What REALLY was BB’s Pop Chart pre 1955?

Hi everyone,

I am throwing this out to you as there are music chart history experts galore on this
site, many of whom have followed the charts for decades.

Billboard currently defaults to "Best Sellers in Stores" when reeling off chart stats
pre-Aug 1958. This however excludes the song's concurrent performances on their
Most Played by Jockeys, Most Played in June Boxes or the vague Top 100.

Sensibly, Joel Whitburn's books use a combination of those pop charts (I think
current policy is that a song's peak position is awarded based on its highest position
on one of those charts.).

However, does anyone know (remember) what the real story was back then?
For example, if I was living in 1956 and wanted to know what the (say) 4th most
popular song was that week... what chart would I consult? Do we know which the
Music Industry used? Or was it just not terribly important to the General Public back
then?

Perhaps this is a question for Paul who has 'friends in high places' :-)

Since I first started with my chronological list of
Top 40 hits thirty years ago*, I have always used the
Best Sellers chart from 1940 until the introduction of
the Top 100 in late 1955 and then the Hot 100 once it
was introduced in 1958. This is also the system Casey
Casem used. (Under this system, this week's two newest
Top 40 hits bring the total to 15,525.)

In his publications, Fred Bronson ignores the Top 100
and uses the Best Sellers chart until the introduction
of the Hot 100.

And as we know, Joel Whitburn uses all charts for the
years that there were multiple singles charts.


*In the late 1980s, I decided that I wanted to own
copies of the actual Billboard singles charts, in part
so that I could make a chronological list of Top 40
hits. I spotted a classified ad in Rolling Stone by a
guy selling (obviously illegal) copies of charts for
sixty cents each. Over the next couple of years, I
purchased 50 years of charts from him (50 X 52 X $.60
= YIKES!!) Just a few months after completing my
collection of charts, Joel started publishing his
books of actual charts, thereby rendering my
collection of contraband charts virtually worthless.

Joel Whitburn was an active Billboard subscriber at the time and he told me that he loved it when the Top 100 was first
published in November 1955, as it had the most titles. He still followed the other charts, but the Top 100 was his "go-to"
chart for buying records.

Billboard really was more of an "industry" publication at that time and I don't think the general public was really all
that interested. That's why there were separate charts for Best Sellers, Juke Boxes and Disc Jockeys. The Honor Roll of
Hits was really more of a "song" chart, with every available version listed at one position. I think it was more geared
toward the song publishers. The very first Top 100 chart stated that it was a COMBINED TABULATION of Dealer, Disk
Jockey and Juke Box Operator replies. Billboard would later put a disclaimer under the Top 100, stated that it "was NOT
designed to provide tested information for buying purposes. This function is most reliably served by other weekly
features..." So, even Billboard suggested that the other charts were probably more useful.

I'm sure the people that worked at Billboard at the time had no inkling someone would be talking about this stuff nearly 70
years later, LOL!

Paul Haney wrote: Joel Whitburn was an active Billboard subscriber at the time and he told me that he loved it when the Top 100 was first published in November 1955, as it had the most titles. He still followed the other charts, but the Top 100 was his "go-to" chart for buying records. Billboard really was more of an "industry" publication at that time and I don't think the general public was really all that interested. That's why there were separate charts for Best Sellers, Juke Boxes and Disc Jockeys. The Honor Roll of Hits was really more of a "song" chart, with every available version listed at one position. I think it was more geared toward the song publishers. The very first Top 100 chart stated that it was a COMBINED TABULATION of Dealer, Disk Jockey and Juke Box Operator replies. Billboard would later put a disclaimer under the Top 100, stated that it "was NOT designed to provide tested information for buying purposes. This function is most reliably served by other weekly features..." So, even Billboard suggested that the other charts were probably more useful. I'm sure the people that worked at Billboard at the time had no inkling someone would be talking about this stuff nearly 70 years later, LOL!

I like to call the era before Billboard in 1958 The Wild Wild West of charts. I've come to appreciate the 1940-1954 book by Whitburn for that reason, that you get the best of the best and don't have to sift through years of charts to get there.

Before 1940, I have my resources including Whitburn's 1900-1940 book and an excel sheet full of rankings.

We take for granted in 2020 how revolutionary the Billboard Hot 100 was in 1958 when it started. Charts back then, while informative were all over the place and not consistent. Paul is right, I don't think anyone cared as much as we do now in that era of charts...

Brian W. wrote: I miss libraries.

Be thankful you have a decent one nearby. I live in a
rural area, nearest town to me that even has a library
it's only open a couple half-days a week (pre-covid) and
other than mostly best-sellers doesn't have much.

That having been said, give me small town life over the
big city any day of the week!