Talk:Time Out (album)

RIAA's first Platinum jazz album?
According to the RIAA's Gold and Platinum Database Search, Time Out and Kind of Blue both went platinum on the same day, 28 April, 1997 (which, admittedly, seems kind of weird). They were both beaten by Head Hunters (certified 1986) and Heavy Weather (certified 1991). (I got these albums from this list.) Are we sure the Telegraph isn't talking about some other, perhaps British, rating agency and not the RIAA? Or maybe we're disallowing fusion?—Ketil Trout (&lt;&gt;&lt;!) 02:30, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Head Hunters and Heavy Weather are fusion albums, which is a controversial style to jazz purists who dont think it's actual jazz, so that may explain the discrepancy. Dan56 (talk) 03:21, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think we can be sure, because (unsurprisingly) Martin Chilton at The Telegraph gives no sources. I must admit that I was surprised myself, when I added this, that the information was not here already. I see that the Kind of Blue article makes no similar claim. But yes, exactly the same day sounds very odd, doesn't it. It's interesting that Kind Of Blue pre-dates Time Out by only 5 months, but that both had to wait over 38 years to get platinum. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:15, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The most accessible edition of Kind of Blue is the 1997 CD reissue by Legacy Records, whose copies to retailers probably led to the album in general reaching the threshold for the certification. This album was also remastered that year by Legacy. Dan56 (talk) 23:44, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, it obviously has a lot to do with accessibility. Perhaps you should copy your (very informative) comments over to Talk page at Kind of Blue? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:51, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Whether it is the first certified album is irrelevant. First, the person who recorded it died, not the album, and second, there are the issues mentioned above, and third, there were musicians whose records were sold poorly, but were very influencing. So all in all, the mention of this particular album having received a certification is very poor. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 12:25, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think anyone said that the album had died? Other musicians, whose albums have had poor sales, but were influential, certainly deserve due mention at the appropriate place. As regards the above "issues", the claim, about this being the first jazz platinum album, was added in good faith using a highly respected [WP:RS]. So I'm not sure how things should have been done any differently, even with hindsight. I am only now glad of Ketil Trout's careful research. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:58, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. And, just to be clear, I was neither trying to imply that the addition to the article wasn't made in good faith, nor that the Telegraph wasn't a reliable source. Mostly I was surprised by the statement and trying to understand two things I don't have much experience with: (1) how is the certification of album sales regulated (is the RIAA the de-facto standard?) and (2) what is considered a "jazz album" by experts? Perhaps I shouldn't have added the {dubious} tag.  What made me dubious (of the RIAA's ability to count, if anything) in addition to the same day certification was that Kind of Blue took 38 years to get a million, but then only 11 more years to quadruple that number, and also that Time Out seemed to track Kind of Blue's sales for the first four decades, but then fell sharply behind after 1997.  Dan56's point about the reissues that year is very interesting and makes why there might be a knee in 1997 at least seem less mysterious. Cheers—Ketil Trout (&lt;&gt;&lt;!) 02:48, 14 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Marian McPartland's Piano Jazz: Herbie Hancock On Piano Jazz, NPR, January 31, 2014 4:20 PM ET: "In 1973, Hancock recorded the jazz-funk fusion record Headhunters. It became jazz's first platinum album." --Thnidu (talk) 03:25, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Now there is a source stating it has been certified double-platinum, but RIAA itself does not support this claim. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:11, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The original source of the double-platinum claims was PRNewswire. In its Sony form it's here. PRNewswire is the source given in Crist's book. The RIAA states platinum only, and they should be the best informed about what certifications they've issued. EddieHugh (talk) 16:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * RIAA shows Double Platinum. Either look at the image (2x under "Platinum") or expand details. 98.179.179.36 (talk) 23:32, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes. Correct: "2x Multi-Platinum | February 18, 2011". Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Another source
Another source here if anyone wants to work it into the article. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 04:26, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Dubious
The claim that the album has sold 2&nbsp:million copies is not supported by the RIAA sources, which only list it as having sold 1&nbsp:million as of 1997, but those are only for US sales. The band's site links to an article that it was certified double platinum, but again, not according to RIAA. Without seeing Stephen A. Crist's book, it's not clear what it is basing sales on. So the issue is that RIAA's own site does not support the claim being made. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:29, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Poor writing style
It is poor writing style to continually repeat the subject, yet seems to want to do just that. It is mentioned in the lede, twice in the background section, once in the legacy section, twice in the reissues section and once in the charts section. Korny O'Near edit warred this into a summary (rather than following WP:BRD) "a) nowhere else does it explicitly say these were from the "Time Out" sessions, and (b) "recorded during the recording" sounds weird". Why would we be discussing any other work than the one this article is about? Also out-takes are clearly the cuts from the Time Out recording sessions. Which other album's sessions would we be discussing in this article? If it were from another album's out-takes, that would be worth writing about, but I have changed the phrase to "as well as two previously-unreleased songs from the same sessions". We are both at 3RR so a discussion is in order. How would you change it without repeating the album's title yet again? Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:13, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I originally had it as "Time Out sessions", you changed it to "recording sessions", and after some reversions back and forth you changed it to "same sessions". "same sessions" is fine with me, so maybe we can just move on? I would have preferred "Time Out sessions", since now nowhere does it explicitly say that the album Time OutTakes represents outtakes from Time Out, but anyway, I can live with this. Korny O&#39;Near (talk) 17:21, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:48, 29 December 2021 (UTC)