Post malone crushes record held by michael jackson for 34 years

ConservativeMind

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
570
Points
0
Location
Avon, IN
https://www.maxim.com/entertainment/post-malone-tops-michael-jackson-2018-8

The hits just keep on coming for Post Malone.

Best known for monster hip-hop jams like "Rockstar" and "White Iverson", performing at Maxim parties and getting ill-advised face tattoos, Malone just crushed a pop record held by Michael Jackson for 34 years.

The rapper's blockbuster debut album, 2016’s Stoney, has surpassed MJ's Thriller with the most weeks in the top 10 on the Top R&B/Hip-Hop Albums chart.
With 77 weeks on the chart, Malone has squeaked past Jackson's 76 weeks, which previously fended off Whitney Houston's self-titled debut (64 weeks) and the Black Eyed Peas' The E.N.D. (63 weeks).

It's the latest big chart feat for Malone, who beat a Beatles record back in May when nine songs from his chart-topping album, Beerbongs & Bentleys nabbed top 20 positions on the Billboard Hot 100, handily smashing the previous six-song record held by The Beatles and rapper J. Cole.
 
here we go again....
Meet the new King of Pop.

... oh they forget this:

Thriller_Award_(08-04-2014).jpg
 
Let me beat the negative people that were hating on sam.smith..


Who's post malone? Hes not famous








Lol
 
Another overrated artist who is benefiting a lot from streaming. Americans have no taste. He can have this record but he will never be as iconic as MJ. Watch in 5-10 years, he will struggle to have hits.
 
Another overrated artist who is benefiting a lot from streaming. Americans have no taste. He can have this record but he will never be as iconic as MJ. Watch in 5-10 years, he will struggle to have hits.

In five to ten years,nobody will even know the name Post Malone lol. Let's call a spade a spade now.
 
Post malone iz da new king of pop, guyzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111one111111!!!!!!!!!
 
Can't wait for this to turn into a 5 page thread of people saying how much they hate post malone or have never heard of him yet somehow still hate him.
 
Who is that? I have never heard that name. Never saw that guy, no images. Never heard someting on radio or TV about him. And i will not use google for searching. Waste of time. No interest in that guy.
 
I don't understand how you can compare sales records with the past. There were no streaming back then.

If I stream the same song 70 times, it's counted as 70 individual sales. But if I listen to the same vinyl/CD 70 times, it's counted as only 1 sale.

And with streaming, you don't even have to listen to the song. Just clicking on the link counts.

Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley and even The Beatles cannot compete with Spotify and Deezer.


But has anybody paid for a post malone song with real money?
 
So why exactly does malone get talked down upon because he broke a record?? What about ourselves makes our fandom feel threatened that we have to do to put him down? What did he exactly do to us?

The people behind the article calling him king of pop or whatever.. send 'hate' that way if there has to be someone to attack
 
God, I hate Post Malone.

Not for breaking this record. Records are meant to be broken.

He's just God awful in every discernible way.
 
Personally this is the first time ive ever heard that name. .what makes fans defensive is because everytime something like this happens the media use it as a stick to beat or belittle mj no matter how stupid that is As others say today is totaly different to years gone by when you went to your local record shop and bought a physical copy had it scanned at the checkout and knew it went towards the charts.
 
Yeah so shouldn't it be the media be attacked? Post malone didnt do anything to us.. right?
 
I never even heard of this Post Malone. Music today sux @$$ anyways.
 
I don't understand how you can compare sales records with the past. There were no streaming back then.If I stream the same song 70 times, it's counted as 70 individual sales. But if I listen to the same vinyl/CD 70 times, it's counted as only 1 sale. And with streaming, you don't even have to listen to the song. Just clicking on the link counts. Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley and even The Beatles cannot compete with Spotify and Deezer.

But has anybody paid for a post malone song with real money?


This!

Pay for it with real hard earned money!
That's the true testament of something really of authentic value!
That's a real validation of the worth of someone's work/craftsmanship!
 
Doubt very few have heard of this Malone guy and probably have no interest in looking him up, much less hate him.
The gripe is with the chart system. I thought multiple streams were to equal buying an album, not one. He and others are knocking Whitney, the Beatles, etc records. And those were records to be proud of.
Now we are running apples against oranges. It's not a fair fight. And in my eyes, those records have not been broken.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en-gb"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">You cannot compare Michael Jackson to a guy on the chart today. Congrats to post Malone for sure but buying a record is a completely different experience than streaming a record <a href="https://t.co/OhjUVXZs1C">https://t.co/OhjUVXZs1C</a></p>&mdash; Sebastian Bach (@sebastianbach) <a href="https://twitter.com/sebastianbach/status/1029439610974158848?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">14 August 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
There really is no reason to attack the guy for accomplishing something..

