independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > RIAA top 20 artists based on album sales
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 2 of 2 <12
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #30 posted 11/03/20 12:22pm

kev1n

avatar

This gives a decent introduction to King George,... got all his albums on the shelf here in Belgium!

.

.

https://youtu.be/w_KdJvFKUgI

.



[Edited 11/3/20 12:26pm]

It was not in vain...it was in Minneapolis!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #31 posted 11/04/20 10:52pm

ReddBlitz

Interesting. However, MJ should be much higher.
[Edited 11/4/20 22:59pm]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #32 posted 11/05/20 12:01am

RODSERLING

Prince should be on this list with all his undercertified albums. He currently have a total of 40 Millions certified albums.
.
NaMely undercertified albums
FOR YOU should be GOLD (+0.5M)
Dirty Mind sb Platinum instead of gold (+0.5M)
Purple Rain sb 16*P instead of 13*P (+3M)
ATWIAD : sb 3*P instead of 2*P (+1M)
Parade sb 2*P (+1 M)
SOTT 2*P (+1M)
Lovesexy 1*P (+0.5M)
Batman 3*P (+1 M)
.
So already a missing 8.5 M in the 80's.
.
Graffiti Bridge 1*P (+0.5M)
Diamonds and Pearls 3*P (+1 M)
The Hits 1 2*P (+1P)
The Hits 2 2*P (+1P)
The Hits 3 3*P (+2P)
.
A missing 5.5 M in the 90's
.
TVBOP 3*P (+2M)
Ultimate should be gold (+0.5)
Lotus Flower 1*P (+0.5M)
.
So a missing 3 M in the 2000's
.
So that makes for a 17 millions worth of certifications missing.
.
Prince should be #20 on this list, with 57 millions.
.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #33 posted 11/05/20 9:25am

MotownSubdivis
ion

RODSERLING said:

Prince should be on this list with all his undercertified albums. He currently have a total of 40 Millions certified albums.
.
NaMely undercertified albums
FOR YOU should be GOLD (+0.5M)
Dirty Mind sb Platinum instead of gold (+0.5M)
Purple Rain sb 16*P instead of 13*P (+3M)
ATWIAD : sb 3*P instead of 2*P (+1M)
Parade sb 2*P (+1 M)
SOTT 2*P (+1M)
Lovesexy 1*P (+0.5M)
Batman 3*P (+1 M)
.
So already a missing 8.5 M in the 80's.
.
Graffiti Bridge 1*P (+0.5M)
Diamonds and Pearls 3*P (+1 M)
The Hits 1 2*P (+1P)
The Hits 2 2*P (+1P)
The Hits 3 3*P (+2P)
.
A missing 5.5 M in the 90's
.
TVBOP 3*P (+2M)
Ultimate should be gold (+0.5)
Lotus Flower 1*P (+0.5M)
.
So a missing 3 M in the 2000's
.
So that makes for a 17 millions worth of certifications missing.
.
Prince should be #20 on this list, with 57 millions.
.
Well if his albums are still undercertified then why would he be on the list?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #34 posted 11/05/20 3:10pm

rogifan

What about Guns N' Roses? Or did Use Your Illusion I and II not sell as much as I'm thinking it did?

Paisley Park is in your heart
#PrinceForever 💜
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #35 posted 11/14/20 10:30am

POOK

avatar


POOK BET SOME OF THAT TIMING

LOT OF OINK FLOYD BOUGHT ON WAX THEN CASSETTE THEN DISC

P o o |/,
P o o |\
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #36 posted 12/16/20 2:01pm

MickyDolenz

avatar

rogifan said:

20. Van Halen - 56.5M

I wonder what the ratio is between the Diamond Dave albums & Van Hagar. I don't think the sales of the Gary Cherone album makes much of a difference. razz

You can take a black guy to Nashville from right out of the cotton fields with bib overalls, and they will call him R&B. You can take a white guy in a pin-stripe suit who’s never seen a cotton field, and they will call him country. ~ O. B. McClinton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #37 posted 12/16/20 2:22pm

lastdecember

avatar

MickyDolenz said:

rogifan said:

20. Van Halen - 56.5M

I wonder what the ratio is between the Diamond Dave albums & Van Hagar. I don't think the sales of the Gary Cherone album makes much of a difference. razz


about 34 -18 Dave over Sammy, but to be fair Dave had six albums and Sammy had 4, but Dave was there for both diamond albums. The rest of their sales is from the two compilations, the live record that Sammy did is counted in his total, the one with Dave did poorly.


