Do you think re-release material should count with the original when looking at records against other albums? (Obvious case being Teenage Dream & Bad #1's record, top 10 records, etc).
I'm asking because I'm working on an #analysis, and well, the question pertains to it
No. Look at Rhythm Nation, for instance. When Love Will Never Do (Without You) hit #1 in 1991, that was a big deal because no album before or since produced #1s in three separate calendar years. The song was also the seventh single. It's impressive and noteworthy when a song that has been available for two years on a multi-million selling album is able to do that well.
A totally new song that was not previously available is naturally going to attract attention and garner sales even from fans who already owned the original album. If you ARE aiming for one of those lofty records like "most top ten hits from one album", that's cheating your way to it.
No. But if it was a bonus track which was released on the same day as the standard album, it should. Just like Taylor's "Ours" on Speak Now and "New Romantics" on 1989.
Definitely not. The first single from an album's re-release might as well be a new lead single to the GP. For example, it's way more impressive when a fifth single off an album does well than when the first single off a re-release (even though it might be the fifth single of the era) does well.
No. Look at Rhythm Nation, for instance. When Love Will Never Do (Without You) hit #1 in 1991, that was a big deal because no album before or since produced #1s in three separate calendar years. The song was also the seventh single. It's impressive and noteworthy when a song that has been available for two years on a multi-million selling album is able to do that well.
A totally new song that was not previously available is naturally going to attract attention and garner sales even from fans who already owned the original album. If you ARE aiming for one of those lofty records like "most top ten hits from one album", that's cheating your way to it.
Quote:
Originally posted by ThugginGrande
Definitely not. The first single from an album's re-release might as well be a new lead single to the GP. For example, it's way more impressive when a fifth single off an album does well than when the first single off a re-release (even though it might be the fifth single of the era) does well.
I agree with these. Ultimately to me, I think it's unfair to compare an album released once to an album where a singer went into the studio, purposely recorded more hits, and tacked it on top of their album for more success.
If you tuck on an entire new EP (like The Fame Monster), no.
If you only add a few new songs (GGGB, TD) and that's enough for people to buy the entire album again, then that sale deserves to go towards the original album.
Maybe there should be percentage and retitling rules.
For album sales you can't really split it since they're counted as one release once the re-release debuts, but for singles it's a bit to combine new material charting as an achievement for an album that it wasn't originally on. Best way is to just describe it as an era's stats instead.
to combine new material charting as an achievement for an album that it wasn't originally on. Best way is to just describe it as an era's stats instead.