Pop Annual 1955-2016
Printed From: Top 40 Music on CD
Category: Top 40 Music On Compact Disc
Forum Name: Chat Board
Forum Description: Chat away but please observe the chat board rules
URL: https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8776
Printed Date: 17 June 2025 at 6:25pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Pop Annual 1955-2016
Posted By: Paul Haney
Subject: Pop Annual 1955-2016
Date Posted: 21 July 2017 at 2:24pm
|
The brand new edition of the Pop Annual 1955-2016 is now up for pre-order (will be released in late September).
Order before July 31 and save $15 off the regular price! https://www.recordresearch.com/pop/pop_annual_1955-2016.php - https://www.recordresearch.com/pop/pop_annual_1955-2016.php |
Replies:
Posted By: edtop40
Date Posted: 21 July 2017 at 6:06pm
|
paul, i like the boxes for check marks, like back when i
had baseball cards and they had the same thing... ------------- edtop40 |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 26 July 2017 at 10:54am
| Paul, when was the last year that a Pop Annual came out? |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 26 July 2017 at 11:41am
The last Pop Annual was in 2011 - they included the "Bubbling Under" songs for the first time |
EdisonLite wrote:Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 26 July 2017 at 11:55am
I've been "programmed" to buy updated books as soon as they are available, so my order is already in. You update Pop Singles, R&B Singles, C&W, release new chart books and I buy 'em! Kind of hard to break a 45 year old habit as I bought my first Pop Singles book in 1972 and have bought every new edition since. Still waiting for an update to the Rock tracks and Album charts but it's been since 2008 and 2009 respectively. Has Joel ever considered having a forum for us chart geeks? Think about the possible topics. CHART ODDITIES In the 1/22/44 issue the Best Sellers and Harlem Hit Parade were incorrect. In the 1/29/44 issue Billboard stated the previous weeks charts were incorrect due to a "clerical" error and actually publish the correct chart information. So now "G.I. Jive" by Johnny Mercer only peaked at #4 on the R&B chart and "My Ideal" by Billy Butterfield peaked at #10 on the national Best Sellers list instead of just being a regional hit. The Rock Tracks chart on 3/24/84 was literally a reprint of the 3/17/84 chart - another "clerical" error. If you take last weeks position from the 3/31/84 chart you can derive 53 out of 60 positions for the prepared but unpublished 3/24/84 chart. The Bubbling Under chart for 1/12/85 only listed 105-110 out of order but according to your old Bubbling Under book you have positions for 101-104. MISSING SONGS "Jingle Bell Imitations" by Chubby Checker & Bobby Rydell is on the 12/25/61 bubbling chart but not in your Pop Singles book. "A House Is Not A Home" by Dionne Warwick was listed as the top version in the Cashbox R&B charts you used in your R&B book but you credit the Brook Benton version with all of its charted weeks. "Don't Say Goodbye" by The Diamonds was listed as a b-side on the Disc Jockey charts for one week but not in your books. Or how about "Too Fat Polka" by Arthur Godfrey was a co-number one on the 1/10/48 Most Played by Jockeys chart but you only give it credit for peaking at #2. BOOK SUGGESTIONS Forum members can suggest future books, i.e. a R&B book based on the Music Vendor/Record World charts to complete the "trilogy" of Pop, C&W, and R&B. You could also get feedback from future book buyers about books you are thinking about publishing. I'm sure you published a book that had underwhelming demand. And maybe offering on-line PDFs of correction/updates for books that you no longer update, i.e. "Pop Hits Singles & Albums 1940-1954". Think of the possibilities! Anyhow just my long winded two cents worth. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 27 July 2017 at 11:42am
|
Has Joel ever considered having a forum for us chart geeks? Think about the possible topics.
That would be fun, but it ain't gonna happen. We just don't have the staff or the resources for such a venture. We are stretched super-thin the way it is these days, basically down to two of us at the office, with yours truly juggling several different projects at the moment. |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 27 July 2017 at 12:21pm
|
I think plenty of chart geeks are already here or are
aware of Pat's forum. ;) |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 17 September 2017 at 5:52am
| The Pop Annual is currently at the printer and will be here in about two weeks. I recently put together a short video on the next RR project and thought you guys might be interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgOG6mqdqPg - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgOG6mqdqPg |
Posted By: jebsib
Date Posted: 21 September 2017 at 4:03pm
|
Paul, in a recent Billboard podcast, Joel hinted that he was considering some
major changes to the Country Songs books moving forward. Because all the flagship genre charts are moving so slowly these days (An example being that Sam Hunt's song is currently #1 for the 32nd week), Joel was pondering incorporating airplay chart positions as well. Wondering if you guys have reached a decision on this, as so many key charts are affected by the slow turnover (now that they are essentially genre—specific distillations of the Hot 100). I for one would be against it, but sadly, I am not a Record Research employee!! |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 22 September 2017 at 9:05am
We have been discussing this very subject recently. One of the biggest complaints about the previous edition was that we started using the so-called "hybrid" chart and totally dropped the Airplay chart. Looks like we'll be going with the Country Airplay numbers as the "main" numbers, but we will also show the hybrid chart numbers as well (probably off to one side). In the rare case where a title made the hybrid chart, but not the airplay chart, then that number would be shown as the "main" number. Hopefully we will have a new edition ready by mid-2018 or so. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 26 September 2017 at 12:19pm
I am getting a "Video unavailable" when I click on this link. Is anyone else getting that? |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 27 September 2017 at 4:35am
Gordon, the link is working for me. If you have trouble, just go to YouTube and search for Paul Haney Record Research and it should come up. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 09 October 2017 at 5:27pm
|
I think the main issue with the "Hot Country Songs" chart (and with other genre-specific charts as well) is that since October 20, 2012 their Airplay component (which is combined with sales, streaming etc. to generate the chart) does not come from the genre-specific Country Airplay chart which measures airplay from COUNTRY stations, but rather the overall airplay chart universe which measures airplay from all formats. This means that the the Country Songs charts is considerably affected by the major contributors to overall airplay, i.e. the CHR/Top 40 radio stations. (CHR=Contemporary Hit Radio) which is not directly related to country airplay. On the 10/20/2012 Hot Country Songs chart Taylor Swift was the immediate benefactor as her songs zoomed up the charts even though by then she had definitely transformed from a country artist to a pop artist. Country chart followers must have been in shock. But maybe not as much as Rap chart followers when PSY "Gangnam Style" became the #1 song in the land. Talk about a WTF moment!