"We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #38 posted 12/16/20 2:32pm

PatrickS77

avatar

Like I said in the other thread: fucking Garth Brooks. Not that I'm surprised surprised, as I know of his sales for a number of years already, but yeah, I'm surprised by his numbers.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #39 posted 12/16/20 2:43pm

RODSERLING

Garth Brooks and the Eagles albums seem way over certified. Obviously they know the tricks with RIAA.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #40 posted 12/16/20 3:43pm

vainandy

avatar

I'm surprised that Michael Jackson is so far down the list. I know that a lot of years have past since "Thriller" but I still figured he would be higher up on the list. But then again, he went years between albums so he didn't make a lot of albums.

.

I'm just glad that nobody past the 1980s made the list. evillol

Andy is a four letter word.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #41 posted 12/16/20 3:52pm

MickyDolenz

avatar

vainandy said:

I'm surprised that Michael Jackson is so far down the list. I know that a lot of years have past since "Thriller" but I still figured he would be higher up on the list. But then again, he went years between albums so he didn't make a lot of albums.

.

I'm just glad that nobody past the 1980s made the list. evillol

Garth Brooks is pretty much a 1990s act even though his first album came out in 1989. Starting with Thriller, Michael Jackson would just milk 1 album for 2 or 3 years.

You can take a black guy to Nashville from right out of the cotton fields with bib overalls, and they will call him R&B. You can take a white guy in a pin-stripe suit who’s never seen a cotton field, and they will call him country. ~ O. B. McClinton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #42 posted 12/16/20 4:07pm

vainandy

avatar

MickyDolenz said:

vainandy said:

I'm surprised that Michael Jackson is so far down the list. I know that a lot of years have past since "Thriller" but I still figured he would be higher up on the list. But then again, he went years between albums so he didn't make a lot of albums.

.

I'm just glad that nobody past the 1980s made the list. evillol

Garth Brooks is pretty much a 1990s act even though his first album came out in 1989. Starting with Thriller, Michael Jackson would just milk 1 album for 2 or 3 years.

Garth Brooks was country which was never a threat to funk so I'm fine with him. evillol

Andy is a four letter word.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #43 posted 12/16/20 4:12pm

PatrickS77

avatar

vainandy said:

I'm surprised that Michael Jackson is so far down the list. I know that a lot of years have past since "Thriller" but I still figured he would be higher up on the list. But then again, he went years between albums so he didn't make a lot of albums.

.

I'm just glad that nobody past the 1980s made the list. evillol

He would be higher if the Jacksons and Jackson 5 would be included and Motown would bother to get old albums certified. So it's not counting his whole career.

[Edited 12/16/20 16:12pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #44 posted 12/16/20 4:30pm

MickyDolenz

avatar

PatrickS77 said:

He would be higher if the Jacksons and Jackson 5 would be included and Motown would bother to get old albums certified. So it's not counting his whole career.

If they are gonna do that then all of the solo Beatles & Eagles albums could be added to their total. Although with the Eagles it was mainly Don Henley who had the really successful solo career, unless you count the Joe Walsh records before he joined the band.

You can take a black guy to Nashville from right out of the cotton fields with bib overalls, and they will call him R&B. You can take a white guy in a pin-stripe suit who’s never seen a cotton field, and they will call him country. ~ O. B. McClinton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #45 posted 12/16/20 4:39pm

PatrickS77

avatar

MickyDolenz said:

PatrickS77 said:

He would be higher if the Jacksons and Jackson 5 would be included and Motown would bother to get old albums certified. So it's not counting his whole career.

If they are gonna do that then all of the solo Beatles & Eagles albums could be added to their total. Although with the Eagles it was mainly Don Henley who had the really successful solo career, unless you count the Joe Walsh records before he joined the band.

And once again I have to say, so what? It doesn't change the fact that it doesn't count his whole career and that Michael Jackson sold more albums than Billy Joel and has a higher total. If you count Paul McCartney's or Don Henley's net worth, you also don't only look at the money they made as solo artists.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #46 posted 12/16/20 4:54pm

MickyDolenz

avatar

PatrickS77 said:

And once again I have to say, so what? It doesn't change the fact that it doesn't count his whole career and that Michael Jackson sold more albums than Billy Joel and has a higher total. If you count Paul McCartney's or Don Henley's net worth, you also don't only look at the money they made as solo artists.

