|
Post by neverduplicated on Jan 8, 2021 14:28:58 GMT -5
People keep saying that other singles from After Hours didn't become hits because Blinding Lights was so huge, but I'm not sure I buy it. There are plenty of examples of artists having multiple big hits at once. Maybe those other songs just weren't big hit material?
|
|
iHype.
4x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2014
Posts: 4,617
|
Post by iHype. on Jan 8, 2021 16:07:04 GMT -5
The consumption was counted when you purchased it. Streams earn individual revenue for every single listen, which is why its on a per-listen/stream basis. You putting something into a cassette player after buying it, does not earn additional revenue for any parties. You buying the cassette was the main revenue. And due to the internet individual songs are definitely almost undoubtedly bigger than ever in consumption. You can listen to something unlimited times practically anywhere, songs can be bought unlimited times (not a limited stock i.e. physical singles), and can be easily obtained after years and decades. I don't think you'd be able to listen to music while on a 2 hour jog in 1968, nor be able to find/buy a song that peaked at #82 five years prior. The digital era has definitely made songs more consumed and available than ever, nonetheless to a wider population than decades ago. By the same token in the 1940s TVs didn't exist, but record players and pianos did. "White Christmas" is the best-selling song of all-time because so many people bought the record and the sheet music. Okay but I think the most important part is did any of these songs being replayed in the background during the 20th century generate additional revenue? A song being played once purchased generates no further monetization that would be useful for the industry to track and include next to sales. RIAA has been about labels certifying music once money was made off of it (i.e. shipments/sales, streams, etc). If a song has generated the equivalent of 13 million sales or whatever high number in revenue via streaming, why should it not be certified 13x Platinum? 150~ streams according to the industry is similar to the revenue earned from 1 song purchase, so it's not like the number used is just some random number. Especially if for years there was plenty and plenty of albums that were doing numbers like 13x Platinum. Nobody questioned an album that generated the equivalent of 13 million sales being certified 13x Platinum. Why should there suddenly be an issue with songs doing similar levels of certifications? What people were listening to in 1940 is beyond irrelevant to this discussion at this point honestly, since RIAA certifications didn't even exist nor do we have actual verifiable data from a period so far back before technology. Yes, it is unfortunate there is no way that listens from decades ago can be measured and included in numbers to compare today, but I'm not sure how exactly is that RIAA's fault or 'problem'. Are they supposed to just not acknowledge streaming? They already specifically note that today's single certifications are 'Digital Certifications' to alleviate the complaints of comparing them to past day singles.
|
|
strongerq
Platinum Member
Joined: August 2019
Posts: 1,489
|
Post by strongerq on Jan 8, 2021 16:39:13 GMT -5
^Bohemian Rhapsody has both Standard Single Certification (Gold) & Digital Single Certification (8xP)
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,779
|
Post by jenglisbe on Jan 8, 2021 16:42:57 GMT -5
Just because they don’t have longevity, a nice peak, or hit a year end list doesn’t mean the era has peaked. Actually that's exactly what it means. Do you know what the word "peak" means?
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,779
|
Post by jenglisbe on Jan 8, 2021 16:44:51 GMT -5
By the same token in the 1940s TVs didn't exist, but record players and pianos did. "White Christmas" is the best-selling song of all-time because so many people bought the record and the sheet music. Okay but I think the most important part is did any of these songs being replayed in the background during the 20th century generate additional revenue? A song being played once purchased generates no further monetization that would be useful for the industry to track and include next to sales. RIAA has been about labels certifying music once money was made off of it (i.e. shipments/sales, streams, etc). If a song has generated the equivalent of 13 million sales or whatever high number in revenue via streaming, why should it not be certified 13x Platinum? 150~ streams according to the industry is similar to the revenue earned from 1 song purchase, so it's not like the number used is just some random number. Especially if for years there was plenty and plenty of albums that were doing numbers like 13x Platinum. Nobody questioned an album that generated the equivalent of 13 million sales being certified 13x Platinum. Why should there suddenly be an issue with songs doing similar levels of certifications? What people were listening to in 1940 is beyond irrelevant to this discussion at this point honestly, since RIAA certifications didn't even exist nor do we have actual verifiable data from a period so far back before technology. Yes, it is unfortunate there is no way that listens from decades ago can be measured and included in numbers to compare today, but I'm not sure how exactly is that RIAA's fault or 'problem'. Are they supposed to just not acknowledge streaming? They already specifically note that today's single certifications are 'Digital Certifications' to alleviate the complaints of comparing them to past day singles. My reply was in reference to this statement you made: "The digital era has definitely made songs more consumed and available than ever" I was essentially asking how you know that since the 1940s is an example of when music was potentially consumed more as there was less competition.
