Latest on MJJC

HIStory is not a true studio album?

Mister_Jay_Tee

Mister_Jay_Tee

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2022
Donations
$1.00
Messages
9,931
Points
113
I see HIStory thrown in the "compilation" section of the albums very often, which is funny to me. Not even just Disc 1, which has been packaged as a "Greatest Hits" at times, but the entire collection. That's interesting to me, enough to make a click bait thread.

I recognize it as a full studio album, it very obviously is. Yet why do you think it tends to get the short end of the stick?

Imagine also a timeline where MJ doesn't make a HIStory/Blood on the Dance Floor. What would a 10 year gap between Dangerous and Invincible mean for MJ? How might that look in the grand scheme of things?
 
The second disc with his new songs is overshadowed (artistically and commercially) by the first disc with his greatest hits songs.

This seems to explain as to why the entire 'HIStory' album is often viewed as a greatest hits album, rather than a true new studio album.
 
It's strange it still hasn't been released as a stand alone
 
I think it's his best album.

I recall reading it was originally supposed to be two discs of new material, but Sony didn't think it would sell. I'd really like to hear those cuts more than any other time period. I know some of those songs made it over to Blood On The Dance Floor, but I know several didn't.

A one disc version was released once sales started declining. Upon release, the full album was fairly expensive. I think $20-$25. I remember my parents made me get the cassette version because it was $5-$10 cheaper.

I think a one disc version would have sold better. Or a two disc version of new material.
 
It’s kinda both. While there is a whole disc of original/new material, there’s also a compilation disc attached. It’s a very weird middle ground. I can understand why it’s usually thrown into “compilations,” but I wish the standalone version would go into the “studio albums” category so people wouldn’t miss it when they’re combing through his catalog.
 
I think at the time Michael and/or his label weren't sure if a new album from him would score after everything that had happened in 1993/1994. So they included a CD with the greatest hits for people who still wanted them on CD, maybe people had them on record or cassette but not yet collected them on CD. But when Invincible came out it frustrated me that all the media wrote: his first new record in 10 years. As if everyone had suddenly forgotten HIStory. Very irritating.
 
NilsHolgersson said:
I think at the time Michael and/or his label weren't sure if a new album from him would score after everything that had happened in 1993/1994. So they included a CD with the greatest hits for people who still wanted them on CD, maybe people had them on record or cassette but not yet collected them on CD. But when Invincible came out it frustrated me that all the media wrote: his first new record in 10 years. As if everyone had suddenly forgotten HIStory. Very irritating.
Click to expand...
It was in their best interest that people didn't recognize it.

To be fair, HIStory ultimately ended up doing more successfully overseas. Invincible was a "hard" pivot back to the US markets.
 
The whole project was misconceived from the start.

Surely, it was the worst of both worlds bundling the hits with the new material in one package.

I would have gone with an artistic album of material related to the accusations (e.g. Scream, SIM) to appeal to the critics and die hard fans. And a short while later released a Hits collection with a small number of new songs not connected to the trail (e.g Earth Song, History) to appeal to the masses.

I think such a campaign would have allowed MJ to make a really self-reflective artistic album, whilst having a hits album to keep his status as a hit maker with the general public.

I really do not see how the actual campaign of bundling the hits album with the album of new material did him any favours - though it probably did help actual sales of some of the singles.
 
MonkeyCheater said:
HIStory is most certainly NOT the best selling double album of all time!
Far from it!

The Wall By Pink Floyd, the White Album by the Beatles….two albums that have sold millions more.
Click to expand...
Before Thriller, the Saturday Night Fever soundtrack was the biggest selling album, and that's a double album. But a double CD is usually different from a double LP though, because a CD can hold up to 80 minutes. HIStory is a 3 record set, so a triple album. Prince's 1999 is a double LP record, but 1 CD. That's also why it's somewhat common for reissues of pre CD-era albums to have 2 different albums on 1 CD
 
DuranDuran said:
Before Thriller, the Saturday Night Fever soundtrack was the biggest selling album, and that's a double album. But a double CD is usually different from a double LP though, because a CD can hold up to 80 minutes. HIStory is a 3 record set, so a triple album. Prince's 1999 is a double LP record, but 1 CD. That's also why it's somewhat common for reissues of pre CD-era albums to have 2 different albums on 1 CD
Click to expand...

Quite correct.

By any measure HIStory is not the biggest selling double album - nowhere near!

Both The Wall and The White Album from the 60s and 70s are over 80 mins long so are not just double albums by the vinyl standards but also on the CD format.
 
MonkeyCheater said:
Quite correct.

By any measure HIStory is not the biggest selling double album - nowhere near!

Both The Wall and The White Album from the 60s and 70s are over 80 mins long so are not just double albums by the vinyl standards but also on the CD format.
Click to expand...
According to Google it's 10 million below The Wall. So that's not "Nowhere near".

