Thats just wrong.


>>>>Billboard.com:

Jay-Z Leapfrogs Eagles, Britney For No. 1 Debut

November 14, 2007, 11:10 AM ET

by Katie Hasty, N.Y.

Jay-Z scores his 10th No. 1 album on The Billboard 200, as "American Gangster" (Def Jam) debuts on top this week after selling 425,000 copies in the United States, according to Nielsen SoundScan. The rapper thus ties Elvis Presley in second place for the most No. 1 albums on the chart; only the Beatles have had more, with 19.

Since 1998, all eight of Jay-Z's solo studio albums have hit No. 1, in addition to his "Collision Course" project with Linkin Park and his "Unfinished Business" collaboration with R. Kelly.

After bowing at No. 1 last week, the Eagles' "Long Road Out of Eden" (Eagles Recording Co.) slips to No. 2 with 359,000, a 49% sales decrease. Garth Brooks' "The Ultimate Hits" (Pearl) debuts at No. 3 after shifting 352,000 units. Brooks' last studio set, 2001's "Scarecrow," debuted at No. 1 with 466,000. His only releases since then have been Wal-Mart exclusives and were thus not eligible to appear on The Billboard 200.

Teenaged R&B heartthrob Chris Brown starts at No. 4 with his sophomore Jive album, "Exclusive," which sold 294,000. His self-titled 2005 debut opened at No. 2 with 154,000. "Exclusive" features Brown's recent Hot 100 chart-topper, "Kiss Kiss," featuring T-Pain.

Carrie Underwood's 19 Recordings/Arista Nashville set "Carnival Ride" falls 3-5 with 121,000 (-29%), while Josh Groban's holiday album, "Noel" (143/Reprise), descends 6-8 despite a 52% sales increase to 116,000.

Selling 87,000 copies, Britney Spears' "Blackout" (Jive) slips 2-7 with a 70% sales hit in its second week. At No. 8, Taylor Swift's self-titled Big Machine debut flies from No. 26 with a 156% sales increase (68,000) in its 55th week. The boost came with the album's DVD-enhanced reissue and her Horizon award win at the recent CMA Awards.

Angels & Airwaves' second Geffen album, "I-Empire," begins at No. 9 with 66,000. The band's first set, "We Don't Need To Whisper," bowed higher, at No. 4, with 127,000 in May 2006.

His first album since completing jail time and surviving a near-fatal car accident in 2006, Cassidy's Full Surface/J set "B.A.R.S. The Barry Adrian Reese Story" begins at No. 10 after shifting 63,000. His sophomore release, 2005's "I'm a Hustla," started at No. 5 with 93,000.

Other big debuts this week include Latin reggaeton duo Wisin & Yandel's "Wisin Vs. Yandel: Los Extraterrestres" (Machete) at No. 14 with 53,000, country quartet Little Big Town's "Place to Land" (Equity Music Group) at No. 24 with 35,000, the Def Jam score/soundtrack to "American Gangster" at No. 36 with 21,000 and the Starbucks Entertainment holiday compilation "Stockings by the Fire" at No. 43 with 18,000.

Album sales are up 7.5% from last week at 9.95 million units and down 16.8% from the same week in 2006 (11.95 million).<<<<<

Considering Elvis didn't even write most of his stuff and was harldy known for memorable albums, I wouldn't get all worked up.

Its not really that BIG of a deal in reality. Its so hard to compare the different era's and also the amount of time it took the artist to accumulate the total. Most of the Beatles total came in their short career which in the USA was barely 7 years. Its the same thing with the Number one singles record with the Beatles at 20 and Mariah at 17, now im sure she will break that, but she has almost 20 years to do it, where as the Beatles did it in less than 7 years. So its an accomplishment but you cant compare things unless taking everything into account.

yeah but come on..elvis and jay z...jesus, im not a massive elvis fan, but god...JAY Z, its laughable.
but as said, different era's, the amount of records sold these days would barely make the top 10 in past times.

zsasz said:

In past times, but not too far past. If you go back to the 60s, albums hardly sold at all. It was all about singles then.

sextonseven said:

How easily people forget. Things have changed since the sixties. People like Elvis were lucky enough to have number-one albums. The Beatles really were the ones that started this shit really.

sextonseven said:

How easily people forget. Things have changed since the sixties. People like Elvis were lucky enough to have number-one albums. The Beatles really were the ones that started this shit really.

