midnightmover said:

People obviously want to remember the bright days of his life.

I remember Suzanne De Passe talking about Michael's best days being before Michael having the pressure to fulfil the Michael Jackson brand. In other word everything uptil Thriller.
[Edited 7/16/09 8:41am]

scatwoman said:

That's certainly a possibility. It seems he's trying to find one explanation for the buying habits of an entire country. That's just silly.

AlexdeParis said:

Inaccurate. When Bad was released in 1987 CDs were less popular than cassettes and vinyl. They were seen as yuppie items. Even when Dangerous was released in 1991, I and most of my friends either got it on cassette or vinyl. There must be millions of people in their 20s, 30s and 40s who never replaced their vinyl and cassette copies of those albums. You'd think now those albums would be first on their shopping list, but instead they seem to be opting for compilations.

Yet they are buying Thriller and OTW. I still haven't heard a convincing explanation for that, so I have to surmise that it's because those albums are more respected than the later ones. People would rather just have the hits from Bad, Dangerous and Invincible, but they want to actually have the whole of Thriller and OTW.
[Edited 7/16/09 9:16am]

vainandy said:

Lawd, I remember when radio was playing the hell out of 'Butterflies'. In fact, that's the only song I remember hearing on the radio from this album. 'Invincible' was not MJ amazing to me, but I do love 'Butterflies'...thought it was cute.

estelle81 said:

I never did get the fuss over "Butterflies". It had a good beat, but I wasn't feeling Mike's voice or the melody on that one. I actually preferred "Cry" to "Butterflies", which probably puts me in a group of one, but so be it.

midnightmover said:

Agree on all points. Personally, I only bought 'HIStory' because I was obsessed with 'Scream'. To this day, I usually only listen to that second disc. I only listened to the first disc the day after his death because I have refused to buy any of his greatest hits albums (personal choice) and that was the only one I could find that had an abundance of MJ through the years on it. I've always believed that people who buy just greatest albums are missing out. There are soo many great songs that never get on the greatest hits compilations.

estelle81 said:

Yeah, for me one of the last great MJ songs was "Ghosts", but you won't find it on many compilations.

midnightmover said:

You seem to have a problem with applying your own experiences to everyone else. First of all, CDs became progressively more popular through the '80s and '90s. Second, there was extra incentive to buy Bad on CD because of the bonus track. You're not honestly arguing against the idea that a higher percentage of CDs of Bad and Dangerous were sold over Off the Wall and Thriller, are you?


That's your problem: you're looking for 1 convincing explanation for the 2-week buying habits of an entire country. There isn't just 1.

1. Some people in the UK simply prefer Off the Wall and Thriller.
2. Some people in the UK are replacing their vinyl and/or cassette copies.
3. Some people in the UK never owned those two albums (particularly Off the Wall, which wasn't a big seller there).

Those are three plausible explanations that have nothing to do with his skin color. To argue that any of them can't be true is just silly.
[Edited 7/16/09 9:38am]

StillDirrty said:

Truer words have not been spoken. I agree that I hate when older artists sellout to the new and popular garbage sounds that mostly kids are into nowadays. I realize they do it to boost album sells, but album sales should never take precedence over one's own integrity, but money rules the world and some people would sell their own children to be popular. The majority of the popluar acts out now are just awful carbon copies of things that were being done years ago anyway. Perfect example is all that voice altering stuff. I remember Roger doing that in the late 80s and Blackstreet doing it in the 90s, so I don't know what's wrong with people who are calling voice altering 'new' and 'innovative'...ain't nothin' new and innovative about that shit.

I just can't respect something that is unoriginal...it's like someone trying to sell a fake Picasso or Dali painting for some outlandish amount of money. It's a fake; you'd be a total fucktard to drop big money on something that wasn't even authentic, but that's what most kids (not all) do nowadays, except it's not their money; it's their parent's money, so what do they care.

For me, I grew out of my Madonna obsession during the 'Ray of Light' era, because, to me, she had done it all and everything that followed after that wouldn't be anything praise-worthy if she kept on that same path of doing whatever sells to the majority instead of taking the risk of not selling by doing something different. Unfortunately, she has yet to really prove me wrong, since most of her newer albums are really no where near as good as her older music, but that's just my . I've enjoyed a few singles here and there, but I used to love every track on her albums back in the day and to this day love her movies 'Who's That Girl?" and 'Desperately Seeking Susan'.

She was tops for me for years, but it faded away for me when she started doing all that 're-invention' nonsense. Re-invention, commonly referred to as 'change', isn't really what she's doing because she's still all about shock tactics and publicity at any cost. I'm still disappointed from when she did that three-way make-out session with Britney and Christina at the VMAs years ago. I wasn't impressed at all, in fact, it made me really lose some respect for her because I felt it was beneath her to have to resort to that just to get attention. She's a great performer on her own; she didn't need that mess to help her IMHO.

