WOOOOAAAAH i expected 20m this is great

Is Deep Purple's study finishing? Just asking but I and various are waiting...

Various parts have been completed but unfortunately the article is not quite ready for publication as yet.

Thank you for sharing these update. I wonder the complexity and huge amount of data because Deep Purple hás 21 studio albums and dozens of compilation and live albums. Is there a prediction? Greetings and have a nice day!

Im not too sure, I've completed quite a bit of research towards it but the other guys still need to finish it off and I'm not too sure how much they still have to do, as they've been concentrating on those short CSPCs and updating acts like Taylor, Drake, Rihanna etc.

Yes they have a ridiculous amount of compilations, live albums, box sets, videos etc. I was shocked just how many, in total I compiled track lists from 254 such products and that's not including their studio albums!!!

Wow, that is unbelievable amount...really impressive! 254 only considering compilations, lives, box sets...

And the main sales are placed around 21 studio albums...

They are a legend and highly loved band in all world with a huge fan base.

Yes, everything from those 254 products, gets apportioned into the relevant studio album or their orphan album.

What struck me most, was the amount of cheap and nasty comps/live albums they have. They clearly do not exert the same kind of stringent control over their catalogue that say Led Zeppelin do and as such have licensed their music out to various territories and various labels,

Those labels in turn have released some pretty substandard products, some of them are complete copies of previous comps, with pretty much the same track lists, titles and artwork!

Must be a nightmare to go trough, just like the discography of Pearl Jam and Grateful Dead to name a few.

It definitely is, their catalogue is just so cluttered up by pointlessly regurgitated compilations, live albums etc

Mind you, I'd imagine Purples catalogue, as difficult and annoying as it is to compile, will be a walk in the park compared to someone like Sinatra!

i must admit i’m not very familiar with deep purple- i only know smoke on the water- are they an act that has lots of consistency or do they have one main album that most people associate with them and how big are they as a whole are we looking at a total around 60m or more like 80m

I'll not give too much away but IMO their popularity hasnt aged as well as say Sabbaths or Zeppelins, two bands they are often mentioned alongside, as the originators of hard rock/heavy metal.

It's strange that time has been kinder to Sabbath than Purple, who in the 70s were easily the more successful of the two.

While neither act was ever on the same level as Zep on a worldwide scale, Purple were probbly more popular in mainland Europe, this was especially true in Germany, where their albums spent a huge number of weeks at No1. They were also Billboards Top Album artists of 1973, in the US.

I never understood why didn't he make ipfi artist list, when he is monster on streaming. I guess that list is revenue based.

Thank you for this update
Expected bigger numbers bc of Spotify, but I didn’t realise how streaming centric he was.
Still insanely huge (biggest artist to debut in the past 5 years?)

When is deep purple coming out?

To humbly contribute and deeply know the band's history, a few points explain this perception: 1. Deep Purple lost its stability and consequently projected popularity with the departure of Ritchie Blackmore in 1975 after the Stormbringer album. 2. The band's collapse in 1976 and their 8-year hiatus caused them to suffer the loss of a generation of fans and the maintenance of sales capacity. 3. They worked little on the mystique of the image and hated the press, unlike Led and Black Sabbath. In fact, in the 70s and even in the 80s, sales were higher than Sabbath, I believe mainly in Europe and Japan (you will give these details shortly). 4. After the Perfect Strangers (great success released in 1984 at their reunion) they had a lethargy of 3 years until the release of The House of Blue Light, losing visibility at the height of metal in the 80s. 5. They were seen in the 80s and 90s by the mainstream media as dinosaurs and dated, just like the Sabbath, which distanced new potential fans. 6. In the 90's and 2000's the labels didn't support enough promotion of the new albums, preferring to focus exactly on compilations, 70's album re-releases and live recordings. 7. Recent, after Now What, released in 2013, they had much better sales on the charts, but the music industry is no longer significant in physical album sales.

Actually Zeppelin was very US centric, most of their albums were sold there.

Deep Purple was focused in USA market just 70's and Perfect Strangers period. They didn't adapt to show business during MTV era. Therefore in Europe and Japan they mantained a huge fan base.

Update Taylor, Drake and Rihanna AGAIN??? Why??? There are a lot of act needing update.

It was to do with those acts reaching 100m and because they were very easily compiled and completed.

And the 60s, where the MKI line up had far more success, than they did in the UK or Europe.

Excellent remark. Hush, Kentucky Woman were singles with good performance at Billboard charts. At canadian charts as well.

Shades of Deep Purple charted reasonably well too.

I am anxious for the final results.

It's one of the most mysteries within fonographic outlets: how many records Deep Purple really sold in all career. Neither Ian Gillan or Roger Glover know it according some interviews! It's a enigma next to being revealed due the glorious work of Chartmasters.

"It’s strange that time has been kinder to Sabbath than Purple, who in the 70s were easily the more successful of the two."

Different kind of band though, Sabbath invented metal while Deep Purple is just hard rock (like Zeppelin).

Don't really get the correlation between what I said and your statement. Especially since Zeppelin are so much more successful and popular than Sabbath.

IMO all three acts were instrumental in the formation of Metal, with both Purple and Sabbath initially being influenced enough by the sound and style of Zeppelin, to change and alter their sound and style.

While I would not class Purple as a Metal band, they certainly introduced musical elements that became staples in metal and were certainly regarded as an influence by many metal musicians and bands that followed, such as Maiden, Metallica, Priest, Rammstein, Pantera etc

For me though, no one band created metal, it was an amalgamation of many bands and music, especially these three mentioned. What I would say is that Sabbaths imagery and lyrical content was way more instrumental than the other two bands with regards to metal.

I personally think that Sabbath have just been marketed better than Purple. In the 80s Sabbath kind of died a death, nobody really seemed to care about them much anymore, it was really all those reunion tours etc that revitalised their name and reputation.

I have no idea who Bad Bunny is. Patiently waiting for Deep Purple.

"Don’t really get the correlation between what I said and your statement."

Well, if your band is considered to be the first metal band a lot of (young) metal fans are gonna be interested in your music.

You seemed to imply that they're very similar bands, and my point is that they're not.