Timmy84 said:

Again with Elvis, if you look at his discography, is really not an album artist like the Beatles were. He made singles and the result of the singles tended to be compiled albums....at least that's the way it looks. Maybe he changed as times did, but if look at his career, he was not known for albums

Timmy84 said:

Again with Elvis, if you look at his discography, is really not an album artist like the Beatles were. He made singles and the result of the singles tended to be compiled albums....at least that's the way it looks. Maybe he changed as times did, but if look at his career, he was not known for albums

he's just one smart, cool, talented dude who knows how to make a buck

the same kids buying his music are wearing his clothes

and to those kids, that defines 'cool'

Jay Z is a marketing genius and a skilled rapper

and you know he wont' pull a "Planet Earth" on us like P

newpower99 said:

Why it's so wrong ?

i hate when they compare the accomplishments of current artists with the things artists did in the past. jayz releases an album like every year, debuts at #1, then falls the 2nd week.every music industry record thats broken in the last 5 years or so should have an asterisk.

lowkey said:

lol i agree! since they started using soundscan a whole bunch of shit albums debut at #1 so its impossible to compare the records from pre 1991 when an album had to climb the charts and earn a #1...soundscan is the steriod era of the music record book

Again with Elvis, if you look at his discography, is really not an album artist like the Beatles were. He made singles and the result of the singles tended to be compiled albums....at least that's the way it looks. Maybe he changed as times did, but if look at his career, he was not known for albums

Considering Elvis didn't even write most of his stuff and was harldy known for memorable albums, I wouldn't get all worked up.

VinnyM27 said:

Not sure exactly what you mean by "the result of the singles tended to be compiled albums" in relation to his album discography, so I'll clarify.

Outside of the movie soundtracks, his albums were released without hit singles. Everything that was considered a potential hit was released as a single only, with his other recordings released as albums, for which he was contracted at 3 albums per year. His work was handled that way all through the 50s and 60s and early 70s, until his last few albums. His singles were intermittently compiled for "hits" releases. And there were EPs as well, as mentioned.

Eileen said:

Indeed. While Elvis was viewed by his record company as essentially a singles artist throughout his career, his albums, especially some of his early '70s albums, were often very badly compiled, and the work he did was often not as well served and presented as other singers', and as imo an artist of his level should have been. In fact, I sometimes wonder if some of his early '70s records were actually compiled at all, or just randomly thrown together, with poor-ish artwork and no sense of design . Musically, imo they were often good, but so little thought seems to have been put into how to present/ sell them to music fans beyond the Elvis fanbase, who seemed to have been viewed as mindless cattle. As long his name was on the cover in big letters, the rest of the presentation didn't matter.

Having said that, a music fan with an open mind could find much to enjoy on most of Elvis' non-soundtrack albums (and some of those too). And he is widely acknowledged as having made several classic original albums, in particular his first RCA record, self titled 'Elvis Presley'from '56, the soundtrack to the 'King Creole' movie in '58, his return from the army album 'Elvis Is Back', in '60, and then there's his 'Elvis Country' album from 1970, as well as at least a couple of fine live albums. Imo his best album may well be 'From Elvis In Memphis', a classic from '69, tho he did some excellent work with the Stax Records houseband in '73, which is best collected on the CD 'Promised Land', . He also made a couple of gospel albums which are often viewed as classics.

And I find it amusing that Elvis is so often singled out here for not writing his own songs, a criticism never aimed at other non-song-writing great singers such as Billie Holliday, Ella Fitzgerald, Frank Sinatra, Mario Lanza, even Louis Armstrong (tho Louis admittedly did write/ rearrange some stuff early in his career). Songwriters then and now would kill to get voices like these to sing their songs.

Of course, it is a matter of taste whether you like the unique stamp Elvis often put on the songs he recorded, and for me, on the Org at least, and without wishing to start yet another boring Elvis debate, he is a much misunderstood true soul brother (as his friend James Brown called him more than once) and is imo, when on form, alongside Louis Armstrong, one of the most soulful, expressive singers I know of. Many of the songs Elvis chose to record in the '70s imo amount to a musical autobiography of his declining years.