That could kinda make a lot of inaccuracies for anyone who has been in a band & had a solo career too. In theory, let's say The J5/Jacksons sold 100 million records. Randy had an album out with his group called Randy & The Gypsys. The Jacksons albums could be added to his or Marlon's solo sales. Then that would make both of them more successful than Madonna or Aerosmith. I don't think most people are gonna buy that. lol

You can take a black guy to Nashville from right out of the cotton fields with bib overalls, and they will call him R&B. You can take a white guy in a pin-stripe suit who’s never seen a cotton field, and they will call him country. ~ O. B. McClinton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #47 posted 12/16/20 5:22pm

PatrickS77

avatar

MickyDolenz said:



PatrickS77 said:


And once again I have to say, so what? It doesn't change the fact that it doesn't count his whole career and that Michael Jackson sold more albums than Billy Joel and has a higher total. If you count Paul McCartney's or Don Henley's net worth, you also don't only look at the money they made as solo artists.



That could kinda make a lot of inaccuracies for anyone who has been in a band & had a solo career too. In theory, let's say The J5/Jacksons sold 100 million records. Randy had an album out with his group called Randy & The Gypsys. The Jacksons albums could be added to his or Marlon's solo sales. Then that would make both of them more successful than Madonna or Aerosmith. I don't think most people are gonna buy that. lol



Randy never was an official member of the Jackson 5. But for sure when Randy talks about his career he is, rightfully, proud over what he achieved with the Jacksons. Of course one could, also rightfully, argue that he laid in a made bed and only joined an already established band. Admittedly things get murky for side men like him. But Michael always was front and center. He was the lead singer. McCartney was a singer and a main songwriter. Same as Don Henley. So they are not compareable to Randy Jackson. And in the case of Michael, he spent many years as the lead singer of a band and just 3 years later also was a solo act for many years in a career that eclipsed his former band. It wasn't just an afterthought. Same as Justin Timberlake or Lionel Richie or Robbie Williams or Diana Ross or Beyonce or Tina Turner and whoever else, who was both succesful as part of a band and a solo act. That has to be looked at differently than Randy Jackson's career.
[Edited 12/16/20 17:26pm]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #48 posted 12/16/20 6:15pm

MickyDolenz

avatar

PatrickS77 said:

Randy never was an official member of the Jackson 5. But for sure when Randy talks about his career he is, rightfully, proud over what he achieved with the Jacksons. Of course one could, also rightfully, argue that he laid in a made bed and only joined an already established band. Admittedly things get murky for side men like him. But Michael always was front and center. He was the lead singer. McCartney was a singer and a main songwriter. Same as Don Henley. So they are not compareable to Randy Jackson. And in the case of Michael, he spent many years as the lead singer of a band and just 3 years later also was a solo act for many years in a career that eclipsed his former band. It wasn't just an afterthought. Same as Justin Timberlake or Lionel Richie or Robbie Williams or Diana Ross or Beyonce or Tina Turner and whoever else, who was both succesful as part of a band and a solo act. That has to be looked at differently than Randy Jackson's career.

I don't think the RIAA or record companies pick out which member was on what album. They don't even count the J5/Jacksons as different groups. Van Halen sales are Van Halen, they are not split into the sales for DLR's Van Halen or Sammy's Van Halen or Van Halen with Eddie's son and not Michael Anthony. They just go by total sales. There's groups like The Temptations & Fleetwood Mac who has had at least 20 different official members over the years. I doubt it if they are gonna give a total to David Ruffin or Peter Green they're going to add only the group albums they were on. There's a reason band & solo albums are not counted together. The Grammy Awards have been known to nominate solo acts who came out of a group as Best New Artist like Jody Watley. It's not like she came out of some obscure local bar band either. Shalamar was fairly well known, at least to the R&B audience.

