Gypsy Life 118,907 Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Yes, the #1 smash can win multiple Grammys, and it'll be a win-win. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitter 3,640 Posted October 14, 2015 Author Share Posted October 14, 2015 Bad romance wasn't #1.And if her #1 is going to be like the music released this past years quality wise... get those grammys.It felt like a #1 tho.And i'm not talking only about the US but for a global smash hit and BR was definitely one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Pinkman 4,660 Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Sure. My fave has more where that came from, unlike others. It's science, bitch Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewYorkCity 10,536 Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 It felt like a #1 tho.And i'm not talking only about the US but for a global smash hit and BR was definitely one.oh so you mean the impact of the song not the chart position.Well... If the quality of the song is going to be less just to become #1, not here for it.If that song is amazing and has a big impact like bad romance or poker face, then great! But if that's the case... Grammys will come for sure.Another thing is that she makes a quality song and it doesn't get recognition... but I think I would rather have that than a basic cheap song charting high tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitter 3,640 Posted October 14, 2015 Author Share Posted October 14, 2015 oh so you mean the impact of the song not the chart position.Well... If the quality of the song is going to be less just to become #1, not here for it.If that song is amazing and has a big impact like bad romance or poker face, then great! But if that's the case... Grammys will come for sure.Another thing is that she makes a quality song and it doesn't get recognition... but I think I would rather have that than a basic cheap song charting high tbh.Yes, it's not about the chart position.I wrote it at the OP, maybe i should edit the title because not everyone reads the OP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Gaga 22,889 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 No, thank you. That's so katy perry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kermit the frog 1,921 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 Hell yes, but that's only because grammys mean nothing nowadays. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexanderLevi2 5,849 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 I want smash hits for singles and a Grammy for the entire album. Currently listening to Joanne Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FRANK1991 3,329 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 well if I was an artist I would like to have a Grammy under my belt Cause once you let it go you better know it's gone Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twitter 14 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 Doesn't matter to me, because both are useful to add to her collection. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAMROD 109,304 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 As for Gaga, she had both, so best of both worlds, baby. Maybe more relevant if this question were applied on Katy. (ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ✧*:･ﾟ 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘢 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘢, 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯'𝘵 (*´艸｀*) ♡♡♡ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfonso 1,547 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 I'd rather have a Grammy while the awards still mean something, it's not as hard to go number one anymore if you have a catchy basic songthis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riot Poof 2,236 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 Yeah. I doubt the GP cares about the amount of Grammys someone has, but they def care a lot about ICONIC songs. A global smash hit is exactly the kind of song that would be etched into people's memories and endure the test of time (if there's quality behind it). I'd rather have people everywhere sing along to a global smash hit 20 years later than have some pop stan on a forum say "well, Gaga has SIX Grammys... take that!"Besides, Gaga would be left with five Grammys, which isn't a bad number at all for someone whose debut album isn't even 10 years old. She could also win more in the future.I also don't think Grammys are all that because a lot of critically-acclaimed artists haven't won a Grammy. For example, Björk, someone revered for her creativity and experimentation (including on this forum), is Grammyless. Meanwhile, artists who are arguably of lesser quality have won several Grammys. Thus, I don't put much stock into them. For me, they're just something to brag about, not exactly something that reflects the actual quality of the person's music. I'm not a woman. I'm not a man. I am something that you'll never understand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronk 14,762 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 At the end of the day we are not defined by our occupations but by who we are as people. So I would trade both choices for more recognition for how the helps people in many ways. Such recognition has started lately, but Gaga deserves a lot more. She deserves the love she gives the world to come back to her. I live outside the space time continuum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kulture Kiari 3,433 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 No! Her Grammies demonstrate that people in her same field recognise her tremendous talent! You want a smash hit? Look what is causing Megan, Carly, Tove Lo. I would rather have Gaga have a single that isnt a smash hit, then have her make a bubble gum song just to get a smash hit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.