rialb said:

thesexofit said:

As said before, because of the downsizing of the industry as a whole, theres less chance then ever now in actually getting commercial play, but if you do get your foot in the door, you have an advantage now as theres even less competition then ever before on the mainstream charts. Lack of A&R development etc....

That and the fact theres only about 4 record companies left period in pop music and pretty much no moderate size labels left as they have been swollowed by either BMG, sony, WB or Universal means even fewer roster of artists and even less variety then ever now on mainstream stations, coupled with the whole radio segregation bullshit employed in the USA (thanks clear channel)

I bet some extreme (and abit pathetic) fans buy multiple copies of their favourite artists singles online as it's so cheap to do so now to get them to no.1....

I have nothing against Rihanna, but the singles chart has been a joke for many years now. Album charts in the US is pretty slim aswell.

Kind of like how some of Michael Jackson's fans were trying to block Katy Perry from reaching number one and tying Michael's record by purchasing the song she was competing with?

Were people doing that LOL. They said that about "Invincible" too (remember the different colour thing?).

I hate zealots of any artist. But the way the music industry is today, where is the competition? Bloody record labels eating up smaller labels And thats only part of the problem....

rialb said:

mjscarousal said:

And guess what?

Nobody GIVES A FUCK

I disagree. Some people seem to be having a fairly negative reaction. Isn't that giving a fuck?

lets see if any1 knows who rihanna is 30years into her career. if it gets anywhere near that.

rialb said:

datdude said:

she still can't pack a high school gym... wait thats the ONLY place she's pack out but it'd have to be free!

Eh, she can't be all bad. She had the good sense to hire Nuno Bettencourt as her guitarist.

Yet another cue she's taken from Janet, who worked with Nuno on a version of "Black Cat"

That Rihanna reign just won't let up.

Comparing her singles to Janet is silly, Janet peaked in a different music industry and Rihanna has had singles out almost constantly for the past 6 years.

Just wait until 6th grade is over Ima blow all these hoes out the water. Come see me in 10 years.

Unholyalliance said:

You know what I would like? For Rhianna to surpass the Beatles record for #1s in the US? Why? Because it would be really funny for someone to bring it up when Beatles fanbois start going over stats about who has the most #1 songs.

I hope she does it. I'm totally behind you girl.

you are legend

xLiberiangirl said:

Well Janet has sold more singles in reality.

Rihanna sold over 20 million singles in just 5 years. How many singles has Janet sold in her 20+ year career?

neonlights said:

xLiberiangirl said:

Well Janet has sold more singles in reality.

Rihanna sold over 20 million singles in just 5 years. How many singles has Janet sold in her 20+ year career?

Not worth comparing as most of Janets singles sales would come from physical sales which actually cost proper money and not 99 cents or whatever. So it's easier then ever to get millions of single sales now. Different world back then. Technically Rihanna's single sales are impressive, but how you get single sales are not when compared to when you could actually physically purchase singles.

She needs to get to 17 and then stop.

Am I the only one who thinks it's completely ass-backwards how single sales are being treated as if they are the be-all/end-all? It's attitudes like that that facilitate clowns like Rihanna and Katy Perry having all these #1 singles off albums that don't even sell 2 million copies in the U.S. I'm supposed to be impressed that more people would rather download an MP3 from iTunes, as opposed to copping the artists whole album?

I'm *a lot* more impressed by an album that sells 5 or 6 million copies domestically, even if it scores no chart toppers.

CONGRATS TO RIHANNA!! she'll have plenty more i'm sure!

It's sad when these stats are promoted as meaningful when you consider facts like this:

http://jaymathes.blogspot...-loop.html

cant knock her hustle, its like she has a new single every couple months. why is it news that she passed janet when janet is not the artist with the most #1's? they celebrate anything these days. at least they waited until mariah tied the beatles or something before it became news

thesexofit said:

As said before, because of the downsizing of the industry as a whole, theres less chance then ever now in actually getting commercial play, but if you do get your foot in the door, you have an advantage now as theres even less competition then ever before on the mainstream charts. Lack of A&R development etc....

That and the fact theres only about 4 record companies left period in pop music and pretty much no moderate size labels left as they have been swollowed by either BMG, sony, WB or Universal means even fewer roster of artists and even less variety then ever now on mainstream stations, coupled with the whole radio segregation bullshit employed in the USA (thanks clear channel)

I bet some extreme (and abit pathetic) fans buy multiple copies of their favourite artists singles online as it's so cheap to do so now to get them to no.1....

I have nothing against Rihanna, but the singles chart has been a joke for many years now. Album charts in the US is pretty slim aswell.

rialb said:

thesexofit said:

As said before, because of the downsizing of the industry as a whole, theres less chance then ever now in actually getting commercial play, but if you do get your foot in the door, you have an advantage now as theres even less competition then ever before on the mainstream charts. Lack of A&R development etc....