Consider "Cruise" by Florida-Georgia Line. The song hit #1 and was headed down the country charts until the remix version with Nelly came out. The song returned to #1 for a lengthy stay because the remix version became very popular on non-country radio stations. Their airplay was incorporated into the Hot Country Songs chart even though the country stations airplay was waning. So in the Country universe the song was on a downward trend but on the chart it was #1 for three more months! Interesting on the Hot 100 the song artist was now listed as Florida-Georgia Line featuring Nelly, however the artist was always listed as just Florida-Georgia Line on both the Hot Country Songs and Country Airplay charts. For the record, Nelly never charted on the country charts. Obviously Billboard's methodology is wrong here for genre-specific charts but I think we can pick apart every Billboard chart. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 09 October 2017 at 5:44pm
I understand the country chart lovers' frustrations but for us chart purists using the Airplay numbers as the "main" numbers is a big fat NOOOOOOOOOOO! The Country Songs chart is what Billboard considers to be their main country chart. To say otherwise is blasphemy. For better or worse (and I agree for worse) you need to reflect what Billboard says and publishes. Over the years Billboard has done incredibly stupid things but you have to go with the source. I think the best solution is to use the Country Songs chart as the main number and be consistent with all previous years. However, include Airplay chart data since 10/20/12 as a secondary number because that's how Billboard views it. This will be consistent with your role as a chart historian plus adding an additional piece of information to somewhat fix Billboard's poor decision. Otherwise you would be a chart manipulator. Whatever you decide, when you send out your early buyer discount announcement for the updated version, you need to clearly specify how you determined your "main" number and why. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 09 October 2017 at 5:49pm
This is fabulous!! Quite the undertaking but I will definitely be a buyer. I'm only afraid that Singles Charts 1973-1982, Volume 2 will be delayed (was hoping for 1954-1963, Volume 3) and that the Cash Box Top 100 Charts 50's, 80's & 90's are a pipe dream. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 10 October 2017 at 3:40am
|
The problem with using the Hot Country Songs for the "main" chart numbers is that we have to sell books to stay in business. Our customers gave us an overwhelmingly negative response when we switched to the HCS chart for the last few months of the 2012 edition. Many longtime customers said that they would never purchase another Country book if we didn't go back to using the Airplay numbers. The main problem (as you stated) is that the HCS chart uses airplay numbers from non-Country stations! BTW, I don't see how we're "manipulating" the chart data if we show BOTH sets of numbers. The Billboard Country Airplay chart is still a MAJOR chart and is closely followed by fans and industry types alike. We did not make this decision lightly. I've posted about this on the Pulse boards and the OVERWHELMING response has been positive. In fact, not one person so far has had anything negative to say. Again, we must sell books or else we will cease to exist.
As for the chart books...the Record World Volume II is just about ready to go. We may hold off on this one until sometime next year. We still have our eyes on continuing the Cash Box series as well. The big problem for us is our small staff and cost concerns. These books are VERY EXPENSIVE to print and the e-Books just don't sell enough. All I ask is that you please be patient as we are getting these books out as fast as we can under the circumstances. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 10 October 2017 at 12:00pm
| FYI, the Pop Annual came in this past week. All pre-orders have been filled and sent! |
Posted By: jebsib
Date Posted: 10 October 2017 at 2:22pm
|
VERY happy the Pop Annual is shipping.
VERY unhappy that the official Whitburn Country peaks are now Airplay-only. (This would be akin to a group of irate readers in 1991 unhappy that the Hot 100 switched to BDS, and demand Record Research only use the Mainstream Top 40 chart as the official source.) I do see both sides. And your point about staying in business is VERY well taken. It's just a shame. HCS was a hybrid chart decades before it become an airplay only survey in the late 80s. BTW, Pulse Music fans are radio driven, so they were horrified when HCS added streams and sales, let alone airplay from other formats. They didn't understand that the chart went from "The Top songs that Country Radio plays" to "The Top Songs consumed in the U.S. that are the Country genre". |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 10 October 2017 at 2:49pm
| I respectfully disagree with the comparison to the Hot 100 change in 1991. The Country Airplay chart WAS the Country chart from January 20, 1990 - October 20, 2012...that's 22 years! All of a sudden you have this completely new chart (which is actually just taken from the Hot 100 stats) as the "official" chart. That was a decision that Billboard made and they kept right on with the Country Airplay chart, which still gets printed in the magazine, although in an abbreviated form. Again, we are not going to totally ignore the numbers of the new chart (that would be wrong), but we are going with what our own customers have told us they want to see. The fact is, that we haven't even started work on the book yet, so this could all change anyway. We are going to reach out to some of our industry contacts and get their input as well. I do appreciate all input and we'll certainly be considering all of this prior to actually getting down to the research part of the project. |
Posted By: Hykker
Date Posted: 10 October 2017 at 4:23pm
I'm not surprised, they're almost the same price as the printed copies. If I'm gonna pay $70 for a book, I might as well get a "real" one. |
Posted By: jebsib
Date Posted: 10 October 2017 at 7:11pm
|
The eBooks are awesome. So much information and you can take them
anywhere. Sad they aren't huge sellers. Hopefully that will be the format when it is time to compile the 2010s "Hot 100 Charts" book. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 11 October 2017 at 1:11am
| It takes just as much time and effort to do the research/editing for an e-book as it does a print book. It doesn't cost us anything to print an e-book (of course), but we still have to pay a monthly storage fee to the printer for use of their server space for every e-book that we offer for sale. |
Posted By: Hykker
Date Posted: 11 October 2017 at 4:07am
I get that, and this wasn't in any way intended as a dig at RR. Maybe I'm just getting old, but I can't think of any reason I'd want a "virtual book" unless the price was substantially lower than a real one. 10% or so isn't gonna do it for me.
