Latest on MJJC

Who does Guiness hold as the BEST SELLING Male artist ever???

babykinsilk05

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
794
Points
0
Location
Providence, RI
In their 2011 edition? I know Madonna was named the best selling female but who's the male?

Elvis?
Garth Brooks?
or
Michael Jackson?

Does anybody know?
 
the answer will always be suspect, like the grammys thing. the cool thing is MJ got the honor first, like with the grammys thing, then people wanted to start 'one upping' him, out of envy. 8 grammys became the standard.
 
MJ is the most successful entertainer of all time

Paul Mcaurtney is the most successful songwriter/musician of all time

uhh.. that's all I know really, but I do know MJ has more Guiness records than any other artist so yeah!
 
Commercially, Michael is the most successful solo artist in history.
Michael is in fact best selling male artist - statistically by official sources from the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s - not estimations, but real sales.

In the USA Garth is the best selling male (+solo) artist, Michael is globally the best seller.
 
Moonwalker.Fan said:
Commercially, Michael is the most successful solo artist in history.
Michael is in fact best selling male artist - statistically by official sources from the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s - not estimations, but real sales.

In the USA Garth is the best selling male (+solo) artist, Michael is globally the best seller.
Click to expand...

there should be a ban on separating the USA from the rest of the world, when determining sales, especially since there are people from all over the world, living in the USA, so that makes separating them, make no sense at all. it's like..so we moved some of the sales, geographically to the left or to the right. that's how nonsensical it is. so, unless the artist is not known outside the USA, that idea should be banned. if Brooks is not known outside the USA, then the comparison of male artist cannot be made. but since he is known outside the USA, then, in reality, there is only one best selling male artist..and that is Michael Jackson.
 
144 said:
there should be a ban on separating the USA from the rest of the world, when determining sales, especially since there are people from all over the world, living in the USA, so that makes separating them, make no sense at all. it's like..so we moved some of the sales, geographically to the left or to the right. that's how nonsensical it is. so, unless the artist is not known outside the USA, that idea should be banned. if Brooks is not known outside the USA, then the comparison of male artist cannot be made. but since he is known outside the USA, then, in reality, there is only one best selling male artist..and that is Michael Jackson.
Click to expand...

:lol: it is like yankee -world champion ,i really don't know which other country they defeated.
people don't jump on me .
 
144 said:
there should be a ban on separating the USA from the rest of the world, when determining sales, especially since there are people from all over the world, living in the USA, so that makes separating them, make no sense at all. it's like..so we moved some of the sales, geographically to the left or to the right. that's how nonsensical it is. so, unless the artist is not known outside the USA, that idea should be banned. if Brooks is not known outside the USA, then the comparison of male artist cannot be made. but since he is known outside the USA, then, in reality, there is only one best selling male artist..and that is Michael Jackson.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Garth Brooks is in fact almost unknown outside the USA, especially in Asia.
Only country music fans do know him, but many of them do consider him more as an entertainer than a real country singer.
 
Moonwalker.Fan said:
Exactly.

Garth Brooks is in fact almost unknown outside the USA, especially in Asia.
Only country music fans do know him, but many of them do consider him more as an entertainer than a real country singer.
Click to expand...

Which is a silly assessment of Garth Brooks, if you ask me. Just because the man was immensely popular and put on entertaining concerts, doesn't mean he isn't a country artist. He writes and sings country music and so therefor is a country singer (it's not his fault he's more entertaining than most of his fellow countrymen lol). That's just jealousy for the most part. Lots of his peers despised him for his success.
 
Who the hell is Garth Brooks lol? Anyway I think Michael is the best selling male artist, but the most selling male artist is probably Elvis, simply because he released more ;)
 
Yes, sorry, you are mistaken.
There is no word: probably. Or - I think.

You/we have to be confronted just with facts.
It doesnt mean - if Elvis released 150 albums and compilations and GHs and 1000x repeated specials or whatever.
The maths doesnt work like 1+1+1=3

Just look at the list of the best selling albums, and what album is Elvis´best seller.
Officially Elvis sold less than Garth Brooks in the USA, and officially is declared that this his album sales is 70% of his global album sales.
So just count.

Anyway, Elvis fans will still insist on their delusions.
MJ fans are still under the illusion of unreal numbers - because media and rec. companies want us to believe something that is unreal, but it artificially reflects some kind of status for Elvis and Michael.
But Michael´s numbers can be officially and statistically proved (for the last 31 years every major album has reached at least 10 mill. copies, that means 6 albums x 10 mill.). Elvis´ not - count his any 6 albums...

you know what I mean.
 
