DuranDuran
Proud Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 12,616
- Points
- 113
I thought the answer was obvious.Nearly all J5/MJ singles were huge hits in this list but as a European I have no clue what it means. Jam for example was nr 3 in that chart while it only reached nr 26 (?) in the pop charts
So you're saying a song is a "proper hit" if mainly a lot of white people listen or buy it? Because that's what the Hot 100 & Top 40 radio is mostly marketed to. R&B radio is primarily Black listeners. The USA is a big place, not everybody listens to the same music. So there's many radio formats. Top 40 stations have always only played certain types of music and/or artists. Until hip hop came along it was mainly white performers. That's how Eric Clapton, Elvis Presley, Rolling Stones sold way more than the Black blues/R&B artists they were influenced by. Pat Boone got bigger hits with Little Richard & Fats Domino songs than they did. New Kids On The Block records sold more than New Edition's.If a song doesn't chart well on the proper chart, then just make up a minor chart, and be sure so exclude all the most popular songs. That way, you get to claim your song was a #3 hit somewhere...
The mainstream media in the USA is majority white and has always been, so of course they are going to reference the "white" Top 40 radio chart before the other ones. It's like The Beatles will get way more magazine & TV coverage than Funkadelic. More money is spent on the promotion of Top 40 radio than the other radio formats. Michael Jackson on Epic got the Top 40 budget. The Jacksons did not. They got the R&B budget, so their records were not as well known with the mainstream audience.The general billboard hot 100 chart is the one that is referenced usually though, the sub charts are only for the chart fanatics.
I understand how it works I still find it weird at times. Another Part of Me reached nr 11 in the main chart and nr 1 in the black singles chart. So in one department it must have underperformed quite a bit for it to fail to get the top 10.
You sound a lot like an American, very much the same sense of tribalism of stereotyping as the "Average American".As a European I simply cannot grasp how Americans think
In America maybe."Enjoy Yourself", "Show You the Way to Go", "Shake Your Body (Down to the Ground)", "Lovely One", "This Place Hotel", "State of Shock" and "Torture" were all hits on the Hot 100. The reason why the rest of their singles flopped wasn't because of budget; they flopped because they weren't appealing to the mainstream audience.
Songs get on commercial radio stations such as Top 40 because of payola. It has little to do with the audience. College radio does not run from companies advertising on them & payola like Top 40, so college radio stations generally will play any kind of music, even classical. College radio is run from listener donations, just like the PBS TV network. More money is spent on certain types of music. In the past that was rock n roll. That's why if you look at the Top 50 highest record sellers in history, the majority of the artists are white male rock bands/singers. There's few non white, non rock, or women artists. Does that mean rock was better than all of the other genres or that men are better than women artists? In the USA, few if any Asian or Arab artists have had Top 10 hits on Top 40 radio. Because the money is not spent on them to get that airplay. They are mostly marketed to their own race/ethnicity. Shaggy said in an interview that Chris Blackwell, who ran Island Records, told him that he's not going to spend much money to promote reggae music or sign reggae artists. Bob Marley happened to get popular not because the record company promoted him to radio in the USA. It's because other popular acts like Mick Jagger & Stevie Wonder spoke about him. It also helped Marley when Eric Clapton remade I Shot The Sheriff. It was word of mouth. Reggae was also helped when The Police became popular because their music was based on reggae.The reason why the rest of their singles flopped wasn't because of budget; they flopped because they weren't appealing to the mainstream audience.
I'm just really glad I live in a place that doesn't have this nonsense. Back in the 90s, they tried to introduce an indie/rock/dance/classical chart here. It lasted a few weeks before they gave up on it because nobody was interested, and because it was completely unnecessary.So you're saying a song is a "proper hit" if mainly a lot of white people listen or buy it?
Listen to whatever you like. But don't pretend your favourite song is #1 when it wasn't. Stop encouraging racism.The USA is a big place, not everybody listens to the same music. So there's many radio formats.
Yes. It's called a participation award. Great that everybody can win something, huh?There's even a separate Latin Grammy Awards show.