Regular books can go anywhere too, and you don't need a special gadget to read them. I don't know if they can be read on a smart phone or not (I don't have one), but it doesn't make much sense to me to try and read a reference book on a puny little screen like that. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 11 October 2017 at 9:28am
|
Hey Paul,
I hope my previous message didn't come across too harshly and I greatly appreciate you taking time out of your Top LP Book research to reply to everyone. Still torn on this issue but you may want to approach it like you did in the "Top Adult Songs" - that is show chart data (since 10/2012) for both charts under each entry. The reader can look at the data and make up their own mind. I'm sure Billboard has received a fair amount of criticism during the past 5 years but they continue unabashedly onward so keeping the HCS chart data prominently is warranted. If you do decide to go with Airplay as the main data, how would you handle the transition on October 20, 2012? For songs on the Country chart before then, would you just start using their chart positions on the Country Airplay chart in continuation? Seems logical if you consider the Airplay chart to be the new official chart. That would create a more stable transition than actually occurred on the actual HCS chart. You can then just show data for the HCS chart from 10/20/12 onward as this was essentially a "new" chart on that date. "Cruise" only charted for 24 weeks on the Airplay chart and was #1 for three weeks. On the HCS chart it was #1 for 24 weeks. If you highlight the Airplay data, imagine the stir that would create given that everyone has heard that this song broke all #1 longevity records (until Sam Hunt came along). Why not get Joel an account? I bet most here would love talking to THE MAN directly. He's been one of my idols for 40+ years now! |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 11 October 2017 at 9:57am
Excellent description. Did Billboard make the chart better or worse? For hard core "country rules" radio listeners it was an abomination. For the rest of us, probably better - but guess who buys RR books? Was there a big outrage from R&B book buyers? Their primary chart also changed and that data was presented in the "Top R&B Singles 1942-2016". There is a R&B/Hip-Hop Airplay chart - maybe these number should be the "main" ones for that genre. I have a buddy who is hard core R&B and that's what he thinks. He did not buy the latest R&B book but not for that reason. He was upset that RR didn't include the Bubbling Under R&B. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 11 October 2017 at 11:31am
|
The R&B chart didn't seem to have the huge discrepancies that the Country charts have. Yes, we would just simply keep the Airplay research flowing as it did and would treat the HCS chart as a new chart from that 10/20/12 date.
Joel has his hands full lately. For those that don't know, his wife (Fran) was in a near-fatal boating accident on July 7th of this year. She's still in the hospital as of today. We're all hopeful, but don't know if she will ever walk again. It was a huge blow to the entire RR family, as we're a very close-knit group. He dedicated the current Pop Annual to her. |
Posted By: jebsib
Date Posted: 12 October 2017 at 5:35am
|
That's terrible news about poor Fran. She would sometimes answer the phone
in years past when I was ordering and seemed to be the sweetest lady. Prayers to the family. |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 13 October 2017 at 2:51pm
|
Oh, my. Prayers to Joel, Fran, and family. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 13 October 2017 at 5:57pm
| Very sorry to hear this. Am wishing the best to all. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 14 October 2017 at 3:35am
| Thanks for the kind words about Fran. We nearly lost her a couple of times over the past few months, but she's a fighter for sure. She's had to endure about 10 serious operations, but she never lost her will to live. The good news is she was just transferred yesterday from the main hospital to a rehab center. Once her breathing issues become more stabilized she may be able to come home and continue her rehab. |
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 14 October 2017 at 1:05pm
|
Very sorry to hear about Fran. I wish her a speedy
recovery. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 16 October 2017 at 4:58pm
Here's some numbers for you concerning the two C&W charts. There were 934 songs that peaked on both charts during 2013-2016 - in honor of your new Pop Annual. 426 songs made both charts 170 songs only charted on the Country Airplay chart 329 songs only charted on the Hot Country Songs chart Not exactly what you may have been expecting. Of course many of those 329 were probably much more pop than country, i.e. Taylor Swift. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 17 October 2017 at 8:34am
|
So on the 60 position Airplay chart there were 605 songs.
On the 50 position Hot Country Songs (HCS) chart there were 755 songs - obviously much higher turnover however, some songs stayed on this chart forever. This was the chart that had two different songs at #1 for over 23 weeks! Nothing like that on the Airplay chart. Think the country diehards believe that there were way too many non-country songs on the HCS chart. For example, Taylor Swift switched from country to pop so all of her songs made the HCS chart while none of them made the Airplay chart. Billboard identified her as country while the country radio stations properly disowned her. The Cruise remix with Nelly was responsible for many weeks at #1 on the HCS but no country radio station played it! On the other hand, many country songs from TV (like the Voice and Nashville) received Airplay but were not enough of a crossover hit to make the HCS chart. Think Billboard needs to re-examine what artists they include on their Hot "Country" Songs chart. Hell, I think Billboard needs to re-examine how they compile their Hot 100! |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 17 October 2017 at 9:41am
Pretty sure it's the other way around. Those songs featured on TV shows like The Voice sell downloads but get virtually zero airplay. For example: "My Baby's Got A Smile On Her Face" by Craig Wayne Boyd hit #1 on HCS and didn't make the Top 60 airplay chart at all! And that's just one example. Just one more reason why I think it's wise to use the Airplay chart for the main numbers. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 18 October 2017 at 6:24am
Right you are - guess I had a "senior moment" there. For 2016 here are the top 10 highest peaking songs that made the HCS but not the Airplay chart: Peak Artist &n bsp; Song Title 1 Keith Urban Blue Ain't Your Color 4 Emily Ann Roberts Burning House 4 Sundance Head Darlin' Don't Go 11 Keith Urban with Carrie Underwood The Fighter 11 Sundance Head At Last 13 Blake Shelton with Gwen Stefani Go Ahead And Break My Heart 14 Adam Wakefield Lonesome Broken And Blue 18 Pentatonix with Dolly Parton Jolene 18 Adam Wakefield I'm Sorry 19 Kane Brown Ain't No Stopping Us Now 11 songs that made the top 20 on the HCS chart didn't make the Airplay chart Here are the top 10 highest peaking songs that made the Airplay but not the HCS Airplay chart: Peak Artist &n bsp; Song Title 39 Brandy Clark Girl Next Door 39 Brett Eldredge It's Beginning To Look A Lot Like Christmas 41 Trace Adkins Jesus And Jones 42 Joe Nichols Undone 44 Lindsay Ell By The Way 45 Scotty McCreery Southern Belle 45 Mickey Guyton Heartbreak Song 45 Brett Eldredge Let It Snow! Let It Snow! Let It Snow! 46 Hank Williams Jr. Featuring Eric Church Are You Ready For The Country? 47 Martina McBride Reckless All songs that peaked at 38 or higher on the Airplay charts made the HCS chart. That Craig Wayne Boyd song only charted for one week and that was at #1. He had 8 total songs on the HCS with 6 of them charting for only one week. The other two charted for 2 and 3 weeks. Similar to the "success" of the Glee Cast when almost all of their songs only charted for one week on the Hot 100. Maybe we should use the Airplay chart instead of the Hot 100! |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 18 October 2017 at 9:00am
I'm a little confused with this list. According to my records, "Blue Ain't Your Color" hit #1 on the Airplay chart and "The Fighter" peaked at #2 on Airplay. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 18 October 2017 at 10:55am
"The Fighter" charted on the HCS chart 5/28/16 to 7/9/16 7 weeks peaking at #7 on 6/4/16 7 1/2 months later re-entered = new entry 2/25/17 to 8/19/17 26 weeks peaking at #2 on 4/22/17 Also charted on Airplay chart 2/25/17 to 8/19/17 26 weeks peaking at #2 on 8/12/17 So it only made the HCS chart in 2016 but made both in 2017. "Blue Ain't Your Color" did make both charts Hot Country Chart 8/27/16 to 3/25/17 31 weeks peaking at #1 (12 weeks) on 11/19/16 Airplay chart 9/3/16 to 2/4/17 23 weeks peaking at #1 (2 weeks) on 1/14/17 My quick analysis just checked songs based on their peak year of 2016 so that's why the Airplay peak of 1/14/17 didn't show up. Should have just checked by song title and would have gotten that one! Sorry about that confusion...Thanks for checking |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 18 October 2017 at 11:15am
|
"The Voice" is pretty much a Country Driven show. So the
viewers all go out and buy the country singers songs on iTunes (and watch youtube) and they make the HCS chart, albeit for a short period of time. Odd that the Radio guys just don't want to play these songs. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 18 October 2017 at 11:16am
| It looks like most of the non-Airplay HCS hits appeared to have come from The Voice contestants. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 18 October 2017 at 11:31am
Many do. I don't know all the contestants on the show because I don't watch it, however some names I do recognize and their number of HCS "hits" include: Danielle Bradbery 10 Jake Worthington 9 The Swon Brothers 9 Emily Ann Roberts 8 Adam Wakefield 8 Barret Barber 7 Sundance Head 6 Cassadee Pope 3 There were also 5 contestants who did duets with Blake Shelton that could be added to this list. So that adds up to at least 65 plus the 8 for Craig Wayne Boyd. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 18 October 2017 at 11:35am
|
Many of those Voice songs are cover versions, so I'm not surprised they don't get any airplay. They are very much "here today, gone tomorrow."
