I love debating music, but when someone brings up "album sales" to defend artist/album quality...

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

The convo is OVER at that point.

Its the weakest argument you can use. Literally.

Yeah. People bought XYZ project or single...what does that have to do with HOW IT SOUNDS!?

Debating is subjective, but thats the point. Thats what makes it interesting.

If it was objective, then we'd have nothing to talk about.

Invoking the MUSIC BUSINESS and the SALE OF MUSIC to indicate album or song or artist quality is basically saying you can't defend your argument or your position.

The biggest trick played on fans of music was how record COMPANIES made ya'll think that sales equated in ANY WAY to album quality or musical contribution to a genre. Ya'll will literally elevate an artist based on titles of "gold" or "platinum" without even trying to make arguments defending your support of an artists actual musical content and presentation.

 

[The Ruler 09]

Only clowns bring up album sales as the reason why something is better. People who say that aren't Hip Hop.

 

[Ziggiy]

It depends on the conversation and or debate. For instance people love to state as fact that Nas's career was hanging by a thread before Ether/Stillmatic DESPITE the fact that Nas released one Double Platinum album and a Platinum album in THE SAME YEAR (99) previously and dropped a Gold selling compilation album in 2000 (QB'S Finest). So how in the HELL could his career be hanging by a thread

But I feel your sentiment, sales are NOT end all be all of artistic success nor even relevance

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

It depends on the conversation and or debate. For instance people love to state as fact that Nas's career was hanging by a thread before Ether/Stillmatic DESPITE the fact that Nas released one Double Platinum album and a Platinum album in THE SAME YEAR (99) previously and dropped a Gold selling compilation album in 2000 (QB'S Finest). So how in the HELL could his career be hanging by a thread

But I feel your sentiment, sales are NOT end all be all of artistic success nor even relevance

Well you're comparing Nas' career to himself. Then sales MAY have a role in the debate.

But comparing artists or different singles? Thats just absurd.

 

[stealthbomber]

lmao ok so defend drake op

 

[LandryFieldsDad]

another great thread

 

[ThaRealness]

I feel you but sales are at least a little relevant if youre talking about two artists with mainstream appeal.

 

[Ian1362]

prepare for Jigga stans

 

[up in here]

I feel you but sales are at least a little relevant if youre talking about two artists with mainstream appeal.

Not really since sales equates to Katy Perry being a best artist of this generation

Sales does not equate quality, and bigger does not mean better. Sales arguments are flawed because they require a strict usage within the argument to suit the person using the sales argument, as any modification of the criteria can paint a different picture. For example, one artist may have greater sales for a specific project than the other but the other may have more sales over their career, so who is better? One artist may have had great sales success before downloads the other may have good sales considering the Internet age we now live in, who is better? One artist may have more sales than the other but a third artist has more than both, is the third artist the best? One might have more than the other but they are both top sellers, is the one with lesser sales a failure?

Numbers might not lie, of course because numbers are just nimbers and dont speak. but the way people use the numbers certainly changes the argument.

 

[JuvenileHell]

I agree...

Artists should be judged on how well they execute the artform...be it how well you play instruments and sing in rock, or lyrics/flow/delivery in rap./

 

[up in here]

The second worst argument someone can use is "it got 5 mics in the source" when it was not actually initially given 5 but retrospectively given 5.

Not only are you rating music by someone else's opinion but you are also historically inaccurate. Smh

 

[Ineedmoney504]

Na sometimes it can be used, as in claim a certain artist has no fans and people not feeling him, and this next artist is the next star in music, and then the first artist comes out and double are triples what the first artist sold them it is relevant, but just in a pure music standpoint its not

But everybody on this site use sales to tell advantage, like Jay stan might say jay dont need to respond to certain artist cause they not on his level, or nas stans might use it to defend nas when a person like mega diss him, they would say nas doesn't need to respond he not on his level and bring up sales, shyt nas even used it on destroy and rebuild when he said mega aint selling records

 

[Brown Ant]

Sales matter. Music quality is subjective; therefore, the more people who purchase a piece of music means the product is better than the lesser purchased product.

 

[Big Blue]

Yes, but albums sales are pretty much the only objective metric that we can use in music discussion.

 

[Mr. Negative]

Record sales dont mean shyt.

It's a girlish, whore's point of view. It's the one of the criteria they use in judging ugly dudes who are on television, knowing if said person was just regular around the way nikka, they wouldn't go near him.

"Person A is popular, therefore person A is attractive"

"Artist B is more popular, so artist B is the better artist"

Same thing. This is the reason the word "swag" began to be used like it did.

To give males a way to call another male "attractive" without flat out saying they find them attractive.