That and the fact theres only about 4 record companies left period in pop music and pretty much no moderate size labels left as they have been swollowed by either BMG, sony, WB or Universal means even fewer roster of artists and even less variety then ever now on mainstream stations, coupled with the whole radio segregation bullshit employed in the USA (thanks clear channel)

I bet some extreme (and abit pathetic) fans buy multiple copies of their favourite artists singles online as it's so cheap to do so now to get them to no.1....

I have nothing against Rihanna, but the singles chart has been a joke for many years now. Album charts in the US is pretty slim aswell.

Kind of like how some of Michael Jackson's fans were trying to block Katy Perry from reaching number one and tying Michael's record by purchasing the song she was competing with?

You know how politicians use "bundlers" to rack up multiple, "small" donations and then send in one big check....I think record companies do the same thing. They hire interns or low-wage workers in 3rd world countries to hit "replay" over and over again on Youtube or buy these digital copies online. Who knows, maybe even youtube embellishes the total number of hits just to stay relevant.....it's 21st century payola/plugola

As long as it's not Beyonce I'm cool.

Go Rihanna!!

ufoclub said:

It's sad when these stats are promoted as meaningful when you consider facts like this:

http://jaymathes.blogspot...-loop.html

Does that make Umbrella any less brilliantly written?

RKJCNE said:

ufoclub said:

It's sad when these stats are promoted as meaningful when you consider facts like this:

http://jaymathes.blogspot...-loop.html

Does that make Umbrella any less brilliantly written?

I clicked on the link to hear the track but it doesn't work, even when I press play, refresh, etc.

Oh yeah, and I've never heard the word brilliant used to describe that song

RKJCNE said:

ufoclub said:

It's sad when these stats are promoted as meaningful when you consider facts like this:

http://jaymathes.blogspot...-loop.html

Does that make Umbrella any less brilliantly written?

No the song is really good! But I don't even think of her when I think about the creativity that went into it. I think of the loop author, and all the people that wrote and made up the music of the song. I don't even equate Rihanna in, because I think many singers could have done that same song.

Here's some background taken from Wikipedia, and you'll might see what I mean (it was originally written for Britney Spears):

"American songwriter-producer Christopher "Tricky" Stewart and Terius "The-Dream" Nash and Kuk Harrell convened in January 2007 at the Atlanta-based Triangle Studios to create new material. In the studio, Stewart was "messing around with a walloping hi-hat sound", which he found in the free music software GarageBand, which is included in all Mac computers. With his attention caught by the sound, Nash asked Stewart what he was doing: "Oh, my God, what is that beat?" When Stewart incorporated chords onto the hi-hat, "immediately the word popped into [Nash's] head"; he went to the vocal booth and started singing.^[4] Nash wrote the first two verses and the chorus over Stewart's skeleton track.^[5] They quickly wrote the lyrics, completing the first verse in 60 seconds. They continued into writing, adding the hook while "Tricky would put the next chord". In a matter of hours, they had recorded a demo of the track.^[4] The song was written with American pop superstar Britney Spears in mind, with whom Stewart had previously worked with in the 2003 song "Me Against the Music". Stewart and Nash thought that Spears, who had "her personal life ... a little out of control" at the time, needed a hit as musical comeback.^[4] Spears was working on her fifth album, Blackout, so they sent a copy of the demo to Spears' management. However, Spears did not hear of the song because her label rejected it, claiming they had enough songs for her to record.^[6]

Following the management's rejection of the track, Stewart and Nash dealt it out to other record labels.It was also given to UK R&B Singer/Song Writer Taio Cruz, who failed to convince his record company to release it.^[7] It was then opted Island Def Jam chairman Antonio "L.A." Reid, a friend of Stewart who established his first studio. By early February 2007, the demo was sent to Reid's right-hand woman, A&R executive Karen Kwak, who passed it along to Reid with a message confirming that they had found a song suited for Rihanna, who was working on her third studio album, Good Girl Gone Bad, at the time. Reid immediately sent the demo to Rihanna, who was also positive of it: "When the demo first started playing, I was like, This is interesting, this is weird. ... But the song kept getting better. I listened to it over and over. I said, 'I need this record. I want to record it tomorrow."^[4]

However, since it was the Grammy season of 2007, Stewart and Nash eyed American R&B singer Mary J. Blige for the demo.^[6] Upon calling them to set the record aside for Rihanna, Stewart had played it to an associate of Blige, subsequently promising the song to her. Having heard the move of the writers, Kwak began calling Stewart and his manager, Mark Stewart, incessantly. Meanwhile, considering Blige's nominations at the Grammys, Stewart and Nash agreed to wait for her response. However, Blige failed to hear the song in full due to her obligations to the Grammys at the time and "had to sign off on the record before her reps could accept it".^[6][8] Finally, Reid "stepped in, trading on his power-broker status and longstanding relationship with Stewart", and admits, "I made the producers an offer they couldn't refuse."^[4] By the time Reid had successfully persuaded Stewart's camp, they "just couldn't say no".^[6] On giving up the record to Reid's camp, Mark Stewart comments, "We knew Rihanna's album would be out in a few months. Mary wasn’t even in an album cycle yet. We made the sensible business decision."^[4]

Rihanna recorded the song, with vocal production by Thaddis "Kuk" Harrell, in a Westlake Recording Studios in Los Angeles. Initially, Stewart admitted he was still reluctant as to whether Rihanna was the right artist to record the song, but following the recording of the "ella, ella" catch phrase, he felt they were onto "something"."