Yet another reason to use the Airplay chart, IMO. |
Posted By: Hykker
Date Posted: 18 October 2017 at 3:55pm
|
Sort of like a few years ago with the Glee cast.
Sure was simpler determining what the "hits" were in the old days (even though the sales/airplay figures are a lot more accurate now)! |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 18 October 2017 at 5:54pm
|
I think a couple of the Glee Cast songs still get
airplay at Christmas for those all Christmas formats but that's it. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 19 October 2017 at 11:43am
|
Did a search for the acts that had the most songs on the HCS chart without making the Airplay chart:
The Voice Cast 105 Luke Bryan 23 Nashville Cast 18 Florida-Georgia Line 16 Blake Shelton 11 Cole Swindell 8 Kane Brown 7 Carrie Underwood 7 Everybody else 134 On the Airplay chart Thompson Square had 4 songs that made the Airplay chart but didn't make the HCS chart. 10 others had 3 and there were 20 Xmas songs that only made the Airplay chart. The Airplay chart's recurrent rules meant a lot of songs peaked in the top 3 only to drop off the chart in a couple of weeks. "You Look Like You Need A Break" by Justin Moore took 47 weeks to finally hit #1 on 10/8/16 only to drop completely off the chart the next week! #1 songs per year per chart: Year Air HCS 2013 31 11 2014 35 13 2015 38 11 2016 40 8 Signed, someone with way too much free time! |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 19 October 2017 at 11:49am
| Oops |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 19 October 2017 at 11:51am
| Oops again |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 20 October 2017 at 3:25am
|
Chartman, that pretty much confirms my suspicions about the HCS chart. Between The Voice and Nashville, that's what, about 40% of the non-Airplay hits. The ones by the big name artists are album cuts that weren't promoted to radio. For instance, when Luke Bryan releases a new album, nearly all of the cuts make the HCS chart right away. The only ones that stick around for any length of time are the ones promoted to radio.
I can understand the reasoning behind Billboard's recurrent rules for the Airplay chart. It can take several months for a radio single to hit its peak. If those songs are never dropped, then the newer songs never get a chance to move up. IMO, a song that's been on the charts for nearly a year should be considered a recurrent! |
Posted By: jebsib
Date Posted: 20 October 2017 at 10:40am
|
Paul, the book is great.
VERY glad the checkboxes are back; Very helpful for collectors. Is there a way to provide feedback if we notice errors? (eg - 1975 Isley Bros Fight the Power spent more than one week in top 10) |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 20 October 2017 at 10:56am
|
That Isley Brothers error is a long story. I just went in and fixed it in the database.
Hopefully there aren't too many more mistakes, but if you do find any, just drop me a PM here or contact me at paul@recordresearch.com |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 22 October 2017 at 4:38pm
Take a look at those songs on the Hot 100 (2016 from the Pop Annual) out of 419 songs, 98 only charted for one week, while 46 others only charted for two weeks. That's 34% of the total. Some reasons, when a pop star passes many download a few of their previous hits on iTunes (i.e. Prince, David Bowie) and when a star release a new album, nearly all of the cuts make the Hot 100 right away. Examples include Beyoncé, J. Cole, Drake, Ariana Grande, Meek Mill, The Weeknd and Kanye West. On 4/8/2017 Drake releases a new album and all of a sudden he has 21 new "hits" on the Hot 100, all peaked on the entry date and 14 are gone in two weeks or less. Of course there's the infamous Glee Cast. 208 Hot 100 and 75 bubbling under entries during their career. All but 35 of these charted for only one week. The same issues that plaque the HCS also are inherit in the Hot 100. In fact many of my colleagues believe the Hot 100 has become a joke. Think there is a better chart that represents the state of popular music than the Hot 100? |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 22 October 2017 at 6:15pm
|
Why would you say it's a joke? What can be said today that cannot be
said in the past is that the Hot 100 more accurately reflects which songs people are listening to the most right now. Some of those songs are popular only temporarily, like the album cuts, while others stick around for many weeks, like the airplay hits. I see nothing wrong with this, but you can't compare today's charts with those of the past when singles were pressed on physical media. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 22 October 2017 at 6:25pm
| I get what you're saying, Aaron. But while the current Hot 100 rules do reflect the moment, I know a lot of professionals in the music business have a problem with the way it's compiled, and I completely understand that side, too. Let's say you're a label and you have a single you're promoting and it's bulleted at #75. The next week, it has more airplay and sales but drops 22 notches because, say, a Drake album was released that week and it has 22 debuts. Something like that hurts the momentum of a single, which will likely move up somewhat the next week, but this can repeat a few weeks later when another superstar's album comes out. I feel the current rules cause all sorts of chaotic movements. I think it's ok to have a chart like this - as a secondary chart in Billboard; call it a Pan-US chart - like Billboard used to have the Pan-European chart in their international section. But I think Billboard should have a main chart that only includes songs that labels are promoting as singles (in some way). |
Posted By: Santi Paradoa
Date Posted: 22 October 2017 at 6:28pm
|
I agree with Aaron completely. No way you can compare the charts of 2017 with those from decades back. The music business has evolved and changed so much in recent years. Airplay seems to be more important than ever before. ------------- Santi Paradoa Miami, Florida |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 22 October 2017 at 7:11pm
Do they no longer have a Hot 100 Airplay chart? It seems this would be the more "traditional" chart that reflects what record labels are promoting to radio. But frankly, if I was in charge at Drake's record label, I'd be happy as can be to see 22 different Drake cuts make the Hot 100 upon the album's debut. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 22 October 2017 at 8:17pm
Exactly my point, but the Hot 100 doesn’t always reflect that. Not to pick on Drake but most of his songs received little or no AirPlay - that’s why their chart life was abbreviated. And it seems that people are primarily just buying the album but each song is treated as if people were purchasing that one specifically. After a week or two the album sales drop dramatically which is reflected in the Billboard 200. And magically all of those “hits” are also gone. Maybe a majority of Drake’s song were falsely charted. That’s one reason why some of my colleagues don’t believe the Hot 100. Over in the U.K. they follow similar chart logic as the Hot 100. A new Ed Sheeran album came out and not only did they all make the chart, but I think he occupied something like 17 of the top 20. That caused a chart rule change. Something like only 5 songs could make the chart. Of course, I always get upset when Billboard compares chart accomplishments of the past 10-15 years with those of the first 30 years or so if the chart. Totally different chart philosophies. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 4:20am
|
Some very interesting points being discussed here.
