|
Glee vs. Elvis - most Hot 100 singles |
Post Reply 
|
Page 12> |
| Author | |
EdisonLite 
Music Fan 
Joined: 18 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 198 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Glee vs. Elvis - most Hot 100 singlesPosted: 18 February 2011 at 11:00am |
|
I normally never post messages here that aren't related to songs on CDs. But this topic of the many Glee singles has come up here before, so I thought this might be of interest to some. I read in the paper today:
'Glee' surpasses Elvis for most Hot 100 singles: The act with the most songs on the Billboard Hot 100 chart isn't the Beatles, Elvis or Michael Jackson. It's the cast of "Glee." In just 18 months of appearing on the charts, the FOX TV series has set the record for the most songs on the Billboard chart in the chart's 52-year history. This week, "Glee" debuts six songs on the chart, giving the series a total of 113 songs that have sold enough copies to place on the chart. That's five more than the now-second-place Elvis Presley, who had 108. And a comment: --Amazing that a chart feat that took Elvis Presley 26 YEARS to accomplish, the cast of 'Glee' has accomplisthed in just 1.5 years! And who knows what their total will be by the time the tv series comes to an end? Just goes to show that we live in different times, where the Hot 100 is compiled very differently. Still, I wonder if years or decades from now, the cast of 'Glee' will be thought of as an act that was as big as Elvis. (I don't think so.) Edited by EdisonLite |
|
 |
|
|
Jody Thornton
Music Fan
Joined: 23 May 2008 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 9 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 February 2011 at 12:42pm |
|
See, to me (and I don't see anyone changing my mind on this) the Glee cast has nowhere near achieved the same success as Mr Presley. Back in his prime, you had to go to the store and cough up what would be $5.00 in today's money, and buy a 45-rpm disc. Today, you can legally download songs in the comfort of your home office. There's no effort to the latter scenario.
And I would not think that Billboard Hot 100 reflects the same similarities between sales and airplay today as in Elvis' day. There was more of a relationship between the two in the past. Funny, I thought that airplay was now a bigger component of today's charts; but does the Glee cast have this many singles on the radio? Really? I guess my problem is getting over the absence of a physical carrier to distribute music. When I download something, I don't really feel like I can boast that I legitimately have a copy of the song or recording. Whereas, if I purchase a vinyl disc, I feel like I "have" it. Moreover, most audio codecs don't come close to the fidelity of recording on physical media - and yes I am including (I am going to regret being quoted as saying this, but here goes my analog pride ...) compact discs (can't believe I said that). But there seems to be no collectibility element to music anymore. Unless any one of you have figured out how to frame an MP3 on the wall. ;) Edited by Jody Thornton |
|
|
Cheers,
Jody Thornton (Richmond Hill, Ontario) |
|
|
|
|
crapfromthepast
Music Fan
Joined: 14 September 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 55 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 February 2011 at 1:58pm |
|
To me, this just means that the charts are broken.
Nothing against the Glee Cast, but 6 new entries on the Hot 100 in the same week? Really? Only to disappear next week? Is a chart that shows this really representative of anything useful? I see this as very similar to the mid-'90s when airplay- only songs weren't eligible for the Hot 100, like "Lovefool", "Don't Speak", "Mr. Jones", etc. The situation corrected itself somewhat after-the-fact when later editions of the Joel Whitburn books included the airplay-only charts as part of their rankings. This situation is clearly going to warrant some after- the-fact cleaning-up. I don't know what the Whitburn folks can do to fix this, aside from toss out the entire Hot 100 and use only the airplay charts. Going forward, I'd suggest making radio airplay, or at least some promotion of the track to radio, a prerequisite for entry onto the Hot 100. |
|
|
|
|
EdisonLite
Music Fan
Joined: 18 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 198 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 February 2011 at 2:02pm |
|
Jody, I agree and disagree with some of your statements. I agree that the 'Glee' cast will probably never be seen as an act that was as big as Elvis (on the charts, or otherwise.) But I don't agree with your statements about the lack of a physical single and its impact.
As an example, if one were to compare, say, Britney Spears' career and Barry Manilow's career (and Britney's actually had a longer chart span than Barry), I don't think it would be fair to say Britney hasn't had the kind of influential/big career as Barry had in his day because her fans are mostly buying downloaded singles and Barry's fans all bought 45s. I think the impact of Britney on young kids today is every bit as strong as Barry's was in his day. Edited by EdisonLite |
|
|
|
|
bwolfe
Music Fan
Joined: 24 May 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 February 2011 at 2:07pm |
|
Someone once told me that in the old days "we all sang from the same page."
