Gabe
3x Platinum Member
Hot Like Fire
Joined: April 2007
Posts: 3,400
|
Post by Gabe on Jun 21, 2008 20:39:45 GMT -5
i think i like Billboard better ;) And I like 7 #1's better than 6! :)
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,575
|
Post by jenglisbe on Jun 22, 2008 10:04:15 GMT -5
The song has lost 200 spins in the last week. It's like they went for that 1 week at #1 and then just dropped the song. Why? I am not getting the promotion for the last 2 singles at all.
|
|
|
Post by jessluvsnick on Jun 22, 2008 11:06:44 GMT -5
They are going through this CD way too fast..GEESH!
|
|
|
Post by zaclord on Jun 22, 2008 11:06:46 GMT -5
i think i like Billboard better ;) And I like 7 #1's better than 6! :) but 20 weeks at #1 is better than just 17 :)
|
|
|
Post by zaclord on Jun 22, 2008 11:08:50 GMT -5
The song has lost 200 spins in the last week. It's like they went for that 1 week at #1 and then just dropped the song. Why? I am not getting the promotion for the last 2 singles at all. and "So Small" as well, when it looked like the label deliberately stopped SS from flying up the charts and almost risked its chance at #1.
|
|
sbp17
8x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 8,485
|
Post by sbp17 on Jun 22, 2008 11:10:34 GMT -5
The song has lost 200 spins in the last week. It's like they went for that 1 week at #1 and then just dropped the song. Why? I am not getting the promotion for the last 2 singles at all. Rascal Flatts has dropped almost 1200 spins in a week. Now THAT'S a song that gives the impression they made one final push. Last Name looks like a song that reached its peak at just the right time to get a number one and is just now trailing off. This song had lots of promo including ACM and American Idol performances. Not every Carrie song can spend six weeks at number one.
|
|
John77
Diamond Member
Carrie Pass
Joined: December 2005
Posts: 11,149
|
Post by John77 on Jun 22, 2008 11:12:44 GMT -5
The song has lost 200 spins in the last week. It's like they went for that 1 week at #1 and then just dropped the song. Why? I am not getting the promotion for the last 2 singles at all. I am mystified as well. It's been odd to say the least with the last two songs... silly as it sounds, "So Small" has had the most "normal" run of any of the songs off Carnival Ride so far. That song's run would have looked a lot more normal (along with every other song on the chart at the time), if not for the "More Than A Memory" stunt. That stunt literally put the Country chart in a 2 month funk!
|
|
Gabe
3x Platinum Member
Hot Like Fire
Joined: April 2007
Posts: 3,400
|
Post by Gabe on Jun 22, 2008 12:22:07 GMT -5
They are going through this CD way too fast..GEESH!
|
|
_adriano.
New Member
Joined: December 2007
Posts: 382
|
Post by _adriano. on Jun 22, 2008 13:15:39 GMT -5
I can't seem to understand why people think that everytime a Carrie single don't spend 6 six atop, it was the label doing something against it. People, songs peak! Sometimes they peak before we wanted it to peak, but that doesn't mean something was made to kill it.
|
|
Eloqueen™
Diamond Member
TSC: Certified Member
Joined: September 2007
Posts: 20,998
|
Post by Eloqueen™ on Jun 22, 2008 13:53:55 GMT -5
I can't seem to understand why people think that everytime a Carrie single don't spend 6 six atop, it was the label doing something against it. People, songs peak! Sometimes they peak before we wanted it to peak, but that doesn't mean something was made to kill it. Exactly. I don't think the label played any part in this song loosing spins.
|
|
Eloqueen™
Diamond Member
TSC: Certified Member
Joined: September 2007
Posts: 20,998
|
Post by Eloqueen™ on Jun 22, 2008 13:55:33 GMT -5
Also if the labels have THAT much control over the charts, Country charts must be really manipulated. A #1 would be meaningless. But I don't think they have that much pull on radio. The song just peaked already.
|
|
|
Post by rockingcountry on Jun 22, 2008 14:16:41 GMT -5
I can't seem to understand why people think that everytime a Carrie single don't spend 6 six atop, it was the label doing something against it. People, songs peak! Sometimes they peak before we wanted it to peak, but that doesn't mean something was made to kill it. Exactly. I don't think the label played any part in this song loosing spins. I agree. It wasn't the label at all. At least it got to #1.