You can take a black guy to Nashville from right out of the cotton fields with bib overalls, and they will call him R&B. You can take a white guy in a pin-stripe suit who’s never seen a cotton field, and they will call him country. ~ O. B. McClinton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #49 posted 12/17/20 2:45am

PatrickS77

avatar

MickyDolenz said:

PatrickS77 said:

Randy never was an official member of the Jackson 5. But for sure when Randy talks about his career he is, rightfully, proud over what he achieved with the Jacksons. Of course one could, also rightfully, argue that he laid in a made bed and only joined an already established band. Admittedly things get murky for side men like him. But Michael always was front and center. He was the lead singer. McCartney was a singer and a main songwriter. Same as Don Henley. So they are not compareable to Randy Jackson. And in the case of Michael, he spent many years as the lead singer of a band and just 3 years later also was a solo act for many years in a career that eclipsed his former band. It wasn't just an afterthought. Same as Justin Timberlake or Lionel Richie or Robbie Williams or Diana Ross or Beyonce or Tina Turner and whoever else, who was both succesful as part of a band and a solo act. That has to be looked at differently than Randy Jackson's career.

I don't think the RIAA or record companies pick out which member was on what album. They don't even count the J5/Jacksons as different groups. Van Halen sales are Van Halen, they are not split into the sales for DLR's Van Halen or Sammy's Van Halen or Van Halen with Eddie's son and not Michael Anthony. They just go by total sales. There's groups like The Temptations & Fleetwood Mac who has had at least 20 different official members over the years. I doubt it if they are gonna give a total to David Ruffin or Peter Green they're going to add only the group albums they were on. There's a reason band & solo albums are not counted together. The Grammy Awards have been known to nominate solo acts who came out of a group as Best New Artist like Jody Watley. It's not like she came out of some obscure local bar band either. Shalamar was fairly well known, at least to the R&B audience.

Yes. So we have another "unfair" distinction. The Jackson 5 and the Jacksons are viewed as 2 different acts by RIAA and Billboard and Grammy and so on, because the name changed, while Van Halen and Temptations are always the same thing, even though members were not. Of course, from Billboard's and whoevers point of view that makes sense and is justified. But from a fan/nerd point of view, comparing career achievements, it doesn't and is unfair. Guns N' Roses with only Axl Rose in the band for me, as a fan, is NOT Guns N' Roses. Even though for everyone else and especially entities like RIAA it is.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #50 posted 12/17/20 8:01am

lastdecember

avatar

MickyDolenz said:

PatrickS77 said:

Randy never was an official member of the Jackson 5. But for sure when Randy talks about his career he is, rightfully, proud over what he achieved with the Jacksons. Of course one could, also rightfully, argue that he laid in a made bed and only joined an already established band. Admittedly things get murky for side men like him. But Michael always was front and center. He was the lead singer. McCartney was a singer and a main songwriter. Same as Don Henley. So they are not compareable to Randy Jackson. And in the case of Michael, he spent many years as the lead singer of a band and just 3 years later also was a solo act for many years in a career that eclipsed his former band. It wasn't just an afterthought. Same as Justin Timberlake or Lionel Richie or Robbie Williams or Diana Ross or Beyonce or Tina Turner and whoever else, who was both succesful as part of a band and a solo act. That has to be looked at differently than Randy Jackson's career.

I don't think the RIAA or record companies pick out which member was on what album. They don't even count the J5/Jacksons as different groups. Van Halen sales are Van Halen, they are not split into the sales for DLR's Van Halen or Sammy's Van Halen or Van Halen with Eddie's son and not Michael Anthony. They just go by total sales. There's groups like The Temptations & Fleetwood Mac who has had at least 20 different official members over the years. I doubt it if they are gonna give a total to David Ruffin or Peter Green they're going to add only the group albums they were on. There's a reason band & solo albums are not counted together. The Grammy Awards have been known to nominate solo acts who came out of a group as Best New Artist like Jody Watley. It's not like she came out of some obscure local bar band either. Shalamar was fairly well known, at least to the R&B audience.

Funny thing with the Best New Artist category that has been a long disputed because of some of the winners, like Jody Watley but also Lauryn Hill and even Cyndi Lauper, all had groups they were with released music, never should have been nominated. And artists were disqualified who would have EASILY won, Whitney Houston was disqualified because of the duet Hold Me with Teddy Pendergrass, and Richard Marx who easily would have won having 4 top five singles and a platnum debut album, but he was disqualified because in 1985 he was on a Soundtrack for the film "Nothing In Common" that starred Tom Hanks and was Jackie Gleasons last film, had it not been his last film no one would have known this film was out, as Tom Hanks at the time was still under the radar.


"We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 2 of 2 <12
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > RIAA top 20 artists based on album sales