Which means that in today's fragmented music world its hard to say what is or isn't a hit. Does a hit means sales or airplay or both? Today's music has very little attachment to young people. Back in the day it was special when one of your favorite performers was on a TV show. You could actually see them in person. Maybe if I saved up enough money I could buy their latest single or if I saved even more I could buy an album. The car ride from the store seemed an eternity until I could get home and throw my new 45s on the stereo. I feel that passion is gone. There's such a cold feel to downloading an mp3. I do it when I can't find music otherwise. I can't accept Glee outdoing anyone whether it be Elvis or the Ohio Express. Sorry Glee fans... |
|
|
the way it was heard on the radio
|
|
|
|
|
budaniel
Music Fan
Joined: 12 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 February 2011 at 2:44pm |
|
the charts are a mess due to downloading IMO. Honestly, if people had to go to the store and buy SIX 45 rpm records to make the Glee songs all hit the chart in the same week, well, chances are they WOULDN'T. They would wait for the full soundtrack to come out. In fact, all six songs wouldn't even have been AVAILABLE on 45 RPM all in one week.
There is barely any official solicitation of designated singles anymore. Every track from an album--or not EVEN an album since songs are thrown up on itunes as soon as they've made some appearance on television--is fair game now to qualify as a single. |
|
|
|
|
torcan
Music Fan
Joined: 23 June 2006 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 10 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 February 2011 at 4:01pm |
Agree totally - that's why today's charts are a "mess". Elvis achieved what he did by having 45s available and promoted to radio. Even if physical singles aren't available today, you could still make downloads count towards the Hot 100 and have it mean something. Billboard should have some rule where a song can't appear on the Hot 100 UNLESS it's a track being promoted as a "single" to radio. That way you'd say the charts return to the ways of yesteryear and you wouldn't see songs debut at No. 12 one week and fall off the next. You simply can't compare the "Glee" cast's accomplishments to Elvis' - it's like apples and oranges. |
|
|
|
|
Hykker
Music Fan
Joined: 30 October 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 February 2011 at 4:47pm |
|
Which brings us back to the question...what is a hit song today? This is especially true with the general lack of multi-format hits. I'm not even sure that requiring something being promoted to radio is necessarily a qualifier. With the advent of BDS/Mediabase monitoring, if you're not a monitored station you pretty much don't exist to the labels. Back when R&R still existed they had a secondary chart based on airplay at "indicator" stations (ie-non monitored) that while it didn't count toward their actual chart at least acknowledged the smaller stations that often broke the hits. Now that's gone. Does "promoted to radio" mean it was on a TM-C Hitdisc (presuming they haven't gone to an all-download system by now)?
I'm curious, how do those of you who are still active in programming CHR/Hot AC stations determine what songs you'll add, how heavy rotation they'll receive and what to keep as golds (assuming you don't do local music testing)? This is not to put down downloads...it greatly evens the playing field...a song by a relatively unknown artist is likely to be just as available as one by a superstar...likewise someone in Podunk has the same access to music as someone in a large city. |
|
|
|
|
Paul C
Music Fan
Joined: 23 October 2006 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 10 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 February 2011 at 5:31pm |
I still have a small supplement that came with an issue of Billboard around 1987 (it isn't dated) titled "How We Track The Hits". It explained in detail the methodology employed for the various charts. At the time there were 240 Top 40 stations that "reported" to Billboard. In order to chart on the Hot 100, a record had to have airplay reported on at least 10 of those stations (and also had to have a minimum number of airplay "points"). This is why songs during this era almost never debuted in the lowest few positions of the chart. It is also why a country or R&B song could sell hundreds of thousands of copies and not make the Hot 100. This requirement was dropped when the Hot 100 started to be based on SoundScan and BDS data in 1991. When songs not commercially released as singles became eligible for the Hot 100 in 1998, a rule was introduced that required a song not commercially available as a single to be in the Top 75 in airplay before it could debut on the chart. A few years later this requirement was dropped (I'm not sure when; it may have been at the same time paid downloads started to be counted around 2004). |
|
|
|
|
Jody Thornton
Music Fan
Joined: 23 May 2008 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 9 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 February 2011 at 10:54pm |
To me, it would seem that YouTube video plays would be the way to judge a hit, at least partially. Most younger people I know (meaning up to 30), just go there and play the video to a new song, over and over and over ... lol. I just don't think you can really go by radio any more. I don't see radio as a real hitmaker these days. I actually wonder if radio is relevant at all? |
|
|
Cheers,
Jody Thornton (Richmond Hill, Ontario) |
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
| Tweet |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
budaniel wrote: