surprising, since the album came out almost a year and a half ago. i don't know many songs by her, but good job for getting this far.

If you were that rich, would you really wear pants anymore? Not I good sir, not I...

man leo u sure like gaga im curious to know wat u think of this artist though gaga is like old news now

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXMu14YlfXs&feature=related

I don't know. I think we can have another artist or group to reach those levels - it's just not going to come in the way that we think it will.

We live in the age of the internet - songs and albums are distributed differently than they have (obviously) been for ages. The real key to a band reaching uber-status is going to be one word: longevity. If you look at the best-selling artists of all time, it's also synonymous with either longevity or a bunch of fantastic albums capped off by one specific masterpiece.

If I gave you this list, what would you think about the quality of the band(s) and albums:

• Michael Jackson
• The Eagles
• Led Zeppelin
• Pink Floyd
• AC/DC
• Garth Brooks
• Billy Joel
• Shanaia Twain
• Fleetwood Mac
• Guns & Roses

You would think that they are acts synonymous with genres (pop, rock, country) and decades (60s, 70s, 80s and 90s). Guess what? They own the 10 best selling albums of all time.

What it really comes down to is if and when there will be another band that is the definition of a decade and genre. It may be voiced differently than what we know (e.g. they may do most business over MySpace, YouTube videos and iTunes), but they will end up being *that* popular compared to some of the older bands. Furthermore, we're in transition from physical media to digital media, when tends to skew popularity between older, disc-based fans and newer download-based fans.

The problem has to do with metrics. How we define success today is different than yesterday, which presents the problem. It's not that music sucks (we have more bands in various genres reaching success more than ever), but it's the form that it takes - we can't really say how popular Paramore is compared to No Doubt which was at least popular in the last decade discs mattered. However, as time passes, we will be able to look back, as we did with Zeppelin, Floyd or AC/DC and realize they stood the test of time, continue to buy, visit or solicit their material, and they'll end up on the list of greatest acts ever. Remember, iPods get sold - not Walkman CD players, so the way we quantify popularity is different. Heck, if I'm gonna listen to music, I will either pull up a YouTube video or listen to it on my cell phone. The industry doesn't quite know (due to how old and retarded they are) how to say 'oh, they're popular because of this' because it's not always monetized properly.

Having said that, I think we've had bands within the decade emerge as pretty big artists. It may take another 10 years to sift through them and say 'man they really were that great when they were around'. I'd hate to argue them, but I really think a band like Rascal Flatts is there give than they have released 5 albums hitting multi-platinum status this decade.

i think she i mean HE is only popular because he has balls

GaGa doesn't have balls. Only a penis.

*deletes "Cherish" by Madonna from MP3 player*

well done Lady/Sir Gaga

Regina Spektor sings the crap out of Lady Gaga. I generally don't like her. It's nothing personal she just bugs me.

See, here's the problem. Tragic Kingdom was a huge success, sure. However, it was mainly because they brought their unique sound to the mainstream. Return of Saturn did not sell much at all - in fact, less than their "processed" album, Rock Steady.

If Lady Gaga "going back to her roots" meant simply playing on her Piano & singing (leo-j's link), she would not have become the phenomenon she has been, because it is that which is a dime a dozen. On the other hand, her album The Fame brought its own unique sound (whether it's processed or not). This is why she got so popular.

It's true - the album may not stand the test of time. It doesn't mean she'd be any more popular if she did it any other way, though. While longetivity is necessary to reach truly massive numbers, differentiating oneself (bringing a unique sound) is actually more important. Hell, go take a look at the best selling albums ever, and you'll see plenty of "crap" (Backstreet Boys' debut make it in the top 10 best selling albums ever).

Besides, some of these artists "selling out" are simply having fun with their music. I don't see a need to hate them, just simply stop listening to them. (... or yell at the people that actually listen / buy the music)

Well, anyways, grats to Lady Gaga (though the chart's history is only 4 years).