|
|
Choco
Diamond Member
lavender haze
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 27,301
My Charts
Pronouns: he/him
|
Post by Choco on Jan 8, 2021 17:27:51 GMT -5
People keep saying that other singles from After Hours didn't become hits because Blinding Lights was so huge, but I'm not sure I buy it. There are plenty of examples of artists having multiple big hits at once. Maybe those other songs just weren't big hit material? "In Your Eyes" was great (imo) and very similar to other hits he's had in the past. It also had a great start, but it never even came close to what BL was still pulling on any radio chart. Other than that, SYT is the only other thing they've pushed to radio and seems to be doing fine right now.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2021 17:29:48 GMT -5
By the same token in the 1940s TVs didn't exist, but record players and pianos did. "White Christmas" is the best-selling song of all-time because so many people bought the record and the sheet music. Okay but I think the most important part is did any of these songs being replayed in the background during the 20th century generate additional revenue? A song being played once purchased generates no further monetization that would be useful for the industry to track and include next to sales. RIAA has been about labels certifying music once money was made off of it (i.e. shipments/sales, streams, etc). If a song has generated the equivalent of 13 million sales or whatever high number in revenue via streaming, why should it not be certified 13x Platinum? 150~ streams according to the industry is similar to the revenue earned from 1 song purchase, so it's not like the number used is just some random number. Especially if for years there was plenty and plenty of albums that were doing numbers like 13x Platinum. Nobody questioned an album that generated the equivalent of 13 million sales being certified 13x Platinum. Why should there suddenly be an issue with songs doing similar levels of certifications? What people were listening to in 1940 is beyond irrelevant to this discussion at this point honestly, since RIAA certifications didn't even exist nor do we have actual verifiable data from a period so far back before technology. Yes, it is unfortunate there is no way that listens from decades ago can be measured and included in numbers to compare today, but I'm not sure how exactly is that RIAA's fault or 'problem'. Are they supposed to just not acknowledge streaming? They already specifically note that today's single certifications are 'Digital Certifications' to alleviate the complaints of comparing them to past day singles. But they don't for albums? plus I do disagree that there wasn't push back with all these multi platinum albums certs under streaming conditions Vs years and decades under sales. the biggest issue Is it gives the wrong impression That suddenly there all these best albums of all time and they are the best overnight. The general public doesn't know the nitty gritty. All they see is a plethora of platinum albums coming out. That therefore must be great albums because a platinum album was something that took endurance to be great and get certified.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2021 17:35:37 GMT -5
Okay but I think the most important part is did any of these songs being replayed in the background during the 20th century generate additional revenue? A song being played once purchased generates no further monetization that would be useful for the industry to track and include next to sales. RIAA has been about labels certifying music once money was made off of it (i.e. shipments/sales, streams, etc). If a song has generated the equivalent of 13 million sales or whatever high number in revenue via streaming, why should it not be certified 13x Platinum? 150~ streams according to the industry is similar to the revenue earned from 1 song purchase, so it's not like the number used is just some random number. Especially if for years there was plenty and plenty of albums that were doing numbers like 13x Platinum. Nobody questioned an album that generated the equivalent of 13 million sales being certified 13x Platinum. Why should there suddenly be an issue with songs doing similar levels of certifications? What people were listening to in 1940 is beyond irrelevant to this discussion at this point honestly, since RIAA certifications didn't even exist nor do we have actual verifiable data from a period so far back before technology. Yes, it is unfortunate there is no way that listens from decades ago can be measured and included in numbers to compare today, but I'm not sure how exactly is that RIAA's fault or 'problem'. Are they supposed to just not acknowledge streaming? They already specifically note that today's single certifications are 'Digital Certifications' to alleviate the complaints of comparing them to past day singles. My reply was in reference to this statement you made: "The digital era has definitely made songs more consumed and available than ever" I was essentially asking how you know that since the 1940s is an example of when music was potentially consumed more as there was less competition. I'd agree on the more available today. I'd disagree on the more consumed. But it used to be acceptable that music could be consumed passively and be popular, not so much with the hip new in crowd and their views on passove entertainment. i really do believe singing along to a song playing quietly in the background on the radio, or tv, or at a restaurant, does not make it any less popular than a song you went and clicked to play. My friends and I are always commenting on the music played when we go for a coffee or meal. It's a huge part of our conversations. But we all grew up in a different time when music was more of a background passove thing, rather than sit and continually click and select songs.
