Should Gaga Care About Single Success Anymore?

[Fiona Apple 13,006]

She should

[Bitter 3,640]

No one is claiming tthat she's the second coming of Jesus.  

The only reason why 7/11 was nominated is because Beyoncè is marketing gold. MTV was just thirsty to get her to show up to their trashy and tacky award show, which she didn't. Oops. Mainly because she knows how tacky it is, and realized their transparency. And ulitmately, she doesn't need to act an ass at the VMAs like so many other people have done now. She also knew that it was gonna be all about Taylor, which it was.

 She has built a brand and empire which Americans LOVE. Americans love power, hardwork, and success. That's why she's so respected.  She's a marketing powerhouse. Just look at her last album. She solidified her status as a legend and icon without having to be all over the radio or charts.

And at the end of the day, she's one of the most talented artists and performers on the planet. In her own words for her song 'Ego,' I talk like this 'cause I can back it up.'  Can Taylor? I think not. She has some good songs, but there are 10000 more talented artists who deserves her success. Now that's overrated.

 

well let's not turn this topic into a taylor vs beyonce comparison.

Beyonce is talented without any doubt but she is overrated af.
Unlike her, Gaga actually needs hits to continue being relevant and sell albums so i hope LG5 deliver some smashes.

[Mister Gaga 22,920]

Yes, but in terms of promo. She shouldn't compose songs with the objective of having hits. She should make a great album, and after that, choose the singles, film the music videos and perform them everywhere.

What I am saying basically is that she shouldn't follow Katy's steps with Teenage Dream. She should care but in terms of promo; not making hits and hits just to have the #1; because in the end, the album (the body of work) it's what matters 

[Supersonic 49,376]

No more promo anymore, delete the chart section

[Cody Draco 2,531]

If she wants to dominate commercially again then yes she should focus on having accessible singles on her next album. The Fame + The Fame Monster sold like hot cakes due in large part to the singles.

Gaga is an album artist in the sense she sells albums and she puts actually artistic effort into crafting each of her albums instead of just tacking a couple singles and a bunch of fillers that someone else/a whole team wrote and calling it Confident, Revival, etc.

For me personally, Gaga is not an album artist in the sense that I enjoy listening to her albums as a whole. I use the majority of her singles and just a small fraction of her album cuts. I will be slayed the day that Gaga produces an album I can enjoy from start to finish.

[StrawberryBlond 14,865]

If she wants to be relevant and sell albums, she needs hits. And if she wants to be able to make the best music videos and tour the world widely, she definitely needs hits. If Gaga doesn't have a massive hit, the album doesn't sell as well, as evidenced by AP. If your singles are good, the public will buy your album most of the time. Gaga's already proved that she's more than a singles artist, so she just needs hits again and she'll be fine. If she completely fell off the radar, we'll kiss goodbye to frequent albums, high quality music videos or even many singles at all. And she certainly won't be able to tour the world extensively, meaning you'll probably have to travel far and wide to see her. Being a hitmaker makes an artist accessible in every sense and keeps them at a good level of sales and relevancy. That's why I say that any artist who claims to not care about single performance is in denial. In the mainstream sphere, if you can't sell, you won't be thought of as a legend or remembered.

[flyp 367]

[Bambino 24,290]

Impact is much more important than a #1 spot on charts.

BR wasn't #1 on Billboard yet its impact was everywhere. And after all, why not? Every artist who works hard would love to have success, and she works hard, releases quality music and of course deserves success. And yes, she can do both, just like she did before.

[iMonster 1,037]

When you're an actual artist it'll never matter whether you chart or not to be honest. 

She is a musician and a great ARTIST. So she'll last longer and have success from that fact alone. Unlike other "singers" she's an amazing writer and vocalist so trivial things like charting #1/single success doesn't effect her as a successful artist. 

Won't call out names but if other "artist", rather people who constantly chart, would stop charting they wouldn't be able to have a career otherwise. Gaga is the complete opposite. 

 

[Kacey Elizabeth 900]

Impact is much more important than a #1 spot on charts.

BR wasn't #1 on Billboard yet its impact was everywhere. And after all, why not? Every artist who works hard would love to have success, and she works hard, releases quality music and of course deserves success. And yes, she can do both, just like she did before.

But Bad Romance reached #2 and the only reason it didn't peaked at #1 was because at that time Tik Tok was outselling it. Otherwise, the song was pretty much a #1 hit. 

[Bambino 24,290]

But Bad Romance reached #2 and the only reason it didn't peaked at #1 was because at that time Tik Tok was outselling it. Otherwise, the song was pretty much a #1 hit. 

How does that make it any different? BR still wasn't a #1 song, regardless of the reason, but its impact and longevity were much bigger than whatever song that was blocking from reaching #1. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of songs that reached #1 due to many reasons (including payola) and still hadn't any kind of impact. This means that a #1 song doesn't mean everything, but the impact. Now if that comes with a #1 spot, why not?