find it really reeally interesting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ing_boy_groups

it's from Wikipedia, but i guess it is somehow credible and based with facts

interesting, why do they referr to them as 'boy groups'? was it written outside the uk? is the term 'boyband' a uk phenomina?

Having the beastie boys on that list is an insult.

Im surprised westlife have sold more than take that? Although its close

I love The Beastie Boys but i'd say they are on the list as they are a group who don't play instruments just like the rest. Obviously it's mental to compare them with any of the others but i'd say they are on there simply as they aren't technically a band in the sense that they all play instruments

My god......

Beastie boys were a hip hop group and played there own instruments, how the hell do you think there albums got made. There act on stage/tv was 3mc's and 1 dj but they still created there own music.

No Bee Gee's?

Hanson all played instruments

Interesting, the UK's top selling boy band of all time are dwarfed by the sales of the UK's (and indeed the world's) best selling musical band ever, the Beatles. Take That have sold 45 million records vs an estimated 1 billion or more for the Beatles. Just goes to show that real music stands the test of time.

you cant love them that much or you would know that they do play instruments..mike d - drums, ad rock - guitar, mca - bass. some songs on there albums are just instrumentals.

I think it's unfair to compare any act to The Beatles and especially on a list where the top seller is 130 million. Most but a handful if that can compare with The Beatles sales. However there's no need to undermine the achievements of others.
All of these acts have achieved as out of the billions of music acts they are in the top for their small sub genre be it 'boyband' or simply 'pop' music they have been successful. It just varies sales wise and is mainly to do with fate, luck and circumstances and that includes The Beatles.

How does anyone know that a certain act won't stand the test of time? The Beatles have been around a lot longer than any of these groups mentioned especially seeing as they are only talking boybands which came into effect 1988 inwards.

People like to use The Beatles to bash any other artist they choose and it's really quite predictable.

My God.....


Not sure what's worse. Me not knowing that the Beastie's played THEIR own instruments or the improper use of the word their. A thread where we have both committed atrocities of the highest order.

They didn't use live instruments on any of their albums until Check Your Head by the way. How the hell did they make Paul's Boutique? Mind boggling........

How bizarre

Fair point, I think it's pretty clear that my post earlier was total bollocks. You win some, you lose some. That's war

it's true, westlife indeed sold more records than take that,as it is based on a worldwide records. take that is just so massive in UK, BUT IN UK ALONE..


i jus think the list is not updated as one direction is still at 12 million.. there are reports that they have sold more than 30 million now

actually, that is not entirely true, but i do agree that the uk is by far their biggest selling territory. "back for good" went to #1 in 31 countries worldwide, i don't honestly think any westlife song had that kind of worldwide impact. westlife just lasted longer, released more music and sold more records that way.

that is the "back for good" days i guess? more than 10 years ago? and by far, were they able to achieve that again?

maybe they have a market also in some european countries, but beyond that, i dont think so, they were somehow huge worldwide during back for good days, but after that, they seem to be unfamiliar epecially today, especially in asia, i must know that very well..

westlife earlier albums were multi-platinum in a lot of countries (beyond europe) and set a record of being best selling international album of all time in some asian countries, and they are still very much known as of today.

checking their itunes performance TODAY,

it is westlife and backstreet boys's records who consistently and continuously chart on at least 20 countries

i already agreed that take that's success is mainly confided to the uk and even more so at this time. however, that single was a huge worldwide success nonetheless and it was bigger than any westlife single, even cracking the big markets by reaching the top 10 in japan and the us.

according to that list, there only seems to be 5 million sales between the two pop acts, despite westlife lasting considerably longer, this alleged worldwide appeal and after releasing 4 more studio albums compared to take that.

Attack the grammer a sign you've got no argument.

As for the second lines you need to go back and check out album credits on the cd inserts

for the same reason the beatles arent mentioned.

There is no argument. I never debated your point. Also, I was simply amazed at how many times you used the word 'there' instead of 'their' in such a short sentence. Chill your beans. I'm just taking the piss. It's 'grammar' by the way


They played on a few tracks on Paul's Boutique. Not the entire album. Hence my comment of 'how did they make it'. With your "How the hell do you think they made albums?" comment you seem to think that unless an artist plays their instruments they are unable to produce an album. I found that a fairly strange line.

I didn't know that the Beastie Boys played their instruments on their albums. If you look around the net you'll find many fans of the band are or were unaware they played live instruments post-Paul's Boutique. I would have thought this is down to Hip-Hop being renowned for splicing samples together to create something new. The Beastie's most acclaimed album is one where they do just that.

It's genuinely not a huge issue to me either way how they made it. I know they created their own music, I just presumed they created it in a different way to how they do. Thank you for enlightening me.

Easy now

Coun3spice you say Take That weren't big in Asia but the fact is in multiple biographies and reports from US Billboard it states they were superstars in both Europe and Asia from 1994.

Just because you live in Asia doesn't necessarily mean you know/were aware of every single movement or every group across each country i'd be impressed if you did. Oasis were absolutely huge when I was growing up but that doesn't mean I was completely aware of them and every little fact.

The fact is Westlife have released more albums actually a good 4 more albums but are still close in sales as someone pointed out. So what does that say? Worldwide means regardless of selling loads in Europe and less other continents it's still Worldwide sales overall regardless. Doesn't matter if it's trillions in one continent and low to moderate in another continent it all counts. You have to sell to be on the list regardless of where you do it and if you sell big in a particular place so be it.

When you started this thread I knew the minute someone innocently mentions Take That you and potentially a handful of other Westlife fans would take issue. I don't see any replies to other groups that have been mentioned.

Why? Is it because they are British and for example an American boyband is less of a threat to Westlife's standing and legacy as they are foreign in a sense and so they don't provoke such a reaction. Is it because they are so close a comparison being that both came from different times in the 90's and are fairly close areas Ireland and Britain. If someone argued a Japanese/American group had sold more or close than Westlife and were 'Worldwide' yet only sold in America or Japan would you be so passionate about it and quick to the mark?

I like Westlife or rather the 1999 to 2002 years and am glad they are a success like i'm sure many Take That fans do but they don't bother commenting or getting involved as people don't actually care about things like this you know having much more important daily challenges going on. However it's a fact though that TT were global regardless of the length of time and well documented they had success in Asia that's a fact.

Was this a genuine thread of interest or a chance to big up Westlife? What do you feel about the other groups on the list aside from Westlife? Any favourites?

The list is only about the album sales, and they are pretty much correct right now, standing at 12 million. They've sold a little over 5 million of each of their first two albums and the latest (Midnight Memories) will probably stand at about 2 million by now.

I think they incorrectly put last year's number (12 million records sold in 1 year) in the list of the album sales. Their total record sales as of now are 39 million.

Is the reason 'cos they are good'?