|
|
m450n
Gold Member
Joined: November 2019
Posts: 878
|
Post by m450n on Jan 8, 2021 18:09:23 GMT -5
Why did Good Days blow up? Is it just the fact that it’s a pretty strong song? Are people connecting to the lyrics? Of all the songs I wouldn’t have expected that kind of success story for it. I imagine the replay value, I had it on repeat for an hour while doing work and didn't even think about changing the song once.
|
|
|
Post by Mayman on Jan 8, 2021 21:00:31 GMT -5
Okay but I think the most important part is did any of these songs being replayed in the background during the 20th century generate additional revenue? A song being played once purchased generates no further monetization that would be useful for the industry to track and include next to sales. RIAA has been about labels certifying music once money was made off of it (i.e. shipments/sales, streams, etc). If a song has generated the equivalent of 13 million sales or whatever high number in revenue via streaming, why should it not be certified 13x Platinum? 150~ streams according to the industry is similar to the revenue earned from 1 song purchase, so it's not like the number used is just some random number. Especially if for years there was plenty and plenty of albums that were doing numbers like 13x Platinum. Nobody questioned an album that generated the equivalent of 13 million sales being certified 13x Platinum. Why should there suddenly be an issue with songs doing similar levels of certifications? What people were listening to in 1940 is beyond irrelevant to this discussion at this point honestly, since RIAA certifications didn't even exist nor do we have actual verifiable data from a period so far back before technology. Yes, it is unfortunate there is no way that listens from decades ago can be measured and included in numbers to compare today, but I'm not sure how exactly is that RIAA's fault or 'problem'. Are they supposed to just not acknowledge streaming? They already specifically note that today's single certifications are 'Digital Certifications' to alleviate the complaints of comparing them to past day singles. But they don't for albums? plus I do disagree that there wasn't push back with all these multi platinum albums certs under streaming conditions Vs years and decades under sales. the biggest issue Is it gives the wrong impression That suddenly there all these best albums of all time and they are the best overnight. The general public doesn't know the nitty gritty. All they see is a plethora of platinum albums coming out. That therefore must be great albums because a platinum album was something that took endurance to be great and get certified. I don't understand why you keep saying more and more albums are getting certified platinum when this is not true. Every year, less and less albums are reaching the 1 million+ mark because of the decline in sales and streams not creating huge numbers as of now.
|
|
singingrulebritannia
Diamond Member
source: https://twitter.com/KametieDraws/status/1801741278666965067
Joined: January 2010
Posts: 25,120
My Charts
Pronouns: he/him
|
Post by singingrulebritannia on Jan 8, 2021 21:09:42 GMT -5
Why did Good Days blow up? Is it just the fact that it’s a pretty strong song? Are people connecting to the lyrics? Of all the songs I wouldn’t have expected that kind of success story for it. I've noticed when artists build up hype through teasers over a long period, it's been a factor in a lot of organic streaming launches in the last few years ("Highest In The Room", "7 Summers", "Forever After All", etc.). Apparently SZA hinted at the song on Instagram back in July, and then a snippet was tacked to the end of the "Hit Different" video back in September.