I'm getting to this point with Mariah and Janet also , especially if they keep on the path they are on now with their music. It's nowhere near as good as it once was and it's because they are conforming to the trends of the moment. I'm still debating on whether I'll be buying Mariah's new album on its debut week based off of the first single, because there's nothing new or great about the song. I'll probably be picking up a used copy of the album if I don't like the second single; something that I have never done with Mariah. I have always gotten her albums on the day they dropped, but now, I'm not soo sure if I want her to debut at number 1 with this project because it doesn't sound like she doing anything different from E-MC2 and that album really wasn't anything spectacular. For me, it's like she's regressing instead of progressing and I just can't understand why, because she's got the talent. Sad, very sad.

midnightmover said:

I'll have to take a listen to 'Cry' again, because I haven't pulled 'Invincible' out of my CD case in years I'll get back to you on that one, because there were 2 or 3 songs from 'Invincible' that I did enjoy besides 'Butterflies, but my aging brain is failing me at the moment.

midnightmover said:

Man, I love "Why You Wanna Trip On Me" and I don't think I've seen it on any greatest hits compilations, but, of course, I have the album, so have never really felt the need to waste my time searching for it on a greatest hits package, but that's just me.

AlexdeParis said:[quote]

midnightmover said:

When Aaliyah died, her album sales sky-rocketed and she was never a huge artist, but that's how people get when someone famous dies suddenly and tragically. It's been like this for as long as I can remember and I just chalk it up to people being caught in the moment and wanting to see what they missed out on when that artist was still alive.

Honestly, I've gotten weird looks from people when I tell them I still listen to vinyls and those looks are usually followed by a statement like, "They still make record players?"; or, "They still make vinyls?"; which, I think is a dumb statement because what do they think most DJs use...uh, duh.

Due to the advances in technology, many people have found things of olden days to be rendered obsolete and to an extent I can agree with them...to an extent. Why would I want to use a rotary phone when I have a touch-tone one? Why use a pay phone when you can get a pre-paid cell phone for dirt cheap and you never have to search for a phone ever again? It's the modern age and CDs and digital downloads are all the rave right now, because they are easier to find and all you have to do is push the play button...no need to rewind or place the needle in the right place. I have a love/hate relationship with CDs because once they scratch you might as well use them as a coaster because they never play the same ever again, but they are soo much easier to find and use.

However, I still cherish my cassettes and vinyls and as long as I know where a vinyl shop is I will continue to purchase them and cassettes...I don't discriminate; I appreciate . Hell, I'd buy an 8-track if I could find a player that still worked. I used to love those things...called them 'big cassette tapes' as a child. It's the nostalgia that comes with them that adds that extra great factor for me, but for kids who didn't grow up around them, there isn't that factor because they have no idea what they are.

estelle81 said:

it is.

midnightmover said:

because the song is crap.

StillDirrty said:

The idea that Bad was not well received is complete bull. Every single released was not just a hit but a monster hit. It sold millions in America and even more abroad. I don't know what people mean when they say Bad wasnt well received. How may copies was it supposed to sell? 100 million? Gimmie a break. Bad was a monster hit!!

Bad sold over 8 million copies in the US as of September 1994 and over 32 million worldwide. Thats a flop?
Bad was the first and only album ever to have five US pop #1 singles on it. Thats a flop?
[Edited 7/16/09 14:08pm]

Bad was a great album too, but obviously its unrealistic to expect that it was going to surpass Thriller.

suga10 said:

Nothing ever will. It just trips me out how people call everything that he did after Thriller a flop cause it didnt sell 60 or 100 million copies. I think thats just retarded. Every album Michael did in his career, especially as an adult was above and beyond successful. Period, end, stop.

dreamfactory313 said:

Well I said that because I heard that the critics didn't like it and that he didn't win one Grammy for it.

I don't think the general record buying public view MJs follow ups to Thriller as "failures", but he set the bar so incredibly high and he was so gifted that anything that came after would be deemed a disappointment.

MJ was a victim of his own success and Thriller represented the perfect storm of factors that attributed to its success: The emergence of MTV, the MJ/QJ collaboration, MJs talent/artistic vision, the void in music after disco. He only hinted at megastardom with OTW but with Thriller, he became larger than life.

MJ became passe` (in terms of album sales)when hip hop/alternative (Nirvana knocked Dangerous out of the top spot) emerged bigger in the US and drowned out the image of the showman/song&dance man. Music changed and MJs sales suffered due to the general tastes of the public. It was no surprise he was HUGE overseas and seeing this, he toured extensively in other parts of the world to adoring fans. They eventually made up a majority of his record buying public.