No. It means they sold more copies. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less.Does that mean rock was better than all of the other genres or that men are better than women artists? In the
Really? Then why are McDonald's & Coca Cola the most popular restaurant & soda in the world? Why do companies spend millions of dollars to run ads during the Superbowl? Why did Pepsi pay Michael Jackson instead of Millie Jackson to make commercials for them? If artists like Stephanie Mills & Frankie Beverly are only promoted to R&B radio, and the mainstream does not listen to R&B radio, how would the mainstream know they are around? Jazz is not played on Top 40 radio, it was not on MTV so how was jazz supposed to sell as well as Madonna or Def Leppard? So the budget does matter. The labels do not spend as much to promote jazz or gospel music, so they are not mainstream. In the early 1990s labels spent more to promote gangsta rap over conscious rap. Top 40 radio was basically a commercial to get people to buy records. If something is not played on it, then people won't know about it to buy it and it won't make whatever chart it is on.You're trying way too hard to make this political. It doesn't matter about budget. It doesn't matter about column inches or TV coverage. It doesn't matter if it's fair or not. The chart tells you what song/movie/book/game sold the most.
You misunderstood me. Of course having a big budget means you can promote/brainwash more people, and that will result in selling more copies.Really? Then why are McDonald's & Coca Cola the most popular restaurant & soda in the world?
The part in italics. That's my point. If you want to know what is the biggest selling song, "the chart" is the only chart that matters.If something is not played on it, then people won't know about it to buy it and it won't make whatever chart it is on.
What are you even talking about?. Billboard has always had multiple charts. It's not something that has just started a few years ago. It's like the Grammy Awards & American Music Awards have awards for multiple genres, not just the ones that are most popular. If there was only 1 chart, then Billboard wouldn't even be a magazine, it would be a pamphlet or something, lol. What's social justice about it? Country is mostly a white genre and so is new age. In the USA, there's separate radio formats for those and Billboard tracks the different formats. There were even some record stores that specialized in certain types of music, like a gospel music only record store. It's the equivalent of having different charts for different kinds of stores, such as a department store chart, a hardware store chart, a bookstore chart, an electronic store chart and so on. A store like Walmart is going to be more mainstream popular than a store like Hallmark which sells greeting cards or a store that only sales electric model train sets. A lot of people don't care about what's mainstream popular, they care more about their kind of entertainment. So they are going to want to see what is popular in their interests. Like if a person is not interested in Marvel movies, but only in "art films", they are going to want to read about that. But since Marvel is more mainstream popular, they are going to get more mainstream coverage.Ok, so a song doesn't get played, so people don't know about it, so it doesn't sell. Boo hoo. Tough luck. That doesn't mean we can elevate it to the top 10 just because we want to restore social justice to the world or some nonsense.
Again, it doesn't matter how long it's been going on.What are you even talking about?. Billboard has always had multiple charts. It's not something that has just started a few years ago.
By definition, the songs at the top of the chart are the ones that sold the most copies. It's literally a popularity contest. That's what the chart means. It's a measure of sales success. If you don't sell enough copies, you don't make the chart. Sorry about that.the Grammy Awards & American Music Awards have awards for multiple genres, not just the ones that are most popular
And that's fine. If they sell enough copies, they get in the chart, and if they don't, they don't.Country is mostly a white genre and so is new age.
Of course. That makes sense. Each radio and store is trying to make as much money as they can.In the USA, there's separate radio formats for those and Billboard tracks the different formats. There were even some record stores that specialized in certain types of music, like a gospel music only record store.
And that would be incredibly dumb. Billboard would go out of business if they did that, because nobody cares what music people might have bought at a hardware store.It's the equivalent of having different charts for different kinds of stores, such as a department store chart, a hardware store chart, a bookstore chart, an electronic store chart and so on.
And that's fine.A store like Walmart is going to be more mainstream popular than a store like Hallmark which sells greeting cards or a store that only sales electric model train sets.
Yes, and that's fine. I'm not dictating what you can and can't listen to.A lot of people don't care about what's mainstream popular, they care more about their kind of entertainment. So they are going to want to see what is popular in their interests.
And that's fine.maybe if thriller wasn't promoted then it wouldn't have sold, and we'd have a different biggest selling album of all time.Also if mainstream radio in the 1980s was still run like it was before rock n roll in the late 1950s, then the success of Thriller & Purple Rain wouldn't have happened. So how something is promoted does matter.
UK. I'm from the UK, where they use the UK chart. At least, they used to. People stopped buying music, and shops stopped selling it and record companies have virtually stopped making it, so they can't produce a sales chart any more.It's really ironic you're saying all this. You don't even use the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 Chart. Being Australian, You use the ARIA Charts.
My mistake then. I got you confused with someone else.I'm from the UK, where they use the UK chart. At least, they used to. People stopped buying music, and shops stopped selling it and record companies have virtually stopped making it, so they can't produce a sales chart any more.