|
|
|
Post by Push The Button on Jan 8, 2021 22:47:19 GMT -5
Okay but I think the most important part is did any of these songs being replayed in the background during the 20th century generate additional revenue? A song being played once purchased generates no further monetization that would be useful for the industry to track and include next to sales. RIAA has been about labels certifying music once money was made off of it (i.e. shipments/sales, streams, etc). If a song has generated the equivalent of 13 million sales or whatever high number in revenue via streaming, why should it not be certified 13x Platinum? 150~ streams according to the industry is similar to the revenue earned from 1 song purchase, so it's not like the number used is just some random number. Especially if for years there was plenty and plenty of albums that were doing numbers like 13x Platinum. Nobody questioned an album that generated the equivalent of 13 million sales being certified 13x Platinum. Why should there suddenly be an issue with songs doing similar levels of certifications? What people were listening to in 1940 is beyond irrelevant to this discussion at this point honestly, since RIAA certifications didn't even exist nor do we have actual verifiable data from a period so far back before technology. Yes, it is unfortunate there is no way that listens from decades ago can be measured and included in numbers to compare today, but I'm not sure how exactly is that RIAA's fault or 'problem'. Are they supposed to just not acknowledge streaming? They already specifically note that today's single certifications are 'Digital Certifications' to alleviate the complaints of comparing them to past day singles. My reply was in reference to this statement you made: "The digital era has definitely made songs more consumed and available than ever" I was essentially asking how you know that since the 1940s is an example of when music was potentially consumed more as there was less competition. It’s been widely reported that Bing Crosby had half a billion records in circulation in the ‘40s.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2021 23:07:19 GMT -5
But they don't for albums? plus I do disagree that there wasn't push back with all these multi platinum albums certs under streaming conditions Vs years and decades under sales. the biggest issue Is it gives the wrong impression That suddenly there all these best albums of all time and they are the best overnight. The general public doesn't know the nitty gritty. All they see is a plethora of platinum albums coming out. That therefore must be great albums because a platinum album was something that took endurance to be great and get certified. I don't understand why you keep saying more and more albums are getting certified platinum when this is not true. Every year, less and less albums are reaching the 1 million+ mark because of the decline in sales and streams not creating huge numbers as of now. I honestly have tried to answer this five times, and I just don't know how to answer it. i guess it comes down to looking at a narrow group of favourite albums or time period, versus the full history of the RIAA. Yea the superstar albums got platinum fast, but a ton of the albums on the list took years to build up support snd the numbers. i understand we now live in an instant gratification/expectation society. But I have no concerns that many of today's albums with the unlimited and easy access streaming provides will easily garner them many certs as time goes on. With most achieving it faster than many albums than from say the 80s.
|
|
|
Post by Mayman on Jan 8, 2021 23:14:40 GMT -5
I don't understand why you keep saying more and more albums are getting certified platinum when this is not true. Every year, less and less albums are reaching the 1 million+ mark because of the decline in sales and streams not creating huge numbers as of now. I honestly have tried to answer this five times, and I just don't know how to answer it. i guess it comes down to looking at a narrow group of favourite albums or time period, versus the full history of the RIAA. Yea the superstar albums got platinum fast, but a ton of the albums on the list took years to build up support snd the numbers. i understand we now live in an instant gratification/expectation society. But I have no concerns that many of today's albums with the unlimited and easy access streaming provides will easily garner them many certs as time goes on. With most achieving it faster than many albums than from say the 80s. Are you Gary's dupe or something? You're not making sense and are contradicting yourself.
|
|
|
Post by thegreatdivine on Jan 8, 2021 23:31:22 GMT -5
@dey it seems like you're just mad about streaming and how music is consumed in this day and age.
It's already been proven to you that fewer albums go Diamond or even Platinum these days in comparison to decades ago and while singles may reach Platinum/multi-Platinum certification faster these days, it's not without difficulty.
It's annoying seeing people consistently try to undermine how hard it is to be a successful artist in the digital/streaming era simply because they came up in the 80's and 90's.
Streaming continues to grow in the US/globally across the music industry, but it's becoming even harder to see success through it.