The difference between the Hot 100 and the whole Country situation is that the Hot 100 has been the Hot 100 since August 1958. That's nearly 60 years! The HCS chart was started in October 2012. Prior to that the Country Airplay chart WAS the HCS chart, and for over 20 years at that. There have always been tweaks to the Hot 100 formula over the years. Granted, the changes made in recent years are much bigger in scope, but the options for people to consume music these days are also much bigger. If this technology had been around in the 1960s, I'm sure that just about every Beatles album cut, for instance, would've charted. Billboard did try the Pop 100 chart, but they discontinued it due to lack of interest. In addition to the Hot 100, I always followed the Radio & Records CHR chart, because that one gave a better picture of what I was actually hearing on the radio. With so many different charts published by Billboard each week, it's pretty easy to follow which ones you feel are the best. |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 5:28am
I would be curious to know if this is true. Does a complete album purchase also count a "single" sale for each cut? Given the way most people consume music these days, it wouldn't surprise me if most are just cherry picking tracks from new albums rather than buying the whole thing. Streaming data gets incorporated into the Hot 100, too, right? That is another explanation for why album cuts temporarily appear on the chart after a hot new release. Again, this doesn't really bother me, because it is accurately showing what's popular in the current week. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 8:41am
I know American Top 40 started switching which chart they were using for their countdown because the Hot 100 just wasn't reflecting what their subscriber base was listening to. Also remember the the Pop Singles book started showing Airplay Only and Sales Only singles for those songs that didn't make the Hot 100 but charted on the other charts. Then you got rid of the Sales Only which was the proper move because these were so minor and not really "hits" in any form of the word. Just like many of those songs that chart on the Hot 100 due solely to digital downloads now! You kept the Airplay Only songs for 1987-1998 until these songs were eligible to make the Hot 100, however you treated the Airplay peak positions as equivalent to the Hot 100. Not really a fan of that decision. I know "Torn" by Natalie Imbruglia and "Iris" by The Goo Goo Dolls actually made the Hot 100 but you have them listed as peaking at #1 for 11 and 18 weeks respectively based solely on Airplay. And then for 1996 you have "Don't Speak" by No Doubt as the top song of the year - 16 weeks at #1 on the Airplay chart with "Macarena" at #2 - only 14 weeks at #1 on the Hot 100 plus platinum X 4 seller. Not sure about that!? |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 8:56am
Yes, streaming has been incorporated since 2007 and YouTube views since 2013. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 9:05am
But, unlike those Sales-only hits of the CD singles era, those downloads are selling enough to get the songs on the Hot 100. There were so many HUGE hits that were Airplay-only cuts, especially during the 1990s, that we had to acknowledge them somehow. As long as we designate them with the special symbol, the reader can either use them or ignore them. BTW, both "Torn" and "Iris" were at the end of their Airplay runs when they were suddenly eligible for the Hot 100. If we listed "Torn" as peaking at #42, it would raise some serious questions. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 9:25am
|
Seems like we got sidetracked from the Pop Annual :)
A couple of errors that you might update: "Raunchy" by Ernie Freeman peaked at #4 on the Most Played by Jockeys chart on 1/13/58. You have it peaking on 12/30/57 (wrong year). "Jingle Bell Rock" by Bobby Helms (1957) had a chart run of 67-23-8-6-17-78 so it was in the Top 40 for 4 weeks. You have it listed for 6 weeks in the Top 40. On the 7/15/57 Most Payed by Jockeys chart, the billboard editors went "b-side" crazy. They have five b-sides listed only for that week: #12 "Jitterbug Mary" by The Dell-Vikings, was listed as the b-side to "Cool Shake" #15 "Don't Say Goodbye" by The Diamonds, was listed as the b-side to "Words Of Love" #18 "First In Line" by The Four Coins, was listed as the b-side to "Shangri-La" #20 "Let Me Hold You In My Arms" by Nick Noble, was listed as the b-side to "A Fallen Star" #23 "Don't Make Me Cry" by Buddy Knox, was listed as the b-side to "Rock Your Baby To Sleep" You may want to update your "tag along" list - of course, could be a case where the Billboard guys drank a little too much coolaid! |
Posted By: Hykker
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 10:18am
I read somewhere that streams from subscription sites will now be weighted more heavily by BB than streams from free sites like Youtube. Any idea what the reasoning behind that is? |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 10:22am
|
Regarding the airplay hits Paul mentioned, I'd vote for "I'll Be There For
You" (Rembrandts) to be listed under #1 with an [Air] symbol and then separately and rightfully as a B-side for its #17 peak. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 11:20am
Joel decided to change the "Raunchy" date so it would come out in 1957 with the other versions of the song. I made the Bobby Helms correction. As for those B-sides, I'll run them past Joel and see what he thinks. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 11:23am
Aaron, I get where you're coming from on this one. However, it's different from the other examples, in that it was released on a single, therefore became eligible for the Hot 100 (and Billboard did show it as the A-side on the actual charts). |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 23 October 2017 at 2:02pm
|
Paul, I definitely understand the logic behind it and why it's listed that way. I'm only suggesting it because technically--and despite how Billboard listed it--it was clearly a B-side with a separate chart run than when it was riding high on the airplay charts. It might open up a can of worms to do that, though. I just assumed there aren't too many examples of where Billboard charted a B-side several months after it was an airplay-only hit. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 24 October 2017 at 2:33am
It's all about the money. Some (but not all) of the artist management and record labels would like nothing better than to shut down music availability on YouTube. They feel that the artists should be paid, no matter how their product is consumed. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 24 October 2017 at 7:34pm
|
A few more updates for you:
"Lipstick Paint A Smile On Me" by Demetris Tapp peaked at 112 on 12/14/63 - you have it peaking at 118 "When The Lights Go Down" by Faith Hill peaked at 119 on 2/1/03 - you have it peaking at 120 "Heat It Up" By Bubba Sparxxx peaked at 103 on 6/24/06 - you have it peaking at 104 I'm not 100% sure the billboard.biz archives are correct for the last two though...I often find mismatches between printed charts and billboard's archives - and naturally the last two were never published in a magazine. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 25 October 2017 at 5:25am
|
Thanks for those corrections!