But yeah, if I want to know what is the biggest selling song in Australia, I'll look it up in the Australian chart. If I want to know what is the biggest selling song in America, I'll look it up in the American chart (ie, I won't look up the "black chart" or the "white chart" or the "yellow chart").
But Billboard was never really for the general public anyway. The average person does not care how many records something sold or what the #1 song is. Billboard was primarily for people who worked in the music industry, That's why it had often had interviews and/or articles with radio disc jockeys, record company A&R, artist managers, recording engineers, film/TV behind the scenes people (because Billboard also tracked sales of videotapes/DVD, film scores, & video games too), concert promoters, and other people the general mainstream audience would have little or no interest in. It was expensive to subscribe to and most stores did not sell it. Some public libraries carried it.So... If I want to know what the biggest selling song is, I will consult the chart. It would be dishonest if they tried to correct the listing according to some supposed bias. What I DON'T want is for some suit to turn up and say "this week's chart doesn't have enough jazz or nu-metal music, let me fix that for you".
Exactly. You have a main chart. And the other charts are a consolation prize, used by labels if a song didn't do as well as they wanted. "Look everyone, we missed the top 10, but at least we got to number 6 in this minor chart!"But still, it's basic statistics. You track multiple formats. We have a main chart and sub charts in addition, because Jazz, Gospel, Orchestra, are sub-genres
Exactly. The chart is a simple tally. And when you add up all the sales, there is only one #1.That's not false positivity or whatever. It's literally just tallys.
It's fine. It doesn't matter who compiles the chart, it doesn't matter if they publish a magazine, and it doesn't matter who buys the magazine.But Billboard was never really for the general public anyway.
That's as maybe. Although looking at this board, lots of people would disagree.The average person does not care how many records something sold or what the #1 song is.
Maybe you've hit on something. All of these charts that they have manufactured are probably, from Billboard's point of view, just there to fill up space in the magazine.other people the general mainstream audience would have little or no interest in. It was expensive to subscribe to and most stores did not sell it. Some public libraries carried it.
That's fine, I guess. Let's just pick the best one and stick with it. It doesn't have to be Billboard, but that's who everybody goes with.Billboard was not the only chart publication in the USA, there were also a few others like Cashbox, The charts in the different magazines were never really identical.
You mean all these weighting factors?Plus if people knew how Billboard got their info, they would probaly see it as not that reliable anyway.
Well, that's up to the label. If they don't wanna be counted they don't have to be I guess.Same with the RIAA. Reporting sales to the RIAA is voluntary, it's not required, and the labels have to pay for certifications.
Exactly. It changed into a different world overnight.That's why the charts completely changed when Soundscan started in the early 1990s
That's fine. A song is either released as a single or it isn't. If it isn't, it should never appear on a singles chart. That much is very clear. Although I'm at a loss to know how you can buy one side of a 7" record.Before the 1990s, the Hot 100 was based on sales of 45s plus radio airplay. Only a song released on 45 (or a 78 in that era) and its B-side could chart. An album track could not chart even if it got radio airplay.
And that's fine. As I said before, it should tell you which single sold more copies, nothing else.So the chart position did not necessarily tell the popularity of a song.
Yeah, the single died. So did the album. It doesn't exist any more. We're in a different world, where people can buy any song they want. You can literally just pick any song from a list, old or new, single or not.Today all of the songs on an album can chart at the same time, radio single or not.
Yeah, a different world. We need to remember that these aren't sales charts though.A song can also chart now from going viral on TikTok or being featured in a TV show/movie, which is what happened with old songs by Fleetwood Mac & Kate Bush.
It's not to fill up space. As I mentioned Billboard is mainly for music business people. If somebody runs a concert hall or club that only plays country music, looking at a chart that has all music or one that features little or no country is useless to them. It's also how the singer/band can ask for how much money they get paid to perfom at a place. The different charts also give information to a record store of how many copies to order of a particular artist's albums/singles. In an area with a larger ethnic population such as a Mexican population instead of a white one or a Black one, what would be the point of a store in that location looking at the Hot 100, since Spanish music does not chart there. But it does chart on the different Latino charts for Latino radio stations. It's like a sushi restaurant is more likely to be in a Japanese neighborhood than a Black one. Jazz rarely had singles, maybe some smooth jazz artists did. But there was a jazz airplay chart that has what was popular on jazz radio stations. The songs that get more listener requests on the radio will get played more often than one that get less requests.I feel like I'm saying this a lot... You raise a lot of interesting points, but ultimately none of them matter. We should just get back to the subject. There cannot be two sales charts.