The White Album though, it's up high, so that's fair. Whatever though. It was a success still.
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
According to Google it's 10 million below The Wall. So that's not "Nowhere near".

The White Album though, it's up high, so that's fair. Whatever though. It was a success still.
Click to expand...
History's 1995 release had already sold 19 million copies by 2004, by now it will have easily outsold The Wall which is claimed to have sold 30M worldwide but only certified for like 18-19 million with streams. Especially since Sony bundles the sales of Greatest Hits onto the original 1995 re-issue
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
According to Google it's 10 million below The Wall. So that's not "Nowhere near".

The White Album though, it's up high, so that's fair. Whatever though. It was a success still.
Click to expand...

What a ridiculous comment!

If The Wall has shifted 30million and History has shifted 20million, it really is silly to deny that History is nowhere near the sales of The Wall. Put another way, The Wall has shifted 50% more than History.

I never said History was not a success, just that you were very wrong in your claim that History was the biggest selling album of all time….As I say, it is nowhere near that.
 
Last edited:
MonkeyCheater said:
What a ridiculous comment!

If The Wall has shifted 30million and History has shifted 20million, it really is silly to deny that History is nowhere near the sales of The Wall. Put another way, The Wall has shifted 50% more than History.

I never said History was not a success, just that you were very wrong in your claim that History was the biggest selling album of all time….As I say, it is nowhere near that.
Click to expand...
I conceded your point guy, but you're an obnoxious blowhard otherwise so I don't really care to ever speak to you again otherwise. "Nowhere near" is the only ridiculous comment here, it's quite stupid in fact. Enjoy your biased objectivity lacking.
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
I conceded your point guy, but you're an obnoxious blowhard otherwise so I don't really care to ever speak to you again otherwise. "Nowhere near" is the only ridiculous comment here, it's quite stupid in fact. Enjoy your biased objectivity lacking.
Click to expand...

LOL! I am the obnoxious blowhard?

Is this how you describe anyone who politely but factually corrects you for being totally wrong about something?

Anyway, let us see if you can keep to your word and not continue talking/responding to me.

I on the other hand, retain the right to keep calling you out if you make further nonsense claims!
 
IhateTheMedia said:
History's 1995 release had already sold 19 million copies by 2004, by now it will have easily outsold The Wall which is claimed to have sold 30M worldwide but only certified for like 18-19 million with streams. Especially since Sony bundles the sales of Greatest Hits onto the original 1995 re-issue
Click to expand...

So, if you dispute the 30 million sale of The Wall, because you only want to count certified sales….
What are the total certified sales for HIStory?

Lot less than 20 million, right?
 
MonkeyCheater said:
So, if you dispute the 30 million sale of The Wall, because you only want to count certified sales….
What are the total certified sales for HIStory?

Lot less than 20 million, right?
Click to expand...
Sony has never certified any of Michael's album sales since the 1990s. But it had already sold up to 19 million by the early 2000s, which is before Michael sold more than 50 million physical albums between 2009-2013 alone. He still is by a considerable margin the biggest legacy artist worldwide in annual sales globally. So if you combined it with the Greatest Hits release it would surpass or be at the same level as The Wall.

All of Michael's studio albums besides Invincible are claimed to have sold more than 30 million
History - 30 Million - Uproxx / 30 Million Units - MJVibe
Dangerous - 40 Million - Forbes / 40 Million - The Rise and Fall of Michael Jackson
Bad - 45 Million - Sony Music Entertainment
Off the Wall - 30 Million - Sony Music Entertainment / 25 Million - Forbes
Thriller - 70 Million - BBC / 100 Million - People Magazine
 
Last edited:
Sales in the USA does not necessarily mean something was bought. A lot of times it just meant that's the amount that was shipped to stores. Which unsold stock might later be returned to the label. Also it generally did not count record club sales (12 albums for a penny!) or "street tapes" (aka bootlegs) sold at flea markets or store parking lots. Reporting to the RIAA is voluntary anyway, it's not required and certifications have to be paid for. It's not really in a labels best interest to do so. If they say so-and-sos album sold 5 million units, then that's royalties they have to pay out. If the artist does not know what they sold, then they can't ask for more money and the label can say they're in the hole.
 
NilsHolgersson said:
I think at the time Michael and/or his label weren't sure if a new album from him would score after everything that had happened in 1993/1994. So they included a CD with the greatest hits for people who still wanted them on CD, maybe people had them on record or cassette but not yet collected them on CD. But when Invincible came out it frustrated me that all the media wrote: his first new record in 10 years. As if everyone had suddenly forgotten HIStory. Very irritating.
Click to expand...
on the homepage it was the first studio album in six years:
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe all double disc albums are counted as "2 units" instead of 1.
Meaning you need to divide the sales by two to get an accurate number of units sold.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top