[RihRihGirrrl]

If you can do it do it...if you wanna take longer to release an album there's no problem with that. It's that simply, there's really no time table. I will say that if an artist is gonna wait 3-4 years between albums then they better come back with something better then their previous work because there's no doubt that the general public is fickle.

[Space Renegade]

If they wanna go the Rih route then sure why not?

[hEz_iRvy_iRv]

Honestly Rihanna releaseson a yearly basis just so she wouldn't be forgotten...honest opinion but I'm not complaining so long as e music is good

[RihRihGirrrl]

Originally posted by hEz_iRvy_iRv

Honestly Rihanna releaseson a yearly basis just so she wouldn't be forgotten...honest opinion but I'm not complaining so long as e music is good

No!...she's doing it because she know's she can capitalize on it. When your album can sell 6 m in a year and then you can follow that up with another lead single that shoots to the top of the charts with absolutely NO promo, why wouldn't you take advantage of that? If she likes making new music on a yearly basis, more power to her, it's obviously no hurting her.

[fromargentina]

I don't like his business point of view, it kinda degrates her image as an artist

[Igrt]

True,there are artists who should release albums on a yearly basis

HOWEVER

with some artists,this kinda carries a risk of overexposure as well(especially when eras "blend").Remember,Beyonce didn't even release an album every year and prior to her break,people were calling for her to sit down and hasve babies.Everything has it's pros and cons,you can get your name out there other ways besides trying to put out new music (due to the fact that Image has now become a factor in the FICKLE music world.)

[foxaylove]

"I think you become disposable when you put out an album every three years."

If you are legitimately a superstar...you can make it work. I don't agree with that quote at all.

[Jack Jackson]

Originally posted by Jolie's Lips

I think it's the other way around. Someone who releases an album every year just for the sake of relevancy, is clearly disposable.

I couldn't have said it better

[Rafael]

Originally posted by RihRihGirrrl

No!...she's doing it because she know's she can capitalize on it. When your album can sell 6 m in a year and then you can follow that up with another lead single that shoots to the top of the charts with absolutely NO promo, why wouldn't you take advantage of that? If she likes making new music on a yearly basis, more power to her, it's obviously no hurting her.

No. She doesn't want to be forgotten.

[Rafael]

Originally posted by Jolie's Lips

I think it's the other way around. Someone who releases an album every year just for the sake of relevancy, is clearly disposable.

I see no lies here.

[Blue.]

People claiming that you need a couple of years to produce an album are just plain stupid.
Moreso, they don'y know how it feels to make music, and constantly feeling the itch, pushing you to get in the studio.
And for all of you nay-sayers:

Please Please Me (1963)
With The Beatles (1963)
A Hard Day's Night (1964)
Beatles for Sale (1964)
Help! (1965)
Rubber Soul (1965)
Revolver (1966)
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967)
The Beatles (aka the White Album) (1968)
Yellow Submarine (1969)
Abbey Road (1969)
Let It Be (1970)

12 albums, 8 years.

STAY PRESSED.

[RihRihGirrrl]

Originally posted by Rafael

No. She doesn't want to be forgotten.

you're no diff then the haters who say she's getting overexposed by releasing so frequently yet the bitch stays slayin left and right. People love Rihanna's music and Rihanna loves making music and u, my dear, will deal

[Hustle.]

It's smart she doesn't give her followers any time to stray away. Leisure time gives people time to think, to forget you, and time to challenge your influence/popularity.

[Mr. Wonder]

Haha, no, RIHANNA needs to release on a yearly basis because all it takes is another girl with an "edgy" hair cut and exotic voice to replace her.

[AMENO]

I think it's time to move away from albums altogether and start releasing 4-5 songs EPs on half-a-year basis.
Or releasing singles only for a period of 2-3 years and then releasing a greatest hits (vol.whatever) album containing all those singles.

[LifeSlain]

They know what they are doing by making her release album after album every year. It's called striking the iron while it's hot. Plain & Simple

[zach]

Originally posted by Blue.

People claiming that you need a couple of years to produce an album are just plain stupid.
Moreso, they don'y know how it feels to make music, and constantly feeling the itch, pushing you to get in the studio.
And for all of you nay-sayers:

Please Please Me (1963)
With The Beatles (1963)
A Hard Day's Night (1964)
Beatles for Sale (1964)
Help! (1965)
Rubber Soul (1965)
Revolver (1966)
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967)
The Beatles (aka the White Album) (1968)
Yellow Submarine (1969)
Abbey Road (1969)
Let It Be (1970)

12 albums, 8 years.

STAY PRESSED.

Yeah, but at least they made good music.

[spc08]

It cheapens artistry in many ways.
But I don't agree in waiting years and years to release an album.