|
|
austin
9x Platinum Member
Pulse Survivor Sri Lanka Sole Survivor
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 9,158
|
Post by austin on Jun 22, 2008 16:06:24 GMT -5
I can't seem to understand why people think that everytime a Carrie single don't spend 6 six atop, it was the label doing something against it. People, songs peak! Sometimes they peak before we wanted it to peak, but that doesn't mean something was made to kill it. Exactly. Not every single stays at number one for four or five weeks. Carrie is doing TREMENDOUS with ALL of her singles, and just getting to #1 is all that mattered. This song peaked after it hit the top, which is outstanding. Many songs peak before the Top 30, so it's great she even got to the top. The label didn't do anything to cut the run of this song short. I like Carrie and think Carnival Ride is miles better than Some Hearts, but I never could get into this one. I think a week at number one is more than it even deserved, so I think everyone should be happy it got that one week. I can't imagine what will happen on this board when -gasp!- one of her songs stalls in the Top 5.
|
|
|
Post by carriefan0209 on Jun 22, 2008 16:08:12 GMT -5
I dont think its the fact that the song didnt have a huge stay at the top which upsets some..its the fact that this song did not appear to be really peaking...then all of a sudden...the floor disappears
|
|
countryqueen
Gold Member
sometimes i wish i lived on a mountain, drank from a stream instead of a fountain...♥
Joined: April 2008
Posts: 676
|
Post by countryqueen on Jun 22, 2008 16:10:37 GMT -5
^i though carnival ride was the better album at first as well, but now that i think about it, IMO, Some Hearts is better because it seems like every song would have made a great hit (except for inside your heaven, which i hate!)...on carnival ride, carrie seems to choose all the songs i am not a big fan of (i don't like all the songs off this one like i did the first)...idk...maybe i've had a little too much carrie overload or something...?
|
|
Eloqueen™
Diamond Member
TSC: Certified Member
Joined: September 2007
Posts: 20,998
|
Post by Eloqueen™ on Jun 22, 2008 16:16:08 GMT -5
I dont think its the fact that the song didnt have a huge stay at the top which upsets some..its the fact that this song did not appear to be really peaking...then all of a sudden...the floor disappears Eh the bullet had already began shrinking greatly as it was reaching the pole position and right now it has a -347 bullet. I don't think it's to big of a shake up. The song has just peaked naturally. I think that some fans are disappointed that this did good, but not as well as they thought it would do and it is such an awesome song that the record company just has to have something to do with it peaking.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,575
|
Post by jenglisbe on Jun 22, 2008 16:24:45 GMT -5
The song has lost 200 spins in the last week. It's like they went for that 1 week at #1 and then just dropped the song. Why? I am not getting the promotion for the last 2 singles at all. Rascal Flatts has dropped almost 1200 spins in a week. Now THAT'S a song that gives the impression they made one final push. Last Name looks like a song that reached its peak at just the right time to get a number one and is just now trailing off. This song had lots of promo including ACM and American Idol performances. Not every Carrie song can spend six weeks at number one. That would make more sense if the song wasn't so new, but for a song to race to #1 in 13 weeks and have a big bullet when it hit #1 and then suddenly fall off is certainly odd. What other song has done that?
|
|
|
Post by carriefan0209 on Jun 22, 2008 16:28:23 GMT -5
^Exactly. Thank you jeng
|
|
Eloqueen™
Diamond Member
TSC: Certified Member
Joined: September 2007
Posts: 20,998
|
Post by Eloqueen™ on Jun 22, 2008 16:30:34 GMT -5
I would hope that you are wrong. If a record company can pull a song from #1 on radio, it can certainly push it there and if that's the case, it completely dwindles the value of most number ones she has gained.