SeventeenDayze said:

RKJCNE said:

Does that make Umbrella any less brilliantly written?

I clicked on the link to hear the track but it doesn't work, even when I press play, refresh, etc.

Oh yeah, and I've never heard the word brilliant used to describe that song

It's widely considered a modern pop classic.

SeventeenDayze said:

RKJCNE said:

Does that make Umbrella any less brilliantly written?

I clicked on the link to hear the track but it doesn't work, even when I press play, refresh, etc.

Oh yeah, and I've never heard the word brilliant used to describe that song

Here's the percussion track from Garageband:

http://www.boomspot.com/f..._drums.mp3

ufoclub said:

SeventeenDayze said:

I clicked on the link to hear the track but it doesn't work, even when I press play, refresh, etc.

Oh yeah, and I've never heard the word brilliant used to describe that song

Here's the percussion track from Garageband:

http://www.boomspot.com/f..._drums.mp3

Ok listening to it now, thanks ....I think the point most of us are trying to make is that basically you can take any random chick in a shopping mall on a Sat. afternoon and turn her into "Rihanna"...what exactly is her "talent"? I've seen several clips of her looking kind of lost, unprofessional and just awkward on stage. Her fame continues to baffle me.

SeventeenDayze said:

ufoclub said:

Here's the percussion track from Garageband:

http://www.boomspot.com/f..._drums.mp3

Ok listening to it now, thanks ....I think the point most of us are trying to make is that basically you can take any random chick in a shopping mall on a Sat. afternoon and turn her into "Rihanna"...what exactly is her "talent"? I've seen several clips of her looking kind of lost, unprofessional and just awkward on stage. Her fame continues to baffle me.

It's because of the group talent of all the people making the song (not the manufactured pop star), and in the case of "Umbrella" it was even originally made for Britney Spears, so yes, the singer is kind of arbitrary.

That's why it's kind of not right to put stock into Rihanna having tons of number one hits indicating she herself is a notable artist in her own right. There's other people responsible for those hits, and seems like they just pick and choose the singer they want to use like they pick and choose another sample or session musician.

RKJCNE said:

ufoclub said:

It's sad when these stats are promoted as meaningful when you consider facts like this:

http://jaymathes.blogspot...-loop.html

Does that make Umbrella any less brilliantly written?

its a catchy ass song but i dont see nothing brilliant about ...ella,ella,eh,eh,eh

RKJCNE said:

SeventeenDayze said:

I clicked on the link to hear the track but it doesn't work, even when I press play, refresh, etc.

Oh yeah, and I've never heard the word brilliant used to describe that song

It's widely considered a modern pop classic.

OK buddy... I know youve said some wack out shit before but this right here takes the cake... I know ur into pop shit but where in the hell did you read or who told you that mess was a modern pop classic? I dont hear that still playing on the radio or people still cranking that leisurely or folks hailing it as a classic..

So I guess Hannah Montana, Bieber, Perry etc are all making modern pop classics because well their modern... their pop... and it just has to be a classic...

Its hard to bite my tongue with u sometimes because u say some outlandish mess alot sometimes LOL

lawdddd help us

[Edited 11/2/11 21:52pm]

[Edited 11/2/11 21:52pm]

SEANMAN said:

rialb said:

I don't necessarily think anyone is losing sleep over it but I do think it is funny that some Janet fans are stressing how meaningless it is. I'm sure that if Janet ever has another number one single on the Hot 100 that it will all of a sudden become very meaningful.

Bullshit. Janet is an established icon. Her mark on the pop music world is set, #1 hit or not.

Of course Janet is an established icon but I just think there is a bit of hypocrisy going on. If Janet has number one hits it is a huge accomplishment but when Rihanna does it somehow it is meaningless? That is bullshit. I don't particularly like Rihanna but to have that many number ones in less than ten years is a tremendous accomplishment.

SEANMAN said:

rialb said:

Eh, she can't be all bad. She had the good sense to hire Nuno Bettencourt as her guitarist.

Yet another cue she's taken from Janet, who worked with Nuno on a version of "Black Cat"

Sure, but Janet was hardly the first pop artist to hire a high profile rock guitarist. Michael did that in 1982 with Eddie Van Halen and again in 1987 with Steve Stevens.

Say it isn't so... Janet why couldn't you churn out 10 singles at once when you were hot?

I'd like to see the reaction of Madonna fans when she By-passes her - isn't it only another two number ones she needs to equal her?

I like a lot oF Rihanna's songs:

Man down, rude boy and don't stop the music are quality tunes.

Even the new song's video is amazing - the song is ok though.

But hate all her old stuff that made her a star - umbrella, disturbia, sos - suck major balls and don't understand why people rate them so highly.