That's as maybe. Although looking at this board, lots of people would disagree.
Maybe you've hit on something. All of these charts that they have manufactured are probably, from Billboard's point of view, just there to fill up space in the magazine.
But that has never been the case. Even in the 45rpm days, part of the chart position was based on radio airplay. Some singles sold more than they got airplay, but the songs that got more airplay but sold less would would usually chart higher than the less played song. It went by the ratio of the airplay + sales together. There's a chart for maxi singles, which for different periods was called either the disco chart, dance music, or club music. A maxi single often contained several remixes and so would not count on the regular singles chart. Because a maxi is 12" and a 45 is 7", 2 different things. Top 40 stations did not generally play the longer remixes, which can be up to 10 minutes or more. But a club would play them. AOR (rock) radio stations did not only play singles, they also played album tracks. When they did play a single, it was mostly the longer album version and not the 45 edits. R&B would often play the album versions too or a remix that would not be on the album.And that's fine. As I said before, it should tell you which single sold more copies, nothing else.
More like you have the pop chart, the biggest most popular chart. And every other chart for every other genre.Exactly. You have a main chart. And the other charts are a consolation prize, used by labels if a song didn't do as well as they wanted. "Look everyone, we missed the top 10, but at least we got to number 6 in this minor chart!"
I am pleased to say a lot has changed!Wow. that's really sad. it's really goes to show you nothing much changed. though, i can say nowadays it seem more people of different races are listening to all kinds of music.
i could be wrong because like I said I don't look at the charts only it's mention.
Sure, there will always be people needing to do that sort of research. But that's neither here nor there. Popular artists get onto the pop chart, and unpopular ones don't. The clue is in the name.If somebody runs a concert hall or club that only plays country music, looking at a chart that has all music or one that features little or no country is useless to them.
Yeah. If you've had a top 10 chart hit, you'll probably get paid 100 or even 1000 times more than if you haven't.It's also how the singer/band can ask for how much money they get paid to perfom at a place.
Actually, you'd be surprised at how much this doesn't make a difference. The radio station plays what they were going to play anyway. They just put people on who request whatever is on their playlist.The songs that get more listener requests on the radio will get played more often than one that get less requests.
No no no. That is not a sales chart. That's something else.But that has never been the case. Even in the 45rpm days, part of the chart position was based on radio airplay.
We don't use that terminology in the UK, but it was similar. They eventually brought in a rule that said a CD wasn't eligible to chart if it had more than 15 minutes of music. Overnight, CDs went from 4-5 songs down to 2-3. Just was just before singles died out.A maxi single often contained several remixes and so would not count on the regular singles chart. Because a maxi is 12" and a 45 is 7", 2 different things.
Just to point out, this is wrong. Something like 20% of music covers the recording costs. The other 80% of music fails to make a profit.'s not for success. Most music CDs are a "success", otherwise they wouldn't have put it out.
This is not what I'm talking about when I say success but I guess technically, this is correct.Just to point out, this is wrong. Something like 20% of music covers the recording costs. The other 80% of music fails to make a profit.
Most CDs were put out in the hope they'd be a success, but most never actually were a success. The success of the whole industry is carried by a small number of megastars.
The Hot 100 is not a sales only chart and never has been. I keep telling you it was a sales & airplay together chart. The only charts in Billboard that are sales only are the album charts & the VHS/DVD/video game charts. Any Billboard singles charts are either airplay & sales (Hot 100, R&B, country, etc.) or airplay only (jazz, Adult R&B, gospel, etc.) No singles charts are sales only and that is the way Billboard has been since it has existed. Even the maxi single chart is partly what songs are popular in clubs, but not radio airplay. If a 45 has a remix, then that will chart on the Hot 100 or R&B chart, That's why I said the B-side of a single could chart separately from the A-side if the B-side got airplay. People didn't buy the single twice for the B-side to chart. Even if they did, Billboard would have no way to know that. This happened with a lot of Beatles singles. It was called a double side hit.No no no. That is not a sales chart. That's something else.
Like, in the UK there used to be 2 charts - the official chart, and... another one, that included airplay. But nobody used to listen to that chart. And really, the only reason it was invented was because some (most) radio stations didn't want to play Slipknot or Marilyn Manson, so it was a convenient excuse to filter it out and pretend it didn't exist (ie the don't play it because it's not in the chart, and it's not in the chart because they don't play it).