Take into consideration how Billboard no longer measures UGC streams and how they now filter out streams from systems/devices not logged into YouTube - both things that have happened in the past year. Bundles are no longer a thing as well. Those 3 moves alone have crippled the numbers many artists used to put up so now it's actually a lot harder for songs and albums to reach those certification marks. It's the hardest it's ever been since streaming became a thing, but apparently, that ain't enough for some of you, lol.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2021 0:00:26 GMT -5
@dey it seems like you're just mad about streaming and how music is consumed in this day and age. It's already been proven to you that fewer albums go Diamond or even Platinum these days in comparison to decades ago and while singles may reach Platinum/multi-Platinum certification faster these days, it's not without difficulty. It's annoying seeing people consistently try to undermine how hard it is to be a successful artist in the digital/streaming era simply because they came up in the 80's and 90's. Streaming continues to grow in the US/globally across the music industry, but it's becoming even harder to see success through it. Take into consideration how Billboard no longer measures UGC streams and how they now filter out streams from systems/devices not logged into YouTube - both things that have happened in the past year. Bundles are no longer a thing as well. Those 3 moves alone have crippled the numbers many artists used to put up so now it's actually a lot harder for songs and albums to reach those certification marks. It's the hardest it's ever been since streaming became a thing, but apparently, that ain't enough for some of you, lol. Then you really haven't been reading my posts, and just making assumptions. I've repeatedly stated things cannot be compared from before streaming and after streaming. and I am unsure how me stating that getting a certification is quite easy today has translated into essays about Diamond or multi platium. When I mean plain and simple getting awarded an RIAA cert of any type. but people for some reason suddenly need to make it about diamond.
|
|
bigolefreak
New Member
Joined: July 2019
Posts: 159
Pronouns: he/him
|
Post by bigolefreak on Jan 9, 2021 0:05:33 GMT -5
Wish The Weeknd was promoting Hardest to Love instead of SYT, but good luck to him cause it's sitting pretty right now (the virality of his Kardashian-esque face has helped) On the topic of post-album singles, I've been waiting for Golden to have its Watermelon Sugar streaming surge moment but I haven't gotten that yet and I fear it won't survive the winter freeze either. But for context it has re-entered at a new peak in the UK and rebounded on the singles charts from the last Christmas week (internationally, at that). So hopefully this works out ![(rofl)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/rofl.png)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2021 0:05:55 GMT -5
@dey it seems like you're just mad about streaming and how music is consumed in this day and age. It's already been proven to you that fewer albums go Diamond or even Platinum these days in comparison to decades ago and while singles may reach Platinum/multi-Platinum certification faster these days, it's not without difficulty. It's annoying seeing people consistently try to undermine how hard it is to be a successful artist in the digital/streaming era simply because they came up in the 80's and 90's. Streaming continues to grow in the US/globally across the music industry, but it's becoming even harder to see success through it. Take into consideration how Billboard no longer measures UGC streams and how they now filter out streams from systems/devices not logged into YouTube - both things that have happened in the past year. Bundles are no longer a thing as well. Those 3 moves alone have crippled the numbers many artists used to put up so now it's actually a lot harder for songs and albums to reach those certification marks. It's the hardest it's ever been since streaming became a thing, but apparently, that ain't enough for some of you, lol. People are always the same. They read something and if it's not all in agreement with the readers view, then the whole post is negative, let me be clear. I'm simply making an observation. It's very easy to get GOLD OR Silver nowadays, nothing wrong thst, just me making an observation. somehow though saying so is negative and an attack on streaming, wow. But thst is how the internet works and you are all in and drink thr koopaid on a topic, or you hate it all.
|
|
|
Post by Mayman on Jan 9, 2021 0:10:47 GMT -5
@dey it seems like you're just mad about streaming and how music is consumed in this day and age. It's already been proven to you that fewer albums go Diamond or even Platinum these days in comparison to decades ago and while singles may reach Platinum/multi-Platinum certification faster these days, it's not without difficulty. It's annoying seeing people consistently try to undermine how hard it is to be a successful artist in the digital/streaming era simply because they came up in the 80's and 90's. Streaming continues to grow in the US/globally across the music industry, but it's becoming even harder to see success through it. Take into consideration how Billboard no longer measures UGC streams and how they now filter out streams from systems/devices not logged into YouTube - both things that have happened in the past year. Bundles are no longer a thing as well. Those 3 moves alone have crippled the numbers many artists used to put up so now it's actually a lot harder for songs and albums to reach those certification marks. It's the hardest it's ever been since streaming became a thing, but apparently, that ain't enough for some of you, lol. People are always the same. They read something and if it's not all in agreement with the readers view, then the whole post is negative, let me be clear. I'm simply making an observation. It's very easy to get GOLD OR Silver nowadays, nothing wrong thst, just me making an observation. somehow though saying so is negative and an attack on streaming, wow. But thst is how the internet works and you are all in and drink thr koopaid on a topic, or you hate it all. You're entire post is invalid because Silver certifications do not exist in the US. Next!
