[Vin]

Originally posted by Fruity

I can't believe this.

It's definitely nothing to do with receipts or even charts.

Singles are just what is ultimately remembered about an artist. They are what stand the test of time. They keep an artist relevant in the future. They are part of musical HISTORY. They define an artist and their highest highs sonically. Hit singles are the fundamental representation of an artist and how their sound was loved by the masses - radio playing them means that not only a few million album buyers know the songs, but hundreds and hundreds of millions of people know every lyric. It's just an absolutely huge part of an artist's legacy.

Not that Beyonce wont have a great legacy anyway, and not that she doesnt already have some mega+memorable singles. But STILL. Let's not pretend you would be happy for her to never have a top 10 ever again.

Perfect post, Fruity. We're on the exact same wavelength.



...Vin

[Drais.]

Some of you are so weird.

Songs don't need to become Top 10 hits to be remembered or become a classic. Lots of Top 10 songs end up just that, as a Top 10 that ends up being forgotten after the next release.

RTW will end up as one of her signature songs
LOT is well on its way to becoming a classic

There would be no big deal over her going Top 10 on The Hot 100 or #1 on iTunes because people do it on a daily basis. What Beyoncé did was genius and will be remembered before whatever Top 10 she does or doesn't get this era.

[Lose My Breath]

I would love Bey to have a top ten hit but only because her music is amazing, it has nothing to do with "bragging" rights.

Whether or not she ever has another top ten wont change the fact that she has had a very successful career and will be remember for a long time.

Some artists WON'T be able to survive without hits, some are able to, Beyonce is of the latter.

[Ressti]

Originally posted by Fruity

May not be necessary but its definitely helpful in the long run. It would still be nice for Beyoncé to achieve top 10s post release. Should be fairly manageable for a pop artist of her calibre.

Eventually Beyoncé (the album and the artist) will begin to suffer without hit songs.

I don't think anyone disagrees with you, but thread is asking something else entirely.

[Jameson Teqkilla]

Originally posted by Ressti

OK Computer had no top 10 hits. Dark Side of the Moon had no top 10 hits. Did it even have singles? You know how many top 10 hits Bob Dylan has in total? Something like 4.

Ultimately it's about making an impact and influencing people, the industry and fellow musicians by doing something brave and innovative.

DSOTM had Money peak at #13, and Time didn't chart.

It's still sold 50 million copies to date.

[Jameson Teqkilla]

Originally posted by Vin

Perfect post, Fruity. We're on the exact same wavelength.



...Vin

Money by Pink Floyd peaked at #13 on the Hot 100. Dark Side Of The Moon had no top 10 singles. Neither did OK Computer. Care to remind me again how those albums prove your point, and not mine?

[JonathanLGardner]

Being a singles artist DEFIES the whole logic of making an album in the first place.

Why go through the effort and cost of making a whole entire album for the majority of people to purchase only 1 or 2 songs - which is barely an EP?

This move by Beyonce was a rebellion against the 1-track music culture that has developed in the digital age.

Singles have gone from being the driving force behind an album purchase to simply being the only song one purchases from an album - there is a HUGE difference.

[Vin]

Beyhive, it's okay to want hit singles. It's not a sign of weakness to admit it, kids.



...Vin

[jax.]

Originally posted by J. YONCÉ

Money by Pink Floyd peaked at #13 on the Hot 100. Dark Side Of The Moon had no top 10 singles. Neither did OK Computer. Care to remind me again how those albums prove your point, and not mine?

BOOP

[Jameson Teqkilla]

Originally posted by Vin

Beyhive, it's okay to want hit singles. It's not a sign of weakness to admit it, kids.



...Vin

But that's not the question you asked.

You asked if we would trade the album success for single success. The answer is no. It doesn't make sense from a financial standpoint, or from the standpoint of Beyonce's legacy. It would be like asking Pink Floyd fans if they would trade Dark Side Of The Moon's album success for Money to have peaked in the top 10. It's a dumb question.

[Nippy'sReceipts]

I vote Top 10 hits. Why? Because Bey gets better album sales when she gets hits & crossover pop success. (DIL and IASF vs B'day and 4).
In particular, her international sales would be better if there were hits.
Hits are very important to Beyonce's sales and the Beyhive is lying if they say it isn't.

[Ressti]

Originally posted by Vin

Beyhive, it's okay to want hit singles. It's not a sign of weakness to admit it, kids.



...Vin

We'd love hit singles, only because we respect her and think she deserves it. But I don't think any of us would sacrifice the album's sales and impact for it. No thanks.

[Drais.]

Originally posted by Vin

Perfect post, Fruity. We're on the exact same wavelength.



...Vin

Except Beyoncé's relevance has been at an all time high throughout 2013, and this is 2 years after an underperforming album with no Top 10 hits.

What did Me & U do for Cassie??

[Lose My Breath]

Originally posted by Vin

Beyhive, it's okay to want hit singles. It's not a sign of weakness to admit it, kids.



...Vin

There is a difference between wanting a hit single and trading a platinum album for a top ten...

[jax.]

Originally posted by Vin

Beyhive, it's okay to want hit singles. It's not a sign of weakness to admit it, kids.



...Vin

Yeah I really don't care about hit singles. Like my fave already got hits. PLUS Drunk in Love is here to #SLEY so #BEYGONE

[Yarotska]

Originally posted by DevonRoars

Hell no. Dem album sales
Lol but singles are 99c so theyll sell a lot more
So yeah I probably would

Not always.

[Flare]

Originally posted by JonathanLGardner

Being a singles artist DEFIES the whole logic of making an album in the first place.

Why go through the effort and cost of making a whole entire album for the majority of people to purchase only 1 or 2 songs - which is barely an EP?

This move by Beyonce was a rebellion against the 1-track music culture that has developed in the digital age.

Singles have gone from being the driving force behind an album purchase to simply being the only song one purchases from an album - there is a HUGE difference.

.

[Lose My Breath]

Originally posted by Ressti

We'd love hit singles, only because we respect her and think she deserves it. But I don't think any of us would sacrifice the album's sales and impact for it. No thanks.

Exactly

Either way, Beyonce is highly revered for her albums as a whole.

Single may be REALLY important for some artists but that isn't the case with everyone, Pink Floyd is a great example mentioned throughout this thread.

[Ressti]

Originally posted by Drais.

What did Me & U do for Cassie??

[PULSE.]

Having a top 10 or #1 single. Would be another great thing for this era + would even push more units. And I hope she gets them. Just like I hoped her album went number 1 and would be successful, just like I hope her tour would be successful. etc. She deserves it.

Plus the era hasn't started yet, far as the promotion.