It led me to find that Billboard did change the Bubbling Under chart for 6/17/2006, sometime after it was originally posted. This led to the following changes: Blow The Whistle by Too Short peaked at #101 (not #103) and charted for 8 weeks (not 7). And She Said... by Lucas Prata charted for 4 weeks (not 5). |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 25 October 2017 at 8:12am
On the originally posted chart the Lucas Prata song was #125 and the Too Short song was not listed - so I'm guessing the put Too Short at 101 and moved everything down on notch thereby kicking out Lucas Prata. They've done that before! Just did a quick view on the free billboard.biz site (where they only show the top 3 positions) and they have: #1 Down - Rakim & Ken-Y #2 Single - Natasha Bedingfield #3 High - James Blunt Where did you find the updated chart showing Blow The Whistle at #1? |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 25 October 2017 at 8:49am
I have access to the BillboardPlus site. That's where I found it. They apparently updated it just a day or two after the original chart was posted, but I didn't catch it at the time. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 25 October 2017 at 8:50am
|
A few more updates for you:
For all of these you have the song at its peak position for one week when it actually was there for 2 weeks "Sally Sayin' Something'" by Billy Harner was at its peak position of 118 on 9/2 & 9/9/67 "Don't Take My Kindness For Weakness" by The Soul Children was at its peak position of 102 on 9/2 & 9/9/72 "Tequila" by Hot Butter was at its peak position of 105 on 1/27 & 2/3/73 "Darlin" by Tom Jones was at its peak position of 103 on 4/25 & 5/2/81 "Jamaica" by Bobby Caldwell was at its peak position of 105 on 4/17 & 5/1/82 "I Believe In A Thing Called Love" by The Darkness was at it's peak position of 119 on 3/6 & 3/27/04 "Why Would You Stay?" by Kem was at its peak position of 102 on 8/28 & 9/11/10 Then there's this one: "Just Came Here To Chill" by The Isley Brothers was at its peak position for 5 weeks (4/22, 5/6, 5/20, 5/27 & 6/3/06) - you say 4 weeks |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 25 October 2017 at 9:01am
|
I double-checked and made all the above corrections.
Thanks again, Chartman! |
Posted By: torcan
Date Posted: 25 October 2017 at 7:32pm
|
Just adding my thoughts on the Hot 100 - I realize
things change and the songs that made it were among that week's top 100, however, it's misleading. If a song wasn't promoted to radio as a single I don't think it should have charted. This would make things more realistic. That the records have been broken for most songs from one album to hit the chart doesn't mean much to me, because for albums like "Thriller" or "Born in the USA" you still had to go to the store and buy the 45, rather than just downloading all or part of an album and having all those obscure tracks chart for a week or two. For me, those albums (and a few others) are the ones that really still hold the record. I guess it's still good for measuring those songs that have been promoted as singles (usually the ones near the top), but when they made these rules they should have thought twice. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 26 October 2017 at 7:46am
The chart on the Billboard.biz site still reflects the originally posted chart. But the Last Week's position on the 6/24/06 chart shows positions corresponding to the BillboardPlus site. Go figure? Have ran across quite a few errors and truncated charts on the Billboard.biz site through the years. Anyhow, excellent catch! |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 26 October 2017 at 4:46pm
|
Here are some incorrect peak dates - I verified all
but the last three with the printed charts. Only the first one is important. The last three might be correct but we all know how you can always count on billboard.biz! "Flying Blue Angels" by Johnny George peaked #108 on 1/20/62 - you have 9/11/61 Different year "Don't Let Me Cross Over" by Adam Wade peaked at #117 on 3/9/63 - you have 3/2/63 "Heartaches" by Kenny Ball peaked at #119 on 12/14/63 - you have 12/7/63 "Rock Candy" by Jack McDuff peaked at #109 on 12/14/63 - you have 12/7/63 "Nevertheless" by Billy Butler peaked at #102 on 12/19/64 - you have 12/12/64 "Either Way I Lose" by Gladys Knight & The Pips peaked at #119 on 12/26/64 - you have 12/19/64 "You're Ready Now" by Frankie Valli peaked at #112 on 4/30/66 - you have 5/28/66 "Love's Gone Bad" by Chris Clark peaked at #105 on 11/26/66 - you have 11/12/66 "Me And Mr. Hohner" by Bobby Darin peaked at #123 on 6/7/69 - you have 5/24/69 "Treat Me Like A Good Piece Of Candy" by Dusk peaked at #106 on 12/11/71 - you have 11/27/71 "Woman Stealer" by Joe Tex peaked at #103 on 3/31/73 - you have 3/17/73 "You Never Know What You've Got" by Bell & James peaked at #103 on 7/28/79 - you have 7/14/79 "Uptown *Hit" by Kurious peaked at #123 on 3/12/94 - you have 3/19/94 "Running Blind" by Godsmack peaked at #123 on 5/22/04 - you have 5/15/04 "Fuego" by The Cheetah Girls peaked at #122 on 1/19/08 - you have 1/12/08 |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 27 October 2017 at 7:17am
|
Corrections have all been made.
Thanks again, Chartman! |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 27 October 2017 at 7:27am
|
Last three - I promise!
