Latest on MJJC

"Dangerous" is actually a double "album"!!!

AlexRox

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
295
Points
0
"Dangerous" is actually a double "album"!!!! Of course the term "album" is SORT of what is at issue here. I think that calling it a studio l.p. (as in a "Long Play", eh) is far more exact as the term for many decades evades the description as to what it exactly is. Truth be said "Dangerous" is a two "l.p." set. Just because it was all on one compact disc does not make it any less so. It simply mens that the c.d. of "Dangerous" contains the entire two l.p. set on one disc!

The idea and concept of over thirty five minutes minutes on one "l.p." is totally legit and meets the definition and requirements as such! It is sad because perhaps it could have been counted as selling as many copies as "Thriller" sold...oh s-hit. I just realized that! WOW!!!
 
Last edited:
Dangerous isn't a double album. Never has been, never will be.

A double album is generally considered as an album that spans two units of the primary median it's sold in. The primary medium Dangerous was sold in was CD and cassette, not vinyl (which is essentially out of the question having suffered a serious rapid decline in popularity between 1988-1991). Given it utilised one CD and one cassette respectively and was sold for the price of a single disc album (unlike HIStory), it's not a double album and it never will be.

In fact, going by your logic, Thriller could potentially no longer be considered the best selling album of all time, which is generally estimated to have sold some 50-65 million copies (I personally reckon early, maybe mid 60's). If any album that consisted of ~70+ minutes of material was now considered a double album and therefore had it's sales double... Eminem's album The Marshall Mathers LP (running at 72 minutes) would have it's sales double to 64+ million. The Beatles 1 (running at 79 minutes) would double to 62+ million.
 
Last edited:
Exactly what Historic said.

Stevie Wonder's Songs In The Key Of Life was released and marketed as a double album, as was the White Album and Sign o' The Times. All in the vinyl, and later on, tape era.

HIStory itself was actually released as a 4 disc LP, which doesn't make it a 4 disc album.
 
What became of Dangerous was developed by an 2 disc album they were working on call 'Decade' was going to release in 1990.. It was going to have a combo of old songs and new.. While working on new material they had too many tracks they believe in and scratched the idea... Or 'til they revisited the idea and developed HIStory... ;) It def. would have been interesting to hear what 'Decade' would have had.. 'Men in Black', Never Can Say Goodbye (adult version), and I'll Be There (adult version)... I wonder if what we hear in the pepsi version was what they were recording for 'Decade'.. STILL would love a full version.
 
KOPV said:
What became of Dangerous was developed by an 2 disc album they were working on call 'Decade' was going to release in 1990.. It was going to have a combo of old songs and new.. While working on new material they had too many tracks they believe in and scratched the idea... Or 'til they revisited the idea and developed HIStory... ;) It def. would have been interesting to hear what 'Decade' would have had.. 'Men in Black', Never Can Say Goodbye (adult version), and I'll Be There (adult version)... I wonder if what we hear in the pepsi version was what they were recording for 'Decade'.. STILL would love a full version.
Click to expand...

... And rumours of Strawberry Fields Forever, which I don't really believe.
 
Actually "HIStory: Past, Present, And Future - BOOK I" was a three disc record set. They went the cheapest route because at the time vinyl records were not selling anymore (at least in comparison to compact discs). This is why I have said that it needs to be re-released as a four vinyl disc set in order to get the maximum sound quality out of it. That and it deserves to have a proper release as such. The three disc one is a bad precedent set for what it should be. So it has always been a minimum of a three record set THOUGH to be more exact it should be described as it and that is that it is a "multi-disc set" hence why it is the world's best selling "multi-disc set", eh!

But yes the standard for E.P.s is actually contrary to the way it has been held the last decade or so. An E.P. is only marked by its running length. Not the amount of songs on it. There are many times in the past that people in the entertainment industry mischaracterized their product and therefore the public often times did not understand what they were getting or why it was the way it was. That is terrible business because it hinders sales potential. An E.P. ("Extended Play" single) is twenty minutes or less. So anything that is over twenty minutes is an l.p. For example Prince has a studio l.p. that only has four songs on it...I think it was "N.E.W.S" but each song is something like fifteen minutes long. So the the whole thing is an hour long. So artists and whoever else (the public, the consumers) have actually been shooting themselves in the foot (mainly this past decade and half) putting out studio l.p.s that were considered E.P.S. because they "only had seven" songs or what have you. If you look at Meat Loaf's "Bat Out Of Hell" is also only had seven songs but was full running l.p. because of the length of their songs.

