Forum
they only count the tracks for streaming, not for physical album sales.
For example, The Wall sold 33 million copies, but as a double disc, it should count as 66 million
Hi Brenn!
In terms of pure, physical, unweighted sales, yes, he sold more than any other solo artist!
Crosby should challenge him in terms of physical singles but he is nowhere near him in album sales / total CSPC. Sinatra is in the middle, he sold a lot - both albums & singles - and even has a chance to hit the general Top 10.
Hi Lance!
As I just said on my previous comment, Sinatra has a slight chance of making the Top 10.
About box sets, they are tricky! I already wanted to weight them stronger multiple times. Some of them are super expensive, but some of them are super cheap too. For example, Garth Brooks used to sell his 10-CDs boxes for $19!
With Presley, gross lists wouldn't help him - kind of the opposite. During the 70s, he sold a monster amount of albums thanks to them being budget-priced. He was virtually the only big name featuring the budget lists, his only challengers were multi-artists compilations and albums of pre-War glories. Even his arguably expensive items, like Aloha from Hawaii, a double LP that wasn't from the budget line, costed only $1 more than John Denver's Greatest Hits that was #1 that year during the holiday season. That's why it is always tricky to weight these records - one would think it's natural to double count Aloha since it had discs, in the other side a second disc for only $1 more is almost an incentive to buy rather than working against it.
I should add a new wording for these boxes yet. There is two kinds: boxes of already existing discs (that can have only 2 discs) and box-sets, packages of 4+ 'new' (in that they were never issued individually) discs. The first category is already 'multi' counted. Setting a weight 2 or so for the latter is a possibility, although as I said I never found a satisfactory formula for them.
A last word on that matter, although they are weighted as 1, extensive boxes are already very positive for one artist's EDS and so ASR. Since it has a lot of content, that's almost the full discography that is purchased immediately, fuelling the indicator used to calculate the ASR.
Hi Che1967!
Thanks to you and all others for the very nice words, it's always appreciated 😉
Hi, Just one word. MJD...
In overall Who is best selling solo artist of all time? I won’t ask bc the answer is here
EAS and ASR Chartmasters.org show us the answer it’not Elvis as many people think but It’s Jackson Who truly is .
What do you think about this?
Hi MJD
I can only echo what everyone else has already said... fantastic work by you and the team🙆. It has been a thrill to read each article and uncover every step of the way a better understanding of the Elvis catalogue. I am amazed by the sheer numbers involved, be it the volume of product, sales figures or the man hours spent to assimilate these and present them in a coherent way. I applaud you all.
With circa 500m records sold, the highest for a solo performer, it is jaw dropping and makes you wonder what might have been if he had not been in the army for 2 years at the height of his fame and spent more of the mid sixties recording proper studio albums and not the soundtracks.
One item l am curious about is the album If I Can Dream with the RPO as I see no mention of it in this article? It was a huge seller in the UK.
Once again fab work. Now have a holiday!!!☺
Its just a simple math tab, imagine if MJ had had released so many albums, compls, and singles like Elvis... he would have sold..... how many records?
MJ has reached his records sales only with 1/3 of the whole Elvis catalog.
Join the discussion..Imagine if Elvis had the extra 1.5 billion people that Michael had to buy his records, during his prime? The Beatles had a 500 million advantage over Elvis, during their prime. When adjusting for population, Elvis is the greatest record seller of the modern era. Bing Crosby is the greatest seller ever.Elvis had a 600 million population advantage over Bing, during his prime. In America, Elvis had about 50 million more people than Bing, during his prime. In America, the Beatles had about 23 million more people than Elvis, during their prime. In America, Michael had about 50 million more people than the Beatles, during his prime. The bigger the population, the bigger the sales numbers will be. You have to adjust for population when comparing the best sellers or it really is unfair to older acts. Equivalent sales are unfair to the older acts as well, since very few albums were sold until well into the sixties.
Your works have always been outstanding. Excellent quality!! Thank you. I hope some days big artists and record labels will use your info
Hi Kwjw!
Thanks for the nice words 🙂
Thanks also for pointing out that miss! In the copy step, when I put all my albums' figures into Anthony's macros, I missed the year 2015. That's 3 albums: If I Can Dream, Elvis Forever by the US Postal Service, and Ultimate Christmas. Together, they add 1,75 million to the total! I cross-checked, supposedly there is no other miss although in a discography like this one we never know 😉
Hi Brandon/Cass!
Ifs rarely work very well. Had Jackson released more albums, he would have sold less per album. Had Elvis released at a time of higher population / sales, he would have been less dominant because of more competitors, and he wouldn't have released music worth of 3 albums per year either. The population argument is really bad since sales aren't obtained during the peak only. Elvis' biggest selling year is 1977, which was a larger year for sales in the US than 1969 (Beatles' peak), 1983 (Jackson's peak), and 2009 (Jackson's passing).