"Luther The Anthropoid (Ape Man)" by The Jimmy Caster Bunch debuted on 8/12/72 - you have 8/5/72 "Missing You" by Luther Ingram was only at its peak position of 108 for one week (3/25/72). On the following week's chart it was listed as the b-side to "You Were Made For Me" also at position 108. Think you gave it credit for being the a-side for the last week thereby giving it credit for 2 weeks at its peak. And lastly "Summer Love" by The Blackbyrds was listed as a b-side on the Bubbling chart for 3 weeks. You indicate this in the Pop Singles book, however the song is not listed as a tag along in the Pop Annual. Maybe because the a-side "Do It Fluid" made the Hot 100. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 01 December 2017 at 10:22am
Hey Paul - could you check the Mainstream Rock chart for 3/24/84 on BillboardPlus? The published chart and the one on billboard.biz was just a copy of the 3/17/84 chart - obviously in error and the last week's positions on the 3/31/84 chart suggested a correct chart was created. PS I ordered the LP book - looks like I'm going to need a fork lift to move it around! Thanks |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 01 December 2017 at 1:17pm
The BillboardPlus info for that particular chart doesn't go back that far. I see that we considered the 3/24/84 chart to be frozen (the same) as the 3/17/84 chart. I suppose you could try to put one together using the "last week" numbers from the 3/31/84 chart, but you'd have to guess at some titles for the ones that fell off. Billboard may have done a chart for 3/24, but didn't bother to make a printed correction, thus it's probably lost for good. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 04 December 2017 at 9:22am
|
Thanks for checking Paul. Give us a heads up when you
start researching the updated Country Songs book (2019?) and I can send you some updates to consider. |
Posted By: RoknRobnLoxley
Date Posted: 12 January 2018 at 1:31pm
Most interesting, Paul. I could be interested in a Radio & Records chart book from RRI. I do like what you’ll be doing with the upcoming updated Country Singles book, going/continuing with the country radio airplay charts for the main data. Now the kicker: I would also be in favor of you and Joel putting together a new book for the Billboard pop radio airplay charts, say 90s and beyond. A brief discussion for our viewers: I’m assuming the historical Billboard pop charts / Hot 100 have reflected the “pop” radio format over the decades rather than all radio formats lumped together. I.e., based on pop radio airplay plus pop record store sales, from the 50s up until the early 90s, when things started going haywire with some not-for-sale tracks getting airplay but no sales, and some singles that were selling without getting any airplay. AKA, the problem that American Top 40 had to deal with in choosing non-Hot 100 charts to keep their subscribers happy, due to the influx of rap and heavy metal. Then in the late 90s, the Hot 100 changed from a “pop” chart to an “everything” chart, where airplay of all radio stations and sales of all recordings were thrown into this “everything” mix. Thus the true “pop” format of pop radio got obliterated on the most famous Billboard chart and replaced with something else. Maybe it would have been better to keep the Hot 100 as a “pop” chart and create a new “everything” chart. Or let the Hot 100 evolve as it did but create a new “pop” chart. Country still has its format and charts, as does RnB, but “pop” no longer has a main chart, its chart the Hot 100 now becoming an everything chart. Pure “pop” has been relegated to airplay charts, a series of them over the years, Top 40 Radio Monitor, Hot 100 Airplay, Top 40 Mainstream Radio Airplay, Top 40 Tracks Airplay, Pop 100 Airplay. The Pop 100 (sales and airplay) was an interesting experiment for a while, but it fizzled out in 2009 per Billboard because the influence of digital downloads made the Pop 100 and Hot 100 too similar. Which leads to my main point: how about you and Joel coming up with a new Billboard pop radio airplay book? You two figure out where it would begin, early 90s, late 90s, or whenever. And which Billboard pop radio charts to use. Keeping the RRI Hot 100 books as they are, for those purists, and creating this new pop radio book for pop purists. This would illuminate and focus on pop music relative to itself over these recent decades without being steam-rolled by other music genres and radio formats. Probably not much chance of this happening, ha, but thought it worthwhile to mention anyway. Thanks much !! |
Posted By: crapfromthepast
Date Posted: 12 January 2018 at 2:54pm
|
I have one modest suggestion, which could satisfy most of us collector/chart nuts:
Could you assemble a book similar to what you've done with the 1960s charts, where each song gets one listing in the book, and that one listing lists all the peak positions and debut dates on the various BB charts? We collectors could use such a book as a checklist for all the songs that charted anywhere in Billboard, without worrying about which particular chart had what position. I would have loved such a book for the 1990s. I personally lost interest in following the Hot 100 after "Lovefool" and "Don't Speak" were deemed ineligible. I attempted to follow R&R for the second half of the 1990s, but it didn't mesh well with the Billboard data, and I just gave up entirely. Nowadays, I rely on my Top Hits USA subscription to tell me what was a hit. If a song makes it onto one of the six yearly recurrent discs, then it's a hit in my little world. That averages out to about 105-110 "hits" per year, or roughly everything that hit the top 15 if we go back to typical 1980s chart movements. Edit: The book I was thinking of is https://www.recordresearch.com/country/across_the_charts_1960s.php - Across The Charts . I love this collection, and will use it as my reference if my year-by-year collecting ever goes back into the '60s. ------------- There's a lot of crap on the radio, but there's only one http://www.crapfromthepast.com" rel="nofollow - Crap From The Past . |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 13 January 2018 at 5:11am
|
Don't see much chance of any "Pop" book(s) focusing on the 1990s and beyond. The demand for such a book just isn't there and, quite frankly, Joel doesn't have much interest in that period either.
IMO, the Across The Charts - The 1960s book was a terrific idea, but it just didn't sell very well. That, combined with our ever-dwindling staff and resources, doesn't bode well for any future volumes. We have to devote our resources to the bread-and-butter books (Top Pop Singles, Pop Annual, Pop Albums, Country and R&B Singles) to stay in business. Any "specialty" books will be based on how well the basic ones continue to sell. |
Posted By: RoknRobnLoxley
Date Posted: 13 January 2018 at 7:45am
| I've got it, a NEW book: Pop Albums ANNUAL !! Yeah, baby... |
Posted By: torcan
Date Posted: 13 January 2018 at 1:50pm
|
I believe a Pop Albums Annual was considered once - I
remember one of the flyers about 20 years or so ago indicating it was upcoming. Nothing ever came of it, unfortunately. I'd love to see one. I'd also still like to see the Cashbox charts series books continue - I'd buy an '80s book in a second. I guess were only two years away from the '10s Hot 100 book too! |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 13 January 2018 at 3:24pm
|
Pop Albums Annual - never happen. Ever since Billboard allowed catalog albums on the Top 200, an older album can always hit a new peak position. Besides, we'd have to fill in all of the weeks in Top 10, Top 40, etc. Would be a logistical nightmare.