But yes, anything that needs to have two vinyl discs because of its running time is and should be counted as a double l.p. So yes, the sales should be much higher. The fact that something is only on one c.d. does not negate what is being offered and sold.

And by the way "Thriller" is the safely the world's best selling l.p. because the sales of it are at least one hundred million sold worldwide according to both the Guinness Book Of World Records and The World Music Awards. So the adjustments would still allow it to be in that safe zone! :) Rawk! :)
 
Last edited:
AlexRox said:
But yes, anything that needs to have two vinyl discs because of its running time is and should be counted as a double l.p. So yes, the sales should be much higher. The fact that something is only on one c.d. does not negate what is being offered and sold.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I actually always found it weird that in the US they count double albums twice (in most countries they don't). I don't think that's fair, because when someone decides to buy an album that's still one person not two, regardless whether it was a double album or not and regardless of how much they paid for it. I don't think it is fair to say from that that if the album had been a single album not a double then twice as many people would have bought it due to its cheaper price. That doesn't work like that.

Anyway, I find this thread a bit pointless.
 
Lol! Not at all! You just don't understand and value capitalism! Hence why people outside of the U.S. probably DON'T count correctly or jip a person who deserves to be paid fairly! If someone provides twice as much product or service then they should be rewarded for doing twice as much! Lol. Sheesh. Seriously?! It sure as hell isn't about "how many people are involved". Why are you responding to a thread that is pointless?! Is this a normal aspect of your behavior? Or is it just something you say to silence others because you realize that what you are saying is not logical? Wow. Welcome to reality.
 
So you do not think Michael should have reaped the rewards for his work?! Or you do but you are going to dictate what in your mind is too much? You and what army? Surely you have one because most people who can think aren't going to support you peacefully that's for sure.
 
when It comes to single or double disc pay out for an artist it does not alwayssss matter... when an artist Is famous enough the average cost of the album Is considered while coming up with the pay out.

If an album costs $10 and a artist get 5 cents per album... That is the same as an artist getting 10 cents for a $20 album..

It doesn't always work out that way depending on contract, but that's why a good attorney is needed when setting the deal!
 
Michael was probably getting jipped with "Dangerous" and all of his l.p.s at least from 1991 on but because people perceived the amount he was getting to be astronomical no one has ever questioned it. That being $2.75 per sale concerning the l.p.s that were being released on Sony at that point in time.
 
AlexRox said:
Lol! Not at all! You just don't understand and value capitalism! Hence why people outside of the U.S. probably DON'T count correctly or jip a person who deserves to be paid fairly! If someone provides twice as much product or service then they should be rewarded for doing twice as much! Lol. Sheesh. Seriously?! It sure as hell isn't about "how many people are involved". Why are you responding to a thread that is pointless?! Is this a normal aspect of your behavior? Or is it just something you say to silence others because you realize that what you are saying is not logical? Wow. Welcome to reality.
Click to expand...

I understand capitalism just fine, thank you. I also understand that the US's approach of counting record sales twice if it is a double album is based on a more capitalistic POV where it is the money that is paid for it that counts, not the number of people buying it. You like the US way better, but it doesn't mean your personal preference makes it a more correct than other country's approach. People are just as much correct in preferring the one copy-one count method too. Depends on what you are looking for when you are citing record sales.

Generally record sales numbers are used by the fans of artists to brag about how many people like that artist's music. And the real number of people that bought an album doesn't change just because you count them twice because what they bought was a double album. You can count Dangerous twice, but that won't change the FACT about how many people really bought it. Which weren't few so I am not unsatisfied with its sales, so I have no interest in an attempt to inflate it in this artificial way. And Dangerous isn't even technically a double album, no matter how long it is. When CD appeared generally albums became longer, so what? Should they count them all twice? Careful of what you wish for because in that way some albums may overtake Thriller in terms of US certifications, while not actually selling better... I think MJ fans would be the first to feel upset and cry foul about such a policy if that happened.
 
Last edited:
I don't believe the U.S. certifications are accurate at all in terms of it all being counted. I don't believe the 29 million. I believe the number is closer to forty million and perhaps fifty million. That's in the U.S. alone. I understand what you are saying and will even go as far as saying I agree with some concern but I think Michael's sales are safe...I don't think there are any l.p.s or more multi-disc sets that could be counted up to whatever numbers are argued for "Thriller".
 
You can change the "rules" any way you want. Everyone knows what the biggest selling album ever is. 'THRILLER'.

All bow down to the King!
 
I've just done the maths on this...

One disc = one album
Two discs = two albums

Mind blowing.
 
It should probably depend on the their running length. Are you talking about vinyls or c.d.s?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top