rowdawg21
6x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2005
Posts: 6,127
|
Post by rowdawg21 on Nov 10, 2007 23:27:39 GMT -5
Just got to hear "More Than A Memory" live from Kansas City! Thanks SGG!!
|
|
drock89
Diamond Member
Joined: October 2007
Posts: 10,985
|
Post by drock89 on Nov 11, 2007 22:43:49 GMT -5
Just got to hear "More Than A Memory" live from Kansas City! Thanks SGG!! No problem!! I don't want to take up the whole board explaining how amazing Garth was, all I can say is WOW! And this song is so powerful live. I fell in love with it all over again last night.
|
|
DCXfan
Gold Member
Joined: March 2006
Posts: 540
|
Post by DCXfan on Nov 12, 2007 2:15:42 GMT -5
Just got to hear "More Than A Memory" live from Kansas City! Thanks SGG!! No problem!! I don't want to take up the whole board explaining how amazing Garth was, all I can say is WOW! And this song is so powerful live. I fell in love with it all over again last night. I was there Friday... I'll second that. Wow. And yes, this song live is incredible.
|
|
drock89
Diamond Member
Joined: October 2007
Posts: 10,985
|
Post by drock89 on Nov 16, 2007 17:29:14 GMT -5
In two weeks, Garth will make history again by reclaiming the #1 spot after 12 weeks of staying inside the top 10.
Its Billboard run will probably look like this:
1-4-8-8-8-10-9-9-6-4-4-2-1
(*probable, not certain)
EDIT: Something else unique, it will have hit #1 in the '07 chart year, spent 11 weeks inside the top 10, and then hit #1 in the '08 chart year.
|
|
Ten Pound Hammer
9x Platinum Member
Banned
I watched it all on my radio
Joined: August 2006
Posts: 9,595
|
Post by Ten Pound Hammer on Nov 16, 2007 19:49:12 GMT -5
^I'm predicting that Carrie will hit #1, then fall to #2 when Garth returns, then return to #1 -- which will make the Toby/Diamond Rio flip-flop in 2001 look comparatively sane.
By the way, Garth's Billboard run to date is actually 1-8-7-8-10-9-8-6-4-4-4 after 11 weeks (11/24).
|
|
popmusicaddict
5x Platinum Member
Nothing's Impossible?
Joined: October 2006
Posts: 5,981
|
Post by popmusicaddict on Nov 17, 2007 1:00:35 GMT -5
Wow at this likely rebounding to #1 after 3 months, that's not controversal in the least bit lmao!
|
|
Free2Bme
New Member
Joined: October 2004
Posts: 133
|
Post by Free2Bme on Nov 17, 2007 17:50:39 GMT -5
Wow! It looks like this song has the ability to jump over Carrie Underwood to take the #1 spot. In the next week or two?
............ ARTIST ........................ SONG TITLE ......... TW ... LW ( +/- ) ............ AI
1 1 KENNY CHESNEY ............ Don't Blink.......... 4487 ...4734 ( -247)............ 35.116 ^3 2 CARRIE UNDERWOOD .... So Small.............. 4431 ...4361 (+ 70) ............ 33.994 ^4 3 GARTH BROOKS More ...... Than A Memory....4471 ...4220 (+ 251)............ 33.182
|
|
John77
Diamond Member
Carrie Pass
Joined: December 2005
Posts: 11,149
|
Post by John77 on Nov 17, 2007 18:56:48 GMT -5
Wow at this likely rebounding to #1 after 3 months, that's not controversal in the least bit lmao! I don't have a problem with it going to #1 legitimately - which is what it looks like it's going to do here soon... I just have a problem with the stunts pulled in it's first week of release to get it a #4 debut on Mediabase & a #1 debut on Billboard... Personally, I absolutely LOVE the song and the video. It's REALLY sad to me that the whole little publicity stunt was pulled in the first place as in the eyes of many this is already a "tarnished" #1... and it getting back to #1 will only fan those flames even more, unfortunately...
|
|
rowdawg21
6x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2005
Posts: 6,127
|
Post by rowdawg21 on Nov 17, 2007 19:04:16 GMT -5
My cousin (the one who co-wrote "More Than A Memory") had the chance to see one of Garth's concerts in KC. Here's what he had to say:
Donna and I got to go to the Nov. 11 concert in KC! It was amazing! 17,000+ people sang every word to every song and didn't sit down the whole 3 hours Garth played. It was my first Garth concert and now I see why everybody says he's the best live show going!
|
|
someguy
Diamond Member
Joined: October 2003
Posts: 16,081
|
Post by someguy on Nov 17, 2007 20:15:56 GMT -5
Wow at this likely rebounding to #1 after 3 months, that