If you look into how his records were made, Elvis was very often effectively the producer/ arranger of his own music, in particular in the '50s/ early '60s and late '60s/ early '70s. He often had a very clear vision of how he wanted his records to sound, from backing harmonies to the overall 'sound', and, had he been a more assertive personality in that area, should have received credit as 'producer' or 'co-producer on many of his records.

Record unit sales mean little to me, as it's all about musical quality to me,and what I personally like, and, while I dig the Beatles, Jay Z and hip hop in general ain't really my thang.

Each to their own.
[Edited 11/15/07 13:24pm]

Miles said:

Yeah there were many during this time that didnt write their stuff at all, but they were in on the musical side of things, arranging, choosing musicians etc. I think people confuse "not writing" back then with things like "sampling" today, that is two very different things. But as you said some of the most revered on this org. Armstrong,Fitzgerald,Washington etc didnt write at all, as others too like Sinatra, Streisand, Nat King Cole, Johnny Mathis etc.. these are some of the greatest singers of all time. I think the bigger issue is that the songs were so good, the musicianship so good and just the lyrics were so good, it didnt really matter, nowadays it takes 6 writers to write a bad song, let alone a good one.

lastdecember said:

Yeah Elvis did good as a producer and arranger, I'm thinking a lot of guys from Motown and Stax also arranged their own vocals and melodies and other arrangements too. Stars back then actually had musical involvement in the songs.

Eileen said:

Indeed. While Elvis was viewed by his record company as essentially a singles artist throughout his career, his albums, especially some of his early '70s albums, were often very badly compiled, and the work he did was often not as well served and presented as other singers', and as imo an artist of his level should have been. In fact, I sometimes wonder if some of his early '70s records were actually compiled at all, or just randomly thrown together, with poor-ish artwork and no sense of design . Musically, imo they were often good, but so little thought seems to have been put into how to present/ sell them to music fans beyond the Elvis fanbase, who seemed to have been viewed as mindless cattle. As long his name was on the cover in big letters, the rest of the presentation didn't matter.

Having said that, a music fan with an open mind could find much to enjoy on most of Elvis' non-soundtrack albums (and some of those too). And he is widely acknowledged as having made several classic original albums, in particular his first RCA record, self titled 'Elvis Presley'from '56, the soundtrack to the 'King Creole' movie in '58, his return from the army album 'Elvis Is Back', in '60, and then there's his 'Elvis Country' album from 1970, as well as at least a couple of fine live albums. Imo his best album may well be 'From Elvis In Memphis', a classic from '69, tho he did some excellent work with the Stax Records houseband in '73, which is best collected on the CD 'Promised Land', . He also made a couple of gospel albums which are often viewed as classics.

And I find it amusing that Elvis is so often singled out here for not writing his own songs, a criticism never aimed at other non-song-writing great singers such as Billie Holliday, Ella Fitzgerald, Frank Sinatra, Mario Lanza, even Louis Armstrong (tho Louis admittedly did write/ rearrange some stuff early in his career). Songwriters then and now would kill to get voices like these to sing their songs.

Of course, it is a matter of taste whether you like the unique stamp Elvis often put on the songs he recorded, and for me, on the Org at least, and without wishing to start yet another boring Elvis debate, he is a much misunderstood true soul brother (as his friend James Brown called him more than once) and is imo, when on form, alongside Louis Armstrong, one of the most soulful, expressive singers I know of. Many of the songs Elvis chose to record in the '70s imo amount to a musical autobiography of his declining years.

If you look into how his records were made, Elvis was very often effectively the producer/ arranger of his own music, in particular in the '50s/ early '60s and late '60s/ early '70s. He often had a very clear vision of how he wanted his records to sound, from backing harmonies to the overall 'sound', and, had he been a more assertive personality in that area, should have received credit as 'producer' or 'co-producer on many of his records.

Record unit sales mean little to me, as it's all about musical quality to me,and what I personally like, and, while I dig the Beatles, Jay Z and hip hop in general ain't really my thang.

Each to their own.
[Edited 11/15/07 13:24pm]

Miles said:

I have "From Elvis In Mephis" is a great one.

I'm not critcizing Elvis too much for not writing his stuff (some people are those types of singers) but I do find it strange that he did have songwriting credits on early releases....He probably would have been a good songwriter if he kept doing it.