Michael is certified as the 7th best selling artist in the United States by the RIAA

troubleman84

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
20,098
Points
0
Location
In my own universe
Kikuchiyo;3851734 said:
Well, for example, MJ has numerous digital singles eligible for RIAA awards but almost zero certification. Last month Billie Jean got 2×P even though it passed 2 million mark in paid downloads in November 2010. :rofl:
Thriller digital single passed 3 million mark in paid downloads in March 2012 and last certification (gold) is from 2005. :rofl:
MJ also has so many physical singles from 80's eligible for certification but...

Anyway for the purposes of RIAA certification the parent company makes the request and, simply put, it has to provide cumulative, aggregate report about certain product. In reality data collecting and making reports about certain product is not so simple process. I hope, that over time MJ will be properly certified (excluding Motown).

It may take a while...

I find something real interesting, if you counted shipments (thanks for the correction by the way, I admit I was off base with that) on albums by MJ, Elvis and the Beatles, all of their numbers appear much lower. The Beatles (136 million, roughly) and Elvis (112 million) and MJ right around almost 70 million in actual shipments. Presents an interesting picture. I imagine Garth Brooks' shipments are also much, much lower too on some albums (mainly his live album).
 

somewhereinthedark

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
990
Points
43
I asked because Hungary is not generally considered Eastern European (especially not by Hungarians) so I thought I might be mistaking you for someone else. But in the context of the Iron curtain and the East/West divide it makes sense ;)



Elvis and the Beatles may have been criticised in the past, when they were still performing, but in my experience the media are extremely favourable to them in recent times. It's almost sacrilegious for journalists to write anything negative about them (the Beatles in particular). It seems you cannot be taken seriously as a music critic if you don't worship the Beatles as the greatest musical act of all time. To me, the Beatles are a tremendously overrated boyband who were not particularly brilliant at anything. They were not the best songwriters, not the best singers, not the best musicians, etc. I'm not saying they were bad, not at all, but I don't think they deserve all the praise they're getting either. I'll personally take Queen over the Beatles anytime. (OT: We have an annual holiday here called Queenday (when we celebrate the Queen's birthday) and this year there was a music festival where artists sang songs from Queen. As I was listening to them, I realised that I could sing along to every song and I thought to myself, "this is a pretty damn great catalogue of music!" Not only are the songs better, but Freddy Mercury is a better vocalist than all of the Beatles combined, imo). People are so not used to hearing a negative opinion on the Beatles though that they think you must be insane or a music barbarian if you don't agree with the "universal consensus" that the Beatles are the greatest gift to music ever. Even people who never even listen to the Beatles think they're great because that's all you ever hear in the media. I wonder where the Beatles or Elvis would stand if they had received the same kind of horrible media treatment for decades that MJ did.

Excellent post!
 

AngieJ

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
3,519
Points
0
Location
USA
Thanks for all the info troubleman84. I'm understanding things a little bit more now.
 
Top