Zeppelin may have toured more, but that's because the demand for them was sick. I'm not saying the Stones couldn't have toured almost every year also, but they only toured North America every three years, 69, 72, 75, 78 and 81. We could assume that the build up, from them being off the road for three years each time, aided in them being n such demand when they returned. Zeppelin re
Forum: Tell Me

Quotetreaclefingers Quotepricepittsburgh QuoteGasLightStreet Quotetreaclefingers Quotepricepittsburgh I believe I have a correction to make as the OP. I stated that Hot Rocks, being a double album, gets credit twice from the RIAA in the U.S. so it's actual sales is about the same as Some Girls. However, I could be wrong. Hot Rocks may have actually sold 12 million (Not 6 million) and isn
Forum: Tell Me

So I'm guessing that Elvis Live, Aloha From Hawaii, which was released as a double LP in the vinyl era, and sold 5 million in the US, doesn't receive, Diamond status, because in the cd era, it was condensed to one disc by the time it reached 5 million. Just like Exile on Main Street is one disc now.
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteGasLightStreet Quotetreaclefingers Quotepricepittsburgh I believe I have a correction to make as the OP. I stated that Hot Rocks, being a double album, gets credit twice from the RIAA in the U.S. so it's actual sales is about the same as Some Girls. However, I could be wrong. Hot Rocks may have actually sold 12 million (Not 6 million) and isn't getting credit as a double because it
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteGasLightStreet If it's from the vinyl era, as in pre-CD era, it's still counted twice. It's actually only sold 6 million copies. Or whatever it is. Divide it in half, that's what it is. Period. That's what I first assumed, but Wikipeida (Which I know makes mistakes) has it stated otherwise, under the certification section and I know somewhere in the RIAA criteria,
Forum: Tell Me

yeah I was hoping for some insight lol
Forum: Tell Me

I hate to start a new thread but I wanted to be sure everyone saw my possible needed correction. I stated on a previous post that Hot Rocks, being a double album, gets credit twice from the RIAA in the U.S. so it's actual sales is about the same as Some Girls. However, I could be wrong. Hot Rocks may have actually sold 12 million (Not 6 million) and isn't getting credit as a double beca
Forum: Tell Me

I believe I have a correction to make as the OP. I stated that Hot Rocks, being a double album, gets credit twice from the RIAA in the U.S. so it's actual sales is about the same as Some Girls. However, I could be wrong. Hot Rocks may have actually sold 12 million (Not 6 million) and isn't getting credit as a double because it's running time is below 100 minutes. I'm a bit los
Forum: Tell Me

It's funny to me that so many people still bring this topic up. It really is apples and oranges. Seriously. Both are fruits and taste great but both taste different. First of all each band's influences are pretty much different. I think the Stones were influenced more by straight Blues, where as The Beatles were more influenced by the already established Rock and Roll or mainstream R
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteJJHMick Georgelicks the Deus ex Machina! Why starting a discussion? Why coming to the brink of being impolite to each other though we are fans of the same thing(s). It only needs Georgelicks (any "Eurosales"/Other continents expert around here?!): He explains the world to us. And makes us smile. The Stones fan is a digital native? I am really surprised. Ok, next criteria: Almos
Forum: Tell Me

Quotegeorgelicks Let's take another Stones classic as Satisfaction: The single: 1,5 m Out Of Our Heads: 1,5 m Big Hits: 3 m Got Live If You Want It: 1 m Hot Rocks: 8-10 m Still Life: 1 m Singles Collection: 1 m Flashpoint: 1 m 40 Licks: 3 m Grrr: 0,3 m Live licks/SAL/Hyde Park: 0,5 m Digital single: 0,7 m (as of 2013) Total: 22-24 million copies sold in the U.S I see your
Forum: Tell Me

Quotegeorgelicks While I have no "theories", some actual facts should help clear up the misinformation you have been told or read. First, let's talk about the U.S. for example: Soundscan has recorded the Stones have outsold Led Zeppelin in total album sales 1991-2013: The Beatles - 56m Pink Floyd - 35m U2 - 33m Elvis Presley - 30m Aerosmith - 29m AC/DC - 27m Rolling
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteRokyfan So the whole premise of this thread is that sales reflect quality? (Does anyone find it surprising that the Stones overall record sales fall so short". . ." ) When I look at who outsold the Stones in (pick any year, pretty much) I come to the conclusion that popularity and quality are unrelated. So, it is not surprising. By no means. I posted it in comparison to ot
Forum: Tell Me

Jimmy Page on One Hit to the Body, middle and end of the song. If for no other reason, it sounds just like him and it's just cool as all hell to hear The Stones along side Jimmy on the same track. Maybe the greatest coming together of Rock Gods ever.
Forum: Tell Me

No doubt the Stones are Kings of the Road, but one of the main reasons behind tours (Next to making ticket sales cash) is to support album sales.
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteJJHMick Thank you, pricepittsburgh, that'll be a lot of calculations to be done - as figures for Gold, Platinum and so on changed from decade to decade and differ from country to country. I only posted those links to show you that all three bands have many more albums than just the ones we think off of the top of our heads. These two links actually consider what each certificati
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteJJHMick Now come on, remember your earliest pre-high school Mathematics class before making up theories: The Beatles, Led Zeppelin (even less) or Pink Floyd have maybe a maximum of 10 long players to take into consideration as big sellers. 200 or even 300 million divided through 10?! A mark of 20 million copies sold was maybe reached by Saturday Night Fever first and then by Thriller (an
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteTurner68 QuoteDandelionPowderman Quotestanlove QuoteDandelionPowderman QuoteTurner68 QuoteLieB QuoteDandelionPowderman The Stones were a live band and Led Zep were both... I disagree, I think it's the other way around. Or, I guess both were both. Led Zep's albums were ambitious, but they didn't put much more than a four piece band on their albums, whereas the Stones created
Forum: Tell Me

I'm the OP, and I agree that sales are not always a good measuring stick, and for what it's worth, The Stones have sold a ton. It's not like their sales are average by any stretch of the imagination. It's true that a lot of irrelevant artist sell a lot too, but those sales are early in the career only, while they are a flash in the pan. my point about the Stones is that, over
Forum: Tell Me

Gimme Shelter because it sounds great whether you're paying attention to the lyrics or not.
Forum: Tell Me

It's interesting because The Beatles, biggest seller, "1" is also a greatest hits package, but they have all those other huge selling studio albums, years before "1" was released. It's almost as with the Stones, millions are content on owning their signature tracks over full studio albums. But honestly, even though, as fans, we never feel like any one era is full
Forum: Tell Me

That's a very good and significant point that I never considered. Bands that break up, tend to have their classic albums immortalized more. Great call.
Forum: Tell Me

Does anyone find it surprising that the Stones overall record sales fall so short of bands like The Beatles and Led Zeppelin and supposedly even Queen and Pink Floyd? I've read that they are certified globally as over 100 million, with claims of 200 million but The Beatles and Zeppelin are certified globally over 200 million with claims of over 300 million. Still, their individual studio
Forum: Tell Me

Apples and oranges. Both are fruits and are sweet, but both taste differently.
Forum: Tell Me