Mercury rising

Mercury Prize nominations are up - now the NME awards are simply an excuse to plug hairgel and because the Brits are merely for best marketer, they're the closest the pop world gets to credibility (though I rate the BBC Folk/World awards).

Florence and the Machine 5/1

Kasabian 5/1

Bat for Lashes 6/1

La Roux 6/1

Glasvegas 6/1

Speech Debelle 8/1

Friendly Fires 8/11

The Horrors 8/1

Lisa Hannigan 8/1

The Invisible 10/1

Led Bib 10/1

Sweet Billy Pilgrim 10/1

Which of these do you rate? Obviously the folk ones are merely window-dressing, they won't win, unfortunately. Florence and the Machine have had a lot of press interest but there's a suspicion that there's more style than substance. The Horrors might get a nod for following an emo-by-numbers debut with a very interesting sophomore album. On the other hand, there's a groundswell of press opinion that this is the year of the electro woman, so it could come down to Bat for Lashes v. La Roux. Glasvegas produced an LP that sounded like Oasis after a couple of years on a Liberal Arts degree, but they haven't really broken the mould. Your thoughts?

The Horrors - an apology

This is for Cynical Ben, who must have the day off, as he's commenting every ten minutes.

Yes, The Horrors' first album was excremental. The new one, however, is rather good. Somehow, they've managed to escape the 'trendy band on pushy record label' pressure to churn out more chart-friendly pap. Perhaps we're seeing a return to giving bands a second chance rather than dumping them for not producing a clone of Album No. 1. Remember: Blur were bloody lucky to get a second crack after the fun-but-derivative Leisure - then we'd never have had Modern Life is Rubbish.