ITT: albums that filtered millions
>>124442586
>>124442594For me, it's the target exclusive alternate version
>billions must be filteredI'd do a beefheart chud edit if i weren't too lazy
>>124442623
>>124442586i’m doubting a million people put this piece of shit and gave it a second thought if they did. forgettable except for the cover. this is like pretending a typewriter is a videogame
>>124442734This one youtube reupload has over a million viewshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aF0g-2SeoMM
>>124442768>a million viewsi knew you were gonna post that but it’s meaningless because at least half if not 70% are partial plays less than 45 seconds. a lot of views come from clicking and going no in 20 seconds. that isn’t listening to it enough to call it filtered, they may have hit it by mistake or thought it was going to be a different band. anyway, i was being hyperbolic and silly. it may still be unfair to say millions because it may not be. impossible to truly know. you have to establish how much is necessary to hear, and then to come to the conclusion that they still don’t like it, to define ‘filtered’ if you really want to get a count. in that case it might just be a million or around that, maybe it’s only 100,000 people who ever played it through beginning to end in all history. and the ones who hated it were ‘filtered’ and the rest were unflltered.
>>124442855>tapping out in the first minute of an album isn't getting filteredYou're grasping at straws. Bear in mind that is simply one youtube reupload, of which there are many, and that youtube reuploads represent only a part of the total number of people who have heard this album in the last 55 years. Discogs alone catalogs 93 different physical pressings of the album
>>124443428you’re right it’s probably less than 50k ever listened to it
Going to release a 90 minute double album of diarrhea noises then spam it here every day and laugh at all the plebs it filters. I am very smart.
>>124443462More than 33,000 people have cataloged a physical copy in their discogs collection. That figure is limited to the small minority of people to have ever heard the album who happen to have a discogs account and a physical copy. Seriously, what is it about this album that drives its detractors to be completely delusional? You could always attempt to research your claims before making them
>>124442586this album is sounds like beefheart wiped his ass with a guitar
>>124443508>More than 33,000 people have cataloged a physical copy in their discogs collection.doesn’t mean they’ve heard it
>>124443508>You could always attempt to research your claims before making themsays the guy claiming it ‘filtered’ millions. now who’s delusional. go get some tickets to see filter, pal
>>124443530>Arguing about unknowable details, calling to speculation, providing no actual evidence of your ownConcession accepted. Anyway, here's the essay the Library of Congress includes along with its entry on the National Recording Preservation Register (it was selected in 2010):https://www.loc.gov/static/programs/national-recording-preservation-board/documents/Trout-Mask-Replica_Shepperd.pdf
>>124443550I've proved, with seconds of research, that millions of people have heard the album. Anon argues that these people mostly heard the first few minutes and quit, but that this doesn't constitute being filtered because [REDACTED].
>>124443556that doesn’t mean millions of people heard it, and then were filtered by it. you’re kind of a fucking dum-dum
