Do you honestly think Adele will break Britney's record?

[Gianni Versace 2,987]

2.4 million

hi s-xy

[OracleMonster 1,733]

I dont understand when people say stuff like this. What is wrong with Taylor and rihanna? what makes adele better than them? Is it because her music is so soft and slow and emotional? Its like when people hear an acoustic version of a Gaga(for example) song that some random person posts on youtube, and they say "ITS SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL" like stfu. Music would suck if EVERYONE made music like adele. that kind of hate needs to stop. THIS is why POP music is dying.

There needs to be more Adeles than Taylors and Rihannas because Adele is actually talented and doesn't really on gimmicks. No one ever noticed Stefani Germanotta and if she wouldn't have put the wigs and weird outfits no one would have noticed her and she wouldn't be successful as she is today. So yes, it is important that someone holds that record that deserves it since the pop industry is so saturated with money making machines. 

[Evan Peters 10,458]

There needs to be more Adeles than Taylors and Rihannas because Adele is actually talented and doesn't really on gimmicks. No one ever noticed Stefani Germanotta and if she wouldn't have put the wigs and weird outfits no one would have noticed her and she wouldn't be successful as she is today. So yes, it is important that someone holds that record that deserves it since the pop industry is so saturated with money making machines. 

why did you have to drag gaga into this when you could have just focused on taylor and rihanna 

hi s-xy

[Whispering 18,865]

Taylor almost did and that surprised me, since I thought she might have lost some of her country crossover fans...and the fact that album sales are in a sharp decline over the last few years. 

I said all along that Taylor and Adele were the only two artists right now who could possibly break the record. I didn't really think Adele could do it, until I saw the reception for this first single. Now, I'm thinking it is a real possibility! 

[TheOriginalOne 9,618]

I hope so. She deserves to.

[Hurem 17,800]

She might be able to.

[TimisaMonster 31,073]

 

I see the Army are literally freaking out.

The what? I'm not a Britney stan just stating the facts...

 

[Riot Poof 2,236]

I dont understand when people say stuff like this. What is wrong with Taylor and rihanna? what makes adele better than them? Is it because her music is so soft and slow and emotional? Its like when people hear an acoustic version of a Gaga(for example) song that some random person posts on youtube, and they say "ITS SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL" like stfu. Music would suck if EVERYONE made music like adele. that kind of hate needs to stop. THIS is why POP music is dying.

Tayters are pressed, and the Little Hipsters are convinced that acoustic-based music is automatically more ~tru and rill~ than synthpop/contemporary R&B/urban music. 

OT: I hope so. Oops!... I Did It Again ain't even that good of an album IMO. I only care about 1/2 of the album.

[craig 680]

Yes, but it won't mean Adele's album is bigger.

Album sales are more front-loaded now, and Adele is releasing Black Friday week. Taylor came close to beating Britney in a non-BF week last year.

[Gianni Versace 2,987]

The what? I'm not a Britney stan just stating the facts...

 

No, i know.

I was talking about posters on other forums (like Exhale)

[LoveandMagic 1,731]

Tayters are pressed, and the Little Hipsters are convinced that acoustic-based music is automatically more ~tru and rill~ than synthpop/contemporary R&B/urban music. 

OT: I hope so. Oops!... I Did It Again ain't even that good of an album IMO. I only care about 1/2 of the album.

I think it's seen like this: acoustic music gives the artist a chance to show off their vocals and lyrics without the criticism that they are hiding behind a busy sound. With acoustic songs it's usually just one or two instruments in the background (or none) and a lot of the time the artist themselves is playing an instrument, which goes to show how multi-skilled they are. With so little to provide "distraction" from the artists vocals the audience can really hear just how well they can sing and how thought provoking and well crafted (or not) their lyrics are. 

Now, I myself am not saying that acoustic music is necessarily better (in fact I think many synthpop or rock instrumentals are much better without the lyrics), but I think that's what some people are getting at when they say something is "better" (as in maybe they noticed things about the singer themselves that they didn't hear with all the busy background instumentals. 

[TimisaMonster 31,073]

No, i know.

I was talking about posters on other forums (like Exhale)

Oh 

[RegiRey 443]

Because in my opinion they suck. If you think they are great then fine lol no one is telling you to take my comment so seriously and cussing  . I just think Adele deserves it more than those two girls because her music is essentially better. <------your opinion

Why do they suck? I honestly want to know why you think they suck. I wanst trying to be shady to you. I just get annoyed that this is how people perceive Pop music. I loved the album 1989 and I love rihannas singles. They make good entertaining music. Im not stanning for them tbh, I never do. But Im just saying that you sound like those people who automatically think that an acoustic version of a song is better because its "REAL" and makes them an artist. I wasnt cussing at you(I barely even cussed ).

Rihanna, Taylor, and Adelle all make completely different music.  Music would be boring as hell if Taylor Rihanna Gaga, britney Christina Katy all made music like Adeles, and you know that.

[RegiRey 443]

There needs to be more Adeles than Taylors and Rihannas because Adele is actually talented and doesn't really on gimmicks. No one ever noticed Stefani Germanotta and if she wouldn't have put the wigs and weird outfits no one would have noticed her and she wouldn't be successful as she is today. So yes, it is important that someone holds that record that deserves it since the pop industry is so saturated with money making machines. 

"actually talented".....Explain this.  Because Taylor Swift can sing, she has that talent, so can Rihanna.

Now you're saying that Gaga is a fraud and shes just trying to make money with her looks and outfits? really you're saying this in a Gaga forum?

Did you know that Adeles "gimmick" is that she is heavier and more "down to earth" than other pop artists. She's a "real" artist who doesnt need synthesizers.

 

I'm not saying I dont like Adele. I do She is great. But why compare her to other artists who make COMPLETELY different music than hers and say she's better.

[Alien Tulip 12,428]

Why do they suck? I honestly want to know why you think they suck. I wanst trying to be shady to you. I just get annoyed that this is how people perceive Pop music. I loved the album 1989 and I love rihannas singles. They make good entertaining music. Im not stanning for them tbh, I never do. But Im just saying that you sound like those people who automatically think that an acoustic version of a song is better because its "REAL" and makes them an artist. I wasnt cussing at you(I barely even cussed ).

Rihanna, Taylor, and Adelle all make completely different music.  Music would be boring as hell if Taylor Rihanna Gaga, britney Christina Katy all made music like Adeles, and you know that.

I just think their music is boring and their songwriting is awful. I prefer a lot of Gaga dance songs off her acoustic songs so that assumption you made of me is wrong and I also love Britney Spears who is known for making bubblegum pop music.