Top 40 Music on CD Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Top 40 Music On Compact Disc > Chat Board
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Is the top 10 entirely wrong in the 90s?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Is the top 10 entirely wrong in the 90s?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
aaronk View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Online
Points: 85
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aaronk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 July 2006 at 12:43pm
That doesn't surprise me, budaniel. I stopped putting my faith in the Billboard Hot 100 chart in the early '90s when it didn't match what was on the radio. I'm not saying that airplay charts are perfect either; however, if a song is receiving massive airplay, I'd call it a hit. If it's receiving little to no airplay, but somehow makes it to the top of the Hot 100, I'm skeptical.
Back to Top
Brian W. View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan


Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Brian W. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 July 2006 at 12:44pm
Originally posted by budaniel budaniel wrote:

Taylor Hicks' single dropped at number one on the
charts for one week. I've never heard the song on the radio, not even
adult contemporary stations. Most of the American Idol winners have
charted at high or at number one...there's a whole load of manipulation
going on there....


Taylor Hicks debuting at number one is not manipulation, that's JUST THE OPPOSITE. That's 227,946 people buying the single the first week it was out, so the song doesn't NEED to be played on the radio to chart at number one.

The American Idol contestants chart high because of consumer sales, not because of manipulated airplay. Of course you didn't hear them on the radio -- radio refuses to play them; all they'll play is hip-hop.

Sure, there is manipulation on the airplay charts, though not by SoundScan... by the people who own the radio stations, who are paid by the record companies.

But the SoundScan sales charts are the most accurate method of calculating what music is popular that has ever been devised.

Prior to SoundScan, Billboard's sales surveys never even took down actual sales totals. They just asked each record store what was their number one seller, number two seller, etc., then averaged all surveys. Pretty unscientific, really. A number one seller was a number one seller -- it didn't matter in the Hot 100 formula how far ahead of the pack it was. So the SoundScan sales charts are the first time in history that tracking of sales is not subject to a FORMULA.

If SoundScan had not been in effect in 1997, Elton John's "Candle in the Wind" would never have been number one.

And, by the way, Elvis' "Hound Dog" was never number one on Billboard's Top 100, the airplay-sales-jukebox combo that was the precursor to the Hot 100. Only "Don't Be Cruel" hit number one on that chart. "Hound Dog" was only number one on the sales chart.

Back to Top
aaronk View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Online
Points: 85
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aaronk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 July 2006 at 1:24pm
I think the bottom line here is that no single chart is going to be perfect. You've got to look at both airplay and sales from more than one chart publisher. I can honestly say that I've never watched ONE single episode of American Idol. I know who Taylor Hicks is, but I have never heard his song. If it was playing, I wouldn't recognize it. Unless you watched American Idol and/or bought the CD, you probably wouldn't know the song.

Every collector has different reasons for collecting certain songs. To me, hits are more than just sales figures, so I'll likely never have Taylor Hicks in my collection. Also, I have to like a song before I'll buy it. I'm not buying a CD just because it's number one.

I don't doubt that the radio charts are manipulated, too; however, a station generally isn't going to play a song for weeks and weeks in heavy rotation if the audience hates it. They don't want people turning off the station. And now that MediaBase is reporting actual spins by airplay monitoring, it's much like the SoundScan of radio. So that argument can be used here, too.

If a record sells half a million copies, is it a hit?

Maybe. Maybe not.

If the only people who know the song are the 500,000 who bought it, I'd say no. If a song is receiving massive airplay, and you can't escape it, and it also sells a half million copies, is it a hit? I'd say yes. Not everyone buys records. I have several friends that own fewer than a couple dozen CDs. Everyone LISTENS to records...on the radio, on TV, at the mall, in the grocery store, etc. That's just my opinion, though. The definition of a hit is at least somewhat subjective.

Edited by aaronk
Back to Top
Brian W. View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan


Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Brian W. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 July 2006 at 5:55pm
I agree -- there's no one definition of "hit." The first few Beatles singles were flops... until they appeared on TV, then everyone rushed out and bought the records.

Is that comparable to people seeing the Idol contestants on TV and buying their records? I don't know.
Back to Top
aaronk View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Online
Points: 85
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aaronk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 July 2006 at 10:21pm
Got off on a tangent there, but to answer the original question: Is the top 10 entirely wrong in the 90s? I think Brian's answer is the best you're going to get: The Hot 100 chart became more influenced by sales and become a more accurate representation of what was selling.

The next question is what exactly are you trying to collect?

Originally posted by budaniel budaniel wrote:

I, like many on here, collect all the chart hits


I also collect the chart hits, but I generally follow the airplay chart post-1991. Why? Because I work in radio, and many of those "sales" hits on the Hot 100 are not important to me. I don't know them and I don't really care if I own a lot of them.

Anyone?
Back to Top
Brian W. View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan


Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Brian W. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 July 2006 at 12:08am
Hmm... I collect all the top-ten selling singles from 1940 to 2001 (except for the early-to-mid 1970s, where there was no separate sales chart), supplemented by top ten airplay hits for the late 1990s and early 2000s.

After 2000, I collect all the #1 and #2 hits, going primarily by the Hot Digital Songs chart starting in Jan of 2005.

I also collect all the million-selling singles... I'm currently trying to find out what they all ARE, since as I've mentioned in previous threads the RIAA simply certifies million SHIPPERS.

I've toyed with the idea of trying to write a really definitive book on million-selling singles. There have been two: Joseph Murrells "Million Selling Records," much of which is based on hearsay, some of it disproven; and Adam White's "Gold and Platinum Records," which was strictly RIAA-certified records.

I'd love to put together a book that is actually fully documented, with proof of the sales for each and every record.

But I don't think those previous books sold very well. And besides, what do I know about writing a book? :D
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.07
Copyright ©2001-2024 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.031 seconds.