Comments on: Our top 50 singles of 2009

By: Paul Faller

Paul Faller — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 04:33:45 +0000

There's also the more straightforward reasoning that the singles are the best songs on the album, and the rest is a load of sub-standard filler (see also: La Roux). I'll begrudgingly admit that she's got an infuriatingly catchy way with a pop song, but a whole album? No thanks.

By: Natalie Shaw

Natalie Shaw — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 17:11:23 +0000

Oh of course that's true, but the sub-narrative being that it's a guilty pleasure to like a pop album still, this far into the existence of popular music.

By: Stef

Stef — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:05:25 +0000

Or that the characteristics of what makes a good single are perhaps different from what makes a good album.

By: MitchellStirling

MitchellStirling — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 18:22:07 +0000

My guess would be that come voting time Gaga's first album was too old and the new one too fresh.

By: Natalie Shaw

Natalie Shaw — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:11:38 +0000

But what I fail to comprehend is why Lady Gaga's album didn't feature at all, yet the single did and highly. That's a real polarisation.

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:54:34 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by natalie_shaw: http://musosguide.com/our-top-50-singles-of-2009/9071. MIMO….

By: Jamie Smith

Jamie Smith — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:00:24 +0000

The reality is that Lady Gaga and Dizzee Rascal have made some brilliant, brain-permeating singles this year that have been impossible to ignore. Just because they are mainstream and liked by idiot teens doesn't make them any less magnificent.

Also, albums are traditionally supposed to be more thoughtful, works that you can grow to love over time. The joy of the single is its immediacy, the fact that within two and a half minutes a piece of music can bury itself in your mind indefinitely.

Just as a caveat to that though – catchy doesn't always = good. See the Zutons.