At least hes out there reaching.. were on our freaking @$$es typing on forum living vicariously. No reason to hate on people that actually try and break a record..
 
Bollywood, it starting to seem like you havent heard much modern mainstream music. Idk what telling people who you dont know proves..
 
The industry is completely different now. it's all about streams. Back in the day you had to actually buy a record. Not today. This isn't that much of an accomplishment going by "old school" standards...
 
Lool, call me old, but I have never heard of this guy! And I don't hate him or the music because I don't know either.
 
The chart success comparison between ‘Stoney’ & ‘Thriller’ is not really fair because the chart metrics changed.

A change in chart rankings explains why Malone’s ’Stoney’ album surpassed the ‘Thriller’ album on the Billboard Top R&B/Hip-Hop Albums chart’s top 10.

Billboard Staff announced that, from February 11 (2017) onwards, chart rankings went from a strictly sales-based formula to one calculating multi-metric consumption. That multi-metric consumption includes traditional album sales, track equivalent albums & streaming equivalent albums.

A fair comparison, in my opinion, would be to compare sales of physical copies of the ‘Stoney’ album to sales of physical copies of the ‘Thriller’ album (because ‘Thriller’ was for 76 weeks on that chart based solely on its sales of physical copies in 1983-1984).
 
Doubt very few have heard of this Malone guy and probably have no interest in looking him up, much less hate him.
The gripe is with the chart system. I thought multiple streams were to equal buying an album, not one. He and others are knocking Whitney, the Beatles, etc records. And those were records to be proud of.
Now we are running apples against oranges. It's not a fair fight. And in my eyes, those records have not been broken.

Well said
 
mj_frenzy;4228054 said:
The chart success comparison between ‘Stoney’ & ‘Thriller’ is not really fair because the chart metrics changed.

A change in chart rankings explains why Malone’s ’Stoney’ album surpassed the ‘Thriller’ album on the Billboard Top R&B/Hip-Hop Albums chart’s top 10.

Billboard Staff announced that, from February 11 (2017) onwards, chart rankings went from a strictly sales-based formula to one calculating multi-metric consumption. That multi-metric consumption includes traditional album sales, track equivalent albums & streaming equivalent albums.

A fair comparison, in my opinion, would be to compare sales of physical copies of the ‘Stoney’ album to sales of physical copies of the ‘Thriller’ album (because ‘Thriller’ was for 76 weeks on that chart based solely on its sales of physical copies in 1983-1984).



There is NO fair way to compare chart records from such vastly different eras and I wish they'd stop reporting it because it's just misleading. Fake news. The reason that so many MJ records stood for so many years and are now being toppled so rapidly is because the game has changed. the rules have changed.

Today is all about streaming so I don't think it's fair to only compare an artist's sale to MJ's sales.
For example, Drake charts incredibly well - he's one of the biggest artists out there at the moment - and his percentage of sales is tiny compared to his streams. If you only looked at his sales he'd be well down but there's no denying he's a HUGE artist today so you have to look at the whole picture.
 
No point comparing two different charts as if they are the same.
 
streaming

This!

Pay for it with real hard earned money!
That's the true testament of something really of authentic value!
That's a real validation of the worth of someone's work/craftsmanship!
Going by this comment, Michael Jackson must not have much value today, since he is streamed too. Since Napster started, many people started downloading for free, including Michael Jackson music. That was before streaming came about. That's why streaming is used in chart criteria today, because that is how a lot of people listen to music now. Also most people today don't even have a stereo to play records or CDs, so there's not a reason to buy them. They listen to music on a phone, PC, or Ipod. Many car manufacturers don't put CD players in cars now as a default, and there's not as many stores that sell music.

Video games are more popular than people buying music in a physical form today like records, tapes, & CDs. Grand Theft Auto 5 has sold around 90 million copies since it got released and has been said to have made more money than any movie ever released around 6 billion US dollars. Even Adele's albums has not sold that much
 
Re: streaming

Going by this comment, Michael Jackson must not have much value today, since he is streamed too. Since Napster started, many people started downloading for free, including Michael Jackson music. That was before streaming came about. That's why streaming is used in chart criteria today, because that is how a lot of people listen to music now. Also most people today don't even have a stereo to play records or CDs, so there's not a reason to buy them. They listen to music on a phone, PC, or Ipod. Many car manufacturers don't put CD players in cars now as a default, and there's not as many stores that sell music.

Video games are more popular than people buying music in a physical form today like records, tapes, & CDs. Grand Theft Auto 5 has sold around 90 million copies since it got released and has been said to have made more money than any movie ever released around 6 billion US dollars. Even Adele's albums has not sold that much

That's all fine and good. We all know that the way people consume music is a lot different now to what it was in the 80s. That's why we shouldn't combine pre streaming and streaming achievements.
 
Back
Top