Last edited:
144 said:
there should be a ban on separating the USA from the rest of the world, when determining sales, especially since there are people from all over the world, living in the USA, so that makes separating them, make no sense at all. it's like..so we moved some of the sales, geographically to the left or to the right. that's how nonsensical it is. so, unless the artist is not known outside the USA, that idea should be banned.
Click to expand...

My spirit has just been slain to the highest heavens! :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:
 
Obviously it would be MJ.

What are Garth's total record sales? :unsure: If country music doesn't perform too well outside of the US, then they can't be too far from his US total.
 
Moonwalker.Fan said:
Yes, sorry, you are mistaken.
There is no word: probably. Or - I think.

You/we have to be confronted just with facts.
It doesnt mean - if Elvis released 150 albums and compilations and GHs and 1000x repeated specials or whatever.
The maths doesnt work like 1+1+1=3

Just look at the list of the best selling albums, and what album is Elvis´best seller.
Officially Elvis sold less than Garth Brooks in the USA, and officially is declared that this his album sales is 70% of his global album sales.
So just count.

Anyway, Elvis fans will still insist on their delusions.
MJ fans are still under the illusion of unreal numbers - because media and rec. companies want us to believe something that is unreal, but it artificially reflects some kind of status for Elvis and Michael.
But Michael´s numbers can be officially and statistically proved (for the last 31 years every major album has reached at least 10 mill. copies, that means 6 albums x 10 mill.). Elvis´ not - count his any 6 albums...

you know what I mean.
Click to expand...

That's why I said Elvis is not the best selling artist, since most of Michael's albums have sold better than Elvis', but it is my understanding that Elvis' total record sales is more simply because he put out loads of material. Do you have any reliable data on Elvis' record sales compared to Michael's? According to Wikipedia Michael sold 750 million and Elvis 1 billion but that seems a bit inflated to me for both.
 
I've never heard of Garth Brooks. Never ever, ever, ever, ever? EVER.
 
This all depends on how success is measured. If we are talking about RECORD sales the title would have to go to Elvis. People have a tendency to forget that before the Long Play album really caught on in the late 50s and the 60s 7 inch singles where the primary way people consumed music. Because Elvis was as tremendously popular as he was, when he was, almost every hit song would translate to another record sold. Michael Jackson on the other hand was recording when the Long Play record had become deeply entrenched as the primary format - albums like Thriller or Bad where just about every song was a hit single would probably be purchased instead of each single individually - ultimately this means that he would have a fraction of the record sales but probably more of his music distributed. If we measure it by album sales then Michael is most probably number one.
 
We all have to strictly differentiate albums from singles - as for "record sales"...

99% of people-journalists and music companies do not state record sales divided on albums and singles...., but simply as - records sales, which is ridiculous and unfair and unprofessional, IMO.

Of course, it can look like - Elvis had lets say 45 singles at charts, so if fro every single was sold has 1 mill. copies , its could be 45 mill. records..., but if from every of his 140 albums and compilations was sold at least 1 mill. copies - that means 140 mil. albums.
But If Thriller has 70 mill. copies alone... its totally different maths.

Quantity doesnt mean quality!

95% people do know only 4-5 songs from Elvis, because he has so many released singles and albums that people can not remember them as MJs singles and albums, and thats why MJs songs and albums are far more iconic and remembered...
 
What records does Elvis hold that show longevity/high sales? I.e. x number of albums, x total sales? I'm sure there are some records Elvis holds (that Michael COULD hold but hasn't accomplished). What are these?
 
The thing about it is that album sales as a measure of the popularity of music is only really valid in the years spanning form maybe 1966-2001 (coincidentally about the years that Michael Jackson was active as a recording artist). Prior to the mid 60s singles - first in the form of wax cylinders, then in the form of 12" 78s and finally in the form of 7" 45s were the form music was most widely consumed in (lets not forget that LP albums didnt even exist before the 50s). Since about 2001 music has been much more widely distributed either though legal or illegal downloading where again it is mostly individual songs being consumed. If we just talk about album sales then we will have to swallow certain absurdities = like the Insane Clown Posse selling more than Bing Crosby, or probably even Hootie and the Blowfish selling more than Duke Ellington. Its just doesnt seem right to me to use a measure that completely excludes so many of the truly ground breaking artists of the early 20th century. Changes in technology will always impact patterns of consumption and the music itself - prior to the dawn of recorded music in the 19th century pop song would regularly be up to 11 minutes in length and were sold in the form of sheet music - it was only the constraints of the Edison cylinder that has formed the strcuture of the 3 minute pop song we know today. I think as Michael Jackson fans we should be sensitive to the fact that changes in technology change people patterns of consumption; After all Bad was one of the first albums to truly push the CD format by including "Leave Me Alone" (not found in the albums other formats), and Dangerous is among the first albums with that amount of material to be considered a single rather than double album (due to the increased storage capacity of CDs to LPs).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top