|
|
|
Post by Mayman on Jan 9, 2021 0:12:17 GMT -5
But fr if you're going to have a conversation/debate with someone... don't continually contradict yourself when someone corrects you. You've done it several times and keep changing what your "point" is.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2021 0:17:58 GMT -5
But fr if you're going to have a conversation/debate with someone... don't continually contradict yourself when someone corrects you. You've done it several times and keep changing what your "point" is. Or maybe they didn't prove me wrong. maybe they suddenly started using examples of diamond certs to prove their point.
|
|
dremolus - solarpunk
Diamond Member
Best In This Chaotic Hell with the best taste
Joined: August 2019
Posts: 13,042
My Reviews
Pronouns: (he/him/they)
|
Post by dremolus - solarpunk on Jan 9, 2021 0:19:32 GMT -5
omg ![](https://64.media.tumblr.com/c23ae9f9aa5dbf4aba207ae0d875409c/8c5623de4db7961f-ce/s540x810/2f5da7ba683f8b29eac71b134dd5bac82b9eaf92.gifv)
|
|
|
Post by Mayman on Jan 9, 2021 0:22:53 GMT -5
But fr if you're going to have a conversation/debate with someone... don't continually contradict yourself when someone corrects you. You've done it several times and keep changing what your "point" is. Or maybe they didn't prove me wrong. maybe they suddenly started using examples of diamond certs to prove their point. TheGreatDevine's example of diamond certifications was used alongside platinum cerifications to dispute your original point. I'm sorry that your opinion is wrong and not factually correct and that you refuse to understand the facts presented to you.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2021 0:29:27 GMT -5
People are always the same. They read something and if it's not all in agreement with the readers view, then the whole post is negative, let me be clear. I'm simply making an observation. It's very easy to get GOLD OR Silver nowadays, nothing wrong thst, just me making an observation. somehow though saying so is negative and an attack on streaming, wow. But thst is how the internet works and you are all in and drink thr koopaid on a topic, or you hate it all. You're entire post is invalid because Silver certifications do not exist in the US. Next! I'm in the UK. I slipped up on the silver part. I do try in a us thread to keep the facts US but I am human. it however does not change the fact that gold is ridiculously easy to achieve.
|
|
|
Post by Mayman on Jan 9, 2021 0:31:25 GMT -5
Okay I'm done talking to men for the day.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2021 0:38:03 GMT -5
I'm also not sure what platinum actually means now. It used to be "1 million copies sold." Now it's...x copies + y number of streams(*z weighting). And a ton easier to achieve than In the past. This was my first post. I certainly have not contradicted myself. It still also remains true getting a certification is easier today. Perhaps getting a diamond record isn't, but I never discussed diamond or multiple platinum. Just simply the riaa handing out certifications. I will also point out for clarity that I also never made a distinction between new music and old music. Both benefit from allowing streams to count towards the certifications easily handed out nowadays.
|
|
jodakyellow
Platinum Member
Joined: July 2018
Posts: 1,513
|
Post by jodakyellow on Jan 9, 2021 1:22:03 GMT -5
You're entire post is invalid because Silver certifications do not exist in the US. Next! I'm in the UK. I slipped up on the silver part. I do try in a us thread to keep the facts US but I am human. it however does not change the fact that gold is ridiculously easy to achieve. Have you ever achieved it
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2021 1:28:31 GMT -5
I'm in the UK. I slipped up on the silver part. I do try in a us thread to keep the facts US but I am human. it however does not change the fact that gold is ridiculously easy to achieve. Have you ever achieved it Perfection? Nope. And I am glad of that fact. I like being human.
|
|
dremolus - solarpunk
Diamond Member
Best In This Chaotic Hell with the best taste
Joined: August 2019
Posts: 13,042
My Reviews
Pronouns: (he/him/they)
|
Post by dremolus - solarpunk on Jan 9, 2021 1:51:13 GMT -5
Have you ever achieved it Perfection? Nope. And I am glad of that fact. I like being human. ![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EYDC_12XYAAbZiM.jpg:large)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2021 2:23:24 GMT -5
Holiday - Little Nas X Peak 37 WOC 7
Certified gold within the past week.
I don't care what they call it, standard digital or whatever. It is still a gold record. And obviously ridiculously easy to achieve when one looks at its chart performance in comparison.
|
|