HIStory
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 6
- Points
- 0
I know some fans are disappointed in the (so far) not so great US sales of Bad 25. (Worldwide sales have been much better.) Therefore I'd like to analyze how other artists have been doing after their death and what it can mean for Michael in the future.
I browsed the discographies of Elvis, the Beatles and Queen looking for posthumus chart performances (posthumus means post Lennon's and Mercury's deaths in the case of the Beatles and Queen). I know the Beatles are held up as a phenomenal posthumus success story. It is claimed that their "1" album that was released in 2000 sold 30 million copies world wide, making it the best selling album of the 2000s. Other album re-releases, best of compilation by them tend to do well too.
But it wasn't always the case. When I look at their discography: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles_discography it seems to me that the renaissance of the Beatles (post Lennon's death) only really started mid-90s with the "Live at the BBC" album and the Anthology trilogy. Then there was the very successful "1" in 2000 and "Love" (the Cirque album) was also successful. (Their latest album "Tomorrow Never Knows" (released this year) which is a compilation of the Beatles' most infulential rock songs, though, peaked at Nr 24 in the US.)
But in the 1980s Beatles releases were less successful. For example, in 1982 they released an album with the Beatles' Nr 1 hits ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20_Greatest_Hits_(The_Beatles_album) ) and it peaked only at Nr 50 on Billboard, 52 in Canada and 10 in the UK.
Elvis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Presley_albums_discography
His most successful box-set up to date is Today Tomorrow and Forever which peaked at 21 on the Billboard in 2002. When you look at his posthumus compilation albums they did not exactly set the charts afire. Until 2002 when ELV1S was released and went Nr 1 in the US, UK and elsewhere. Then 2nd to None (a sequel to ELV1S) went Nr 3 in the US in 2003. These are his only really notable posthumus chart successes! So the first really big success came 25 years after his death!
Queen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_discography
Made in Heaven was a success in 1995, but it was kind of still riding the post-death hype of Freddie. Though it was released four years after his death, but it was the first posthumus album. But after that you do not really see phenomenal chart success for any Queen release. Their latest Greatest Hits album, Absolute Greatest peaked at Nr 195 in the US in 2009.
I'm bringing this up to put Michael's posthumus career into a context and also to try to keep our expectations realistic. We will have to get used to it that not everything that will be released from him will be a phenomenal chart success. It's very difficult to market dead artists and to sell the same stuff all over and over again. It seems to me also a certain amount of time needs pass after the death and post death surge for the public to get hungry of and re-discover an artist again and before a phenomenally successful Greatest Hits album can be put out ("1", ELV1S). It certainly won't happen in every 2-3 years. And of course the public needs to be in a mood to be receptive of that music. The public wasn't receptive of a Beatles Nr 1s album in 1982 but was very much so in 2000. Timing is everything.
With Michael there is another problem, which is that his catalog is relatively small. We are basically talking about 6 and a half albums and there's not many variations you can release them again and again. The Beatles and Elvis have a much larger catalog, so that can be released again and again in many variations.
Considering all these factors I think we should not feel very much down or worried because of the US sales of Bad 25. It's not like other artists who are not here any more constantly do well on the charts - even if they are as legendary as Elvis, the Beatles or the Queen. It's just the reality of posthumus careers.
I browsed the discographies of Elvis, the Beatles and Queen looking for posthumus chart performances (posthumus means post Lennon's and Mercury's deaths in the case of the Beatles and Queen). I know the Beatles are held up as a phenomenal posthumus success story. It is claimed that their "1" album that was released in 2000 sold 30 million copies world wide, making it the best selling album of the 2000s. Other album re-releases, best of compilation by them tend to do well too.
But it wasn't always the case. When I look at their discography: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles_discography it seems to me that the renaissance of the Beatles (post Lennon's death) only really started mid-90s with the "Live at the BBC" album and the Anthology trilogy. Then there was the very successful "1" in 2000 and "Love" (the Cirque album) was also successful. (Their latest album "Tomorrow Never Knows" (released this year) which is a compilation of the Beatles' most infulential rock songs, though, peaked at Nr 24 in the US.)
But in the 1980s Beatles releases were less successful. For example, in 1982 they released an album with the Beatles' Nr 1 hits ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20_Greatest_Hits_(The_Beatles_album) ) and it peaked only at Nr 50 on Billboard, 52 in Canada and 10 in the UK.
Elvis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Presley_albums_discography
His most successful box-set up to date is Today Tomorrow and Forever which peaked at 21 on the Billboard in 2002. When you look at his posthumus compilation albums they did not exactly set the charts afire. Until 2002 when ELV1S was released and went Nr 1 in the US, UK and elsewhere. Then 2nd to None (a sequel to ELV1S) went Nr 3 in the US in 2003. These are his only really notable posthumus chart successes! So the first really big success came 25 years after his death!
Queen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_discography
Made in Heaven was a success in 1995, but it was kind of still riding the post-death hype of Freddie. Though it was released four years after his death, but it was the first posthumus album. But after that you do not really see phenomenal chart success for any Queen release. Their latest Greatest Hits album, Absolute Greatest peaked at Nr 195 in the US in 2009.
I'm bringing this up to put Michael's posthumus career into a context and also to try to keep our expectations realistic. We will have to get used to it that not everything that will be released from him will be a phenomenal chart success. It's very difficult to market dead artists and to sell the same stuff all over and over again. It seems to me also a certain amount of time needs pass after the death and post death surge for the public to get hungry of and re-discover an artist again and before a phenomenally successful Greatest Hits album can be put out ("1", ELV1S). It certainly won't happen in every 2-3 years. And of course the public needs to be in a mood to be receptive of that music. The public wasn't receptive of a Beatles Nr 1s album in 1982 but was very much so in 2000. Timing is everything.
With Michael there is another problem, which is that his catalog is relatively small. We are basically talking about 6 and a half albums and there's not many variations you can release them again and again. The Beatles and Elvis have a much larger catalog, so that can be released again and again in many variations.
Considering all these factors I think we should not feel very much down or worried because of the US sales of Bad 25. It's not like other artists who are not here any more constantly do well on the charts - even if they are as legendary as Elvis, the Beatles or the Queen. It's just the reality of posthumus careers.