|
|
|
Post by 43dudleyvillas on Jun 22, 2008 16:41:28 GMT -5
That would make more sense if the song wasn't so new, but for a song to race to #1 in 13 weeks and have a big bullet when it hit #1 and then suddenly fall off is certainly odd. What other song has done that? But you have to consider the reason for the big bullet: Carrie was doing radio interviews to promote the song and the label was running trade publication ads in support of the song. The effect of that promotion lasted for a week or two and then went away and radio programmers were more interested in "Better as a Memory," despite LN's downloads and callout. So it goes. And again, although the song took a hit in audience in this morning's update (helped in part by WUSN's switch to a mostly Kenny/some Keith playlist to promote the local Chesney stadium show), it really hasn't been losing that much in audience all week. Looking purely at spins is deceptive, so this talk of the "floor disappearing" below the song makes little sense to me. Here are the AI losses this week from the Tuesday update through the Saturday update: -76K, -174K, -168K, -56K, -182K It's not like the bottom fell out of the song (it probably will at some point, as stations adjust their rotation, but it hasn't happened this week). Today was a sizable hit but like WUSN's special programming contributed and maybe LN lost the extra CCUSA spin (I'm not sure about that one). I do think some folks expected more a longer chart run from this song, but it didn't happen. If anything, I think the label's support of LN prevented it from getting blocked from #1 by "Better as a Memory," which programmers seem to like better for whatever reason. I agree with those who have asserted that Arista Nashville sacrificed "All-American Girl" to get Alan Jackson's "Small Town Southern Man" to #1. But there's nothing anomalous about what happened with LN. Look, I'm a big-time cynic when it comes to radio. Frankly, Music Lives, I don't take #1s all that seriously from anyone because for the most part, I think they happen because of label pushes and pulls (heck, Dierks Bentley admitted as much when he celebrated "Every Mile a Memory" eking out a week at #1). But I don't think LN's having peaked after getting to #1 is anything out of the ordinary.
|
|
Eloqueen™
Diamond Member
TSC: Certified Member
Joined: September 2007
Posts: 20,998
|
Post by Eloqueen™ on Jun 22, 2008 16:48:36 GMT -5
Oh wow, that kind of makes me sad. So how do you know which songs that went to #1 actually earned it and which ones were pushed there by their label? Also how is it not illegal for the label to be able to directly control country radio?
|
|
dcowboy77
Platinum Member
Joined: April 2005
Posts: 1,519
|
Post by dcowboy77 on Jun 22, 2008 16:50:39 GMT -5
I would hope that you are wrong. If a record company can pull a song from #1 on radio, it can certainly push it there and if that's the case, it completely dwindles the value of most number ones she has gained. does "more than a memory" by garth brooks ring a bell.
|
|
Eloqueen™
Diamond Member
TSC: Certified Member
Joined: September 2007
Posts: 20,998
|
Post by Eloqueen™ on Jun 22, 2008 16:54:10 GMT -5
How sad to find out that the country chart is just filled with tons of manipulation.
|
|
|
Post by 43dudleyvillas on Jun 22, 2008 17:04:16 GMT -5
Oh wow, that kind of makes me sad. So how do you know which songs that went to #1 actually earned it and which ones were pushed there by their label? Also how is it not illegal for the label to be able to directly control country radio? Well, personally, I look at callout and downloads for some indication of what the listening audiences want to hear. Neither tells the whole story (downloads tend to favor artists with younger fanbases; callout tends to reflect the taste of musically conservative listeners). But still, I consider them useful tools. It just so happens that so far, Carrie's #1s have coincided with great callout and great downloads. So, label pushes notwithstanding, I consider all of Carrie's #1s to be legitimately earned. Hey, look, all the labels try to manipulate the charts if they can...no better evidence of that than the Garth/Big Machine/Pearl Records stunt with "More than a Memory" debuting at #1 (as dcowboy77 pointed out). And Big Machine is an independent label, not a major! Obviously, there are limits to what the labels can do (although I guess the MtaM stunt does make me question just what those limits are). In any case, I'm not sure how you make it illegal for a label to have an artist do interviews with radio stations whose effect will be to get an extra spin or two. Coordinated trade ads, artist interviews, CCUSA co-hosting stints -- they're about visibility to the station and its audience, and they seem to work -- to a point. We're not really talking about a label promoting an unpopular song to the top, or the top-5, or the top-10. As I see it, we're talking about a potential difference of a few spots in a song's chart peak (for example, see Columbia Nashville's battle to get Miranda Lambert her first top-10 hit). So the bottom line is that determining a "deserving" #1 or #whatever is a rather imperfect and uncertain sport (I hesitate to call it a science or an art). As much fun as it can be analyzing the charts and watching artists rack up streaks and records, I also don't take them that seriously.
|
|
Zazie
5x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 5,144
|
Post by Zazie on Jun 22, 2008 17:19:00 GMT -5
Good attitude -- this is all about fun. Those people who enjoy numbers and projecting chart runs are at home here. It isn't science, and chartwatching can't be taken very seriously because the data aren't trustworthy.
In the 1980's, for instance, the charts were based on radio stations submitting their playlists. Which they faked like crazy. That's why songs back then climbed 8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 and then dropped out of the top 10 immediately -- because the radio stations were reporting fake info.