Remember, he had set high bars for himself every album and he can not control who buys his music and who doesn't. When you establish yourself as the biggest artist in the world, everyone (critics, haters/fans obsessed with sales, other musicians) will microanalyze everything that comes after something like Thriller. The followups were successful, but once again, it is relative to the bigger picture of what preceded it.

[Edited 7/16/09 14:22pm]
[Edited 7/16/09 14:23pm]

COMPUTERBLUE1984 said:

I've said before that everyone has their own "Thriller". Meaning that one album that is so far out in the stratosphere, that nothing before or after will ever reach the same expectations or sales or whatever. The same goes for Purple Rain. Prince was selling a few million records before PR and did after. PR was a sales peak. Thriller was too. Like A Prayer was. Born In The USA was. Every artist has one, whether it's a debut album, or one later in their career. It happens. I hate that people said ATWIAD, or Bad, were "failures" compared to their predecesors. It's an unfair comparison. No one EVER reaches that after.

But for the others to say BAD wasn't well received, is blind to the facts at hand. 30 million worldwide says different.

dreamfactory313 said:

In many people's minds, they believe that an album has flopped when it doesn't outsell or sell the same amount of units as previous albums did. With Michael, I don't believe that was ever going to be possible. Nobody has outsold 'Thriller' and I doubt anybody ever will especially with the state of the music industry nowadays. That one album sold more copies than most artists who were out during that time and even before it was released ever will. That single album has sold almost more copies than some artists entire catelogs have managed to do. How does one outsell the highest selling album in music history? I don't believe it's possible, not even if Michael had tried. He wasn't going to top himself; he just didn't seem to want to accept that and that's what I find to be really sad. He died trying to top himself.
[Edited 7/16/09 14:46pm]

estelle81 said:

I used to be a lamb up until Butterfly. She was my favorite artist as a child. But she can't sing anymore and that's why she uses autotune now.

ernestsewell said:

You're absolutely right. For MJ, he always moved massive amounts of albums and what BAD sold was more than some artists have in a career. It is no coincidence that the 1980s spawned huge album sales for some of the albums/artists you mentioned and others (Guns & Roses, George Michael, Whitney Houston to name a few) because MTV provided the perfect marriage for the musician to translate their art to visual images. These artists also never moved large numbers after the 1980s , so your assessment about everyone catching "lightning in a bottle" is correct. MJ had a formula and it did work, but it was not a failure if the follow ups did not move as many units.
[Edited 7/16/09 14:34pm]

ernestsewell said:

Co-Sign on everything. If people want to say that albums preceding an artist's biggest selling album are failures, I don't have a problem with that if they are saying it because the new album's material is weak and uninspired; but, to say it's a failure because it didn't outsell that artist's 'Thriller' is absolutely ridiculous and pretty stupid on those individual's parts.

Album sales have never been determined by the artist, but by the listening public. I've heard albums that were phenomenal, but barely sold any copies yet albums that were pure garbage end up going multi-platinum. Nowadays, it's how the public views an artist that really plays a huge part in determining album sells and that's because image has overshadowed real talent thanks largely to the Britneys, the MTV-like networks, the excessive amount of tabloids, and our society's materialistic and superficial shortcomings.

Sadly, if you aren't attractive or constantly on TV nowadays, you ain't worth people's time for some reason. I loved a time when I didn't see an artist at every single red carpet event. I loved when they didn't blog about what they are doing ever 5 fuckin' minutes. They beg for privacy, yet twitter what they are wearing, eating, location, and who they are hanging out with at that exact moment. I'm supposed to feel sorry for these idiots after they told me exactly what they were doing at that exact moment...psst, please . They bring the unwanted media scrutiny on themselves and if they want to blame anybody for the negative views people have of them, they only need to look in the mirror and point. I know more about what some of them are doing than what my own damn family is doing. Man, I miss the days of old when celebrities understood the definition of 'private' and 'discreet'. I don't want to hear them or see them unless they are on a theater screen or singing on a stage. I really don't need to see mofos peeing either...yes, Diddy, I'm talking to you. Next he'll be sharing his wiping techniques with us. Ugh, disgusting.

estelle81 said:

Let the choir say Amen.

ernestsewell said:

Quite true, but he started the bad tour in Japan in September 1987, barely after BAD had been released, at the time he was god in Japan

And even Michael admits to this in 50th birthday interview

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA...705&page=1


[Edited 7/17/09 21:14pm]

midnightmover said:

Because it an ok album, not a great one. Reminds me of 'Prince' and I prefer the 'Prince' album over 'Off The Wall.'
'Off the Wall' at the time was huge though for a black male artist.
Other than Michael Jackson, Prince and Lionel Richie, I can't think of any other solo black male artists who've 10+ million copies of an album.

ernestsewell said:

But you're talking sales not artistry.

SUPRMAN said:

MC Hammer immediately comes to mind. Stevie Wonder may have as well. I know SITKOL is also diamond, but I don't know if that number is doubled.