The "This album was a NUMBER ONE ALBUM ITS FIRST WEEK!" "...in 2007" "zing lol" problem

Geir Seal of Approval

www.metageiric.com

Your logic seems weird...sales figures being low across the board don't nullify the importance of chart position. Chart position indicates relative popularity, whether the #1 album is outselling the #2 album 10-5 or 100,000-50,000.

I don't think the logic is weird. The dependency on relative popularity at a very specific point in time to me is, while necessary for the momentum of the industry, eventually useless. Again, the context here is future history. Obviously relative popularity could seed that, but there are just as many counterexamples as examples.

And now that relative popularity is becoming harder to measure now that sales figures don't factor in as much, I'm just wondering if there's just too much attention being paid to this, aside from giving the industry something to talk about every day.

I think the relative popularity will stay much the same, in that it seems likely that the album which is the biggest seller that week will also be the one which is most illegally downloaded/copied. Though |I suppose there may be a short time lag between the two.

Have sales figures ever been considered all that important? Several of the most typical albums in the "canon" never sold enough to do well in the album charts anyway. On the other hand where are Ace Of Base, Mariah Carey, Whitney Houston and Aqua in the aforementioned canon?

I think the relative popularity will stay much the same, in that it seems likely that the album which is the biggest seller that week will also be the one which is most illegally downloaded/copied.

Generally correct, but there are some differences. Among those who listen to an album by My Chemical Romance or Korn, it is likely that there is a way larger percentage who have downloaded it illegaly compared to those who listen to an album by Norah Jones or Josh Groban.

if you think Mariah and Whitney aren't in the canon, you are crazy

Geir in "all Korn fans are thieving scum" shockah.

dan I'm not sure the qualifying "if" clause there is really necessary at this late date

1. The Radiohead experiment. If Babyshambles had tried it, they would have earned £0.00 gross, net out to that amount minus 6p per download.

2. Sales happen over time. Chart position is relative to the best sale it achieved in one week. The VU and Nico album is one of the most influential albums ever, it's total sale is high, but it's chart position was #99 in the billboard chart or somesuch.

Geir in "all Korn fans are thieving scum" shockah.

More like "All Korn fans are teenage boys", while all Josh Groban fans are 50 year-old women.

Mark G xpost:

Indeed. Astral Weeks, What's Going On?, Funhouse etc. never charted in the UK, but <i>Sgt Pepper</i> was knocked off the top after six months by <i>Val Doonican Rocks - But Gently</i>.

I have searched the Net, but didn't manage to find any sales figures for "Velvet Underground and Nico". It wasn't mentioned in Mojo Collection either, but I believe its total sales are around a million or two.

On the other hand, "The Bodyguard" soundtrack and "Come On Over" by Shania Twain have sold more than 35 million, but they are nowhere to be seen neither in "The Mojo Collection" nor in similar quality based lists.

Well, those million that bought "VU&Nico", a high proportion started bands.

Where those people that bought "Come on over", a high proportion made love.

Oh wait.

Geir, my 70 year-old Dad spends half his time copying CDs he's borrowed from the library. We're all thieving scum nowadays.

The chronology doesn't quite match (xpost).

Anyway, there is a reason for acts such as Josh Groban, Norah Jones, Michael Buble etc. showing up lately. And it is because 40-50 year-olds are more likely to buy CDs than teens.

The 'infinite tail' makes chart impact / sales figures less important too; if you're number one of 100 releases, and you sold 100,000 copies and number 100 sold 10 copies, that's very different to being number 1 of 10,000 releases, and you sold 100 copies, and number 100 through 10,000 each sold 2 copies.

Does that make sense?

Does anybody know, or is there any way of finding out, whether there has ever been an album released which has sold precisely zero copies?

Well, there's always someone who will buy one. Elton John for instance?

A quick Google search suggests that Sugarland, the long-delayed second album by Kissing The Pink which was released in 1993, may indeed have literally sold nil.