All these 3 artists have extraordinary results, with the Beatles leading the way. No matter how one wants to highlight one of them instead of the remaining two, that's how it is and what really matters 😉
Thanks MJD.
You have done a sterling job regardless especially bearing in mind the size of the catalogue. So his new total now is 314.05?
I think, in the 50s, 60s population is not the only restraint that put artists in constraint to sell albums. Economics was a factor too. Many Asians, Latin American, African countries were dirt poor, and buying an album is the last thing on their mind. It wasn't until the 80s, after decades of double digit economic growth per annum (Especially Asian countries) that these region started to be able to produce large album sales. I dont know about Japan, but I bet in the 50s and early 60s their market was very small too considering they were rebuilding their country and they were less opened to the west back then. Fast forward to the 80s they were the 2nd biggest market in the world, and the likes of MJ, Madonna really benefits from that. So does other Asian markets as well. Even Europe was rebuilding their economy during that time too. So the much smaller population, plus economic factor makes Elvis at a disadvantage. I really dont think its wise to say MJ would've sold more than Elvis had he produced as much albums, singles as Elvis does. Because it is not a fair comparison.
I think what surprised me the most about this was the Orphan category. I had no idea so much of the value of Elvis's catalog wasn't tied to a studio release. I thought the Beatles Orphan total was high, but Elvis blew them away in this category. Any other method then the CSPC and it would be nearly impossible to compare Elvis and the Beatles and Micheal Jackson. Again great work on this. Your method brings perspective to these artists careers like no other I've ever seen.
How did Elvis's 154 million albums in the US compare to the Beatles? Could you add that page to the Beatles called,
BONUS: Total Album (all types) Sales per Country. That page is very helpful when comparing by region.
Yes Kwjw, both his article and the data collector have been adjusted accordingly 🙂
Once again Jazmine, with ifs we can re-write the story in both sides one hundred times. During Elvis' prime had there been a higher population and record market he would have sold more, had there been more competition and weaker communications he would have sold more. Had Jackson been white, issued more albums, released Christmas and/or Gospel songs, passed away one month after his last record, etc, he would have sold more, had he released his biggest albums 20 years earlier, with worst economic background, he would have sold less. We can argue a lot over all that, fact is that's not the way the story has been written. Had Elvis started 20 years later, the market would have been bigger but rock would have been already full of legends and he may have never got his chance / spot in that story. Had Jackson started 20 years earlier, there would have been no Motown to support a young black artist and he may have remained unknown. Both could have end up as blue collar workers in the same factory. Sounds silly? That's the point with ifs, if you change the story, everything changes. You can't change only the market size or the output of an artist and act as if everything else would have remained the same.
Hi Lance!
I'll add that page 🙂
In the meantime, the Beatles did 168,27 million albums in the US!
If streaming, digital sales and music video are not included, Elvis sold more hands down
Can i play the "what if" too? Can i?
What if Queen never lost their popularity in the US during the 80?
What if John Bonham didn't die?
What if Roger Waters wasn't an a-hole?
What if Elvis ate less burgers and more salads?
With 42 albums released compared to 12 from MJ (2 of which were posthumous).
Join the discussion...The population numbers are facts, not a what if. With certified American sales already at 160 million, Drake will be the top seller in America in a few years . He will crush the certified sales of Elvis and the Beatles. Why? Drake has the electronic technology and a much bigger population. Bing Crosby is the greatest record seller. When you take his sales and potential number of buyers, no other act can touch his sales percentage. In the mathematics world, Bing would be considered the greatest record seller ever. Don't forget, Bing had over 1700 official releases, during his career, so his total sales were huge.
Hi Cass!
The population is a fact, that Presley (or Bing or anyone else) would have sell to proportionally as many people if the country was bigger isn't, though. It isn't for nothing if the smallest is a country, the easiest it is to dominate. It's because with 10 million people, they will be way more likely to share the same culture than if there is 300 million people. The US population increased mostly in large cities and mostly on the back of increased Afro-Americans and Latinos populations, two fragments of the US population on which Presley is the weakest. More people means more cultures, more genres, more races, more artists, absolutely not more consumers of one specific artist. That's why playing these "ifs" games is touchy and they can never, never be seen as "facts" as much as you try to back them with raw figures.
Join the discussion...After Bing became a popular musical act in America,the Afro-American and Latinos populations increased by about 80 million and the white population increased by about 130 million. Bing would have sold many more records in the modern era . Based on sales for potential number of buyers, Bing is king. It is the only fair way to compare the greats of different time periods. Like I said, Drake will likely be the official sales champ in a few short years,which will happen, because of a massive population. People will use the population argument for Michael and the Beatles, within ten years.