Cashbox & Record World chart book series both have a very good chance of continuing. Again, just a matter of time for us to work on it. The Billboard weekly Hot 100 charts of the 2010s decade may NOT be a slam dunk. Billboard is only printing 25-30 issues per year. The Hot 100 is now spread out over 2-3 pages and we're not sure how we'd handle the non-printed charts. Also, we're not sure how much demand there even is for charts from the current decade. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 14 January 2018 at 11:39am
Paul, if each continues, what would likely be tne next books for each? I have Cash Box Top 100 Charts - The 60s, and The 70s, so I'm guessing the 80s. But what about Record World? |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 14 January 2018 at 1:45pm
We'd like to do the 1950s for Cash Box, but we need to track down some missing charts. So, the 1980s would likely be next. Record World Volume 2 would be 1973-82 (they ceased publication in April 1982), so that would complete that series. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 14 January 2018 at 1:58pm
| Paul, Any chance of a Radio & Records book? |
Posted By: RoknRobnLoxley
Date Posted: 14 January 2018 at 3:26pm
|
Call me a nut (I am), but for a Pop Albums Annual (if it were ever to come to pass), I’d really prefer to see the yearly peak of an album for EVERY YEAR it appeared on the charts. Not just its absolute peak in its peak year. This would allow us to see the ebb and flow popularity of an album over time, as it actually occurred.
Yeah, that would result in more pages and ink, but the extra cost would be worth it to me. Take my money, please… (Same thing for the Pop Singles Annual, ha.) Thanks for listening, Paul… |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 14 January 2018 at 5:43pm
In my list of books, I see I have: Hit Records (Record World) 1954-1982 which, I believe, indicates peak positions, weeks on, etc. for each song within those years. So what is the "Record World Volume 1" book? Is that a printing of each weekly chart? Maybe I missed it. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 14 January 2018 at 5:51pm
|
RoknRobnLoxley - Re: the Pop 100 - back during that time period, I was on the phone with the Editor of Charts at Billboard a lot (I believe his name was Geoff Mayfield, if I'm not mixing him up with someone else at Billboard.) I had suggested he do a "Pop 100" because the "Hot 100" was an all-charts combo, and if country, rock, R&B, rap, etc. got their own self-contained chart, I argued that pop deserved one, too - a main chart in the book, not just a minor chart - one based on pop/mainstream airplay and pop/mainstream sales. (Basically - the way they always did it for the previous 40+ years). On the first phone call, he said he'd consider it. After several months, he told me they were doing it. But it would switch off every week between the "Pop 100" and the "Hot 100". It wasn't ideal in my eyes, but at least it would be there half the time. Of course, it turned out to be very confusing to readers and they stopped the Pop 100 after a very short time. But I, too, am like you and wish there were a combo of airplay and sales for pop. In my arguments to Geoff, I pointed that AT40 and other countdown audio/radio shows never used the Billboard Hot 100 anymore because it didn't represent any stations (e.g. CHR) that played pop/top 40. He understood that no countdowns were using the Billboard Hot 100 anymore and understood why. (And I didn't tell him this but I've known so many people in the music industry that have told me the Hot 100 is useless for their purposes - whether they be songwriters, producers, A&R, etc. I'm not saying everyone feels that way. I'm just saying a lot of industry professionals have made this comment to me.)
Of course now, things are so different - with streaming, YouTube, downloading, Pandora, Spotify, "talking about songs on Twitter" and all the different types of top 40 stations (some leaning more urban than others), I wouldn't even know what would be best now. But I do believe in the late '90s and through most of the '00s, a true pop chart, as a main (100 or 75 position) full page chart would have been great. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 14 January 2018 at 6:04pm
|
PS - We've talked elsewhere on this site about the inclusion of YouTube plays in the Hot 100. And I, like some others, said I have issues with it. I never really went into details about why I feel that way, so this seems as good a time as any. I understand the argument that times have changed and YouTube should be represented in the point system for the Hot 100. While I agree with that in general, I have 2 or 3 problems with that.
After a music video ends, an automatically generated music video is set to come up in the queue next (and ... I imagine those videos that are set to play next are paid for by the record labels), and unless you hit cancel in 5 to 10 seconds, it starts playing - and whether you wanted to hear it or not, now your play of the first song has generated a play (and equal points) for the 2nd song you have no interest in hearing. Second, some people check out a song and don't like it at all and turn it off after, say, 20 seconds. Should this count the same as a person who likes the song and listened all the way through? I don't think so. But even playing a song for 1 or 2 seconds on YouTube counts as a listen. If someone bought a single and kept it, it counts as a sale. If someone bought a 45 and returned it, eventually that return would be accounted for and that sale wouldn't have counted. Likewise, if a person listens to a portion of a video and turns it off because they don't like the song, I really don't feel it should count the same way that a full listen does. Lastly, based on the new rules, Rebecca Black's "Friday" would have likely been #1 (and perhaps for several weeks). The song quickly got the reputation for being the "worst song of all time" and it caused millions of people to check it out on YouTube. Many people agreed it was really bad - maybe some others thought it was marginally bad or ok or even good. But the majority of people checked it out because they wanted to see how bad it was. This song is an exception to the rule, of course. As it turns out, it wasn't a big hit on the Hot 100. But based on current standards and rules, with the multi-millions of views it got, it would have likely been a #1 hit (and perhaps for many weeks.) And I don't feel that it in any way should be considered along the lines of other #1 hits like, say, "Bette Davis Eyes", "(Everything I Do) I Do It For You", etc. What I'm saying is that there's no way to tell if a person is playing a YouTube video because they like it or because they heard it's awful. I guess I'd be more ok with YouTube's inclusion toward Hot 100 points if the song was listened all the way through. That would at least have some merit in most cases (though not the Rebecca Black case). |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 15 January 2018 at 5:53am
I've been lobbying for it for the past several years now. Hopefully someday! |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 15 January 2018 at 5:58am
I agree, you're a nut! :) A Pop Albums Annual will never happen at Record Research. Just too much work for too little payoff. We have to make a profit to keep the doors open, simple as that. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 15 January 2018 at 5:59am
Yes, it's scans of the actual weekly charts. Volume 1 covered 1964 (when the magazine started) - 1972. |
Posted By: RoknRobnLoxley
Date Posted: 15 January 2018 at 10:45am
| Paul, please also consider a pre-cursor to your Record World chart books = Music Vendor Singles Charts 1954-1963. I've heard that good copies of some / most of these charts might be hard to find. If so, typed up weekly charts would be an acceptable substitute, better than nothing at all. Cheers! |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 16 January 2018 at 3:51am
We're considering it! As you stated, good quality copies would be the major hurdle for that book. |
Posted By: RoknRobnLoxley
Date Posted: 18 January 2018 at 8:58am
|
Groovy Paul!
Since we can't have a Pop Albums Annual, I propose the next best thing: a Pop Albums Comparison Book, album peaks across all 3 BB, CB, & RW charts. The 50s to 80s. Super duper fab gear groovy keen! Take my money, please! |