Doesn't really bother me. I accept that the charts were to some extent bogus, but also it isn't a coincidence (or a sign of fraud) that Merle Haggard, George Strait, and Conway Twitty were getting lots of #1 songs.
Nowadays the eletronic tracking prevents that kind of fixing, but there are always going to be some bogus elements to charts, at least as long as somebody thinks there's money involved.
The idea that a given song might "deserve" to be #1 is subjective. If you go from thread to thread, you see people's divergent ideas about which songs deserve what. I recognize that there are people alive, on this planet, right now, who are going to think that Bob That Head "deserved" to be #1 and will be disappointed if it doesn't get there. I'm delighted to be sharing the planet with them. In fact, I'd have a beer with many of them.
Last Name barely reached #1 on Billboard -- I think it beat labelmate Paisley's song by 57k in audience. (Another example of suspect chart data, but that's the way it is.) And it got there with the lowest total audience number since Christmastime.
But it got there, and that's all that matters. Everybody who's upset that it didn't get 4 weeks can pair off with somebody who's distressed that it got there at all, and go have a good cry.
|
|
lyrichord
2x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2005
Posts: 2,544
|
Post by lyrichord on Jun 22, 2008 17:31:28 GMT -5
In my opinion a "true" #1 is a song that still gets requests and downloads years after it peaked on radio. Carrie's people effed up on "All-American Girl," it's still pulling in way more downloads than other songs of comparable airplay and its video is still very popular--more popular than the LN video on iTunes. They should have let it die a natural death rather than by label suicide and tried to give it more mainstream exposure (Disney movie soundtrack or something). Sonically, LN has some similarity to BHC but many people can relate to BHC and few to LN, which is more of a novelty song.
|
|
dcowboy77
Platinum Member
Joined: April 2005
Posts: 1,519
|
Post by dcowboy77 on Jun 22, 2008 17:37:19 GMT -5
plus the billboard counrty chart is based off of arbitron ratings audience figures correct ?
and if youve seen the new PPM ratings they can drastically change the old diary numbers like crazy so who really knows what correct ?
a station in ny was like #3 ranked in the old diary system....with the new PPMs they fell to #12....pretty drastic.
|
|
Zazie
5x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 5,144
|
Post by Zazie on Jun 22, 2008 18:24:13 GMT -5
plus the billboard counrty chart is based off of arbitron ratings audience figures correct ? and if youve seen the new PPM ratings they can drastically change the old diary numbers like crazy so who really knows what correct ? a station in ny was like #3 ranked in the old diary system....with the new PPMs they fell to #12....pretty drastic. It's Nielsen BDS (Broadcast Data Services) for radio -- Arbitron for TV ratings. But your basic point is correct. There's no reason to trust the audience numbers -- if the battle for #1 is between two songs less than 1 million apart, we don't really know for sure which of them had a larger audience. But does that make us want to stop following the charts? We can just hope they're relatively honest and are using the best data they can get. Modified to say that I just saw a reference to "Arbitron" on an AllAccess email, so I guess I'm wrong about my comment above. But I'll leave it there, with correction.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,575
|
Post by jenglisbe on Jun 23, 2008 7:27:15 GMT -5
But you have to consider the reason for the big bullet: Carrie was doing radio interviews to promote the song and the label was running trade publication ads in support of the song. The effect of that promotion lasted for a week or two and then went away and radio programmers were more interested in "Better as a Memory," despite LN's downloads and callout. So it goes. I would see that if "BAAM" simply had a bigger bullet and passed "LN," but "LN" has dramatically fallen in spins despite only being out for 3-4 months.
|
|
kw9461
3x Platinum Member
Joined: January 2007
Posts: 3,767
|
Post by kw9461 on Jun 23, 2008 13:56:10 GMT -5
But you have to consider the reason for the big bullet: Carrie was doing radio interviews to promote the song and the label was running trade publication ads in support of the song. The effect of that promotion lasted for a week or two and then went away and radio programmers were more interested in "Better as a Memory," despite LN's downloads and callout. So it goes. I would see that if "BAAM" simply had a bigger bullet and passed "LN," but "LN" has dramatically fallen in spins despite only being out for 3-4 months. But that's exactly what happened last week. Carrie still had a bullet, but Kenny's bullet was much bigger and he passed her. This past week, with LN having already peaked, and the promotion wearing off, she made a modest drop (she only lost like 250 spins, half of Brad's ISaG and 1/4 of Flatts' ED). I'm not seeing a dramatic drop, it's the same drop that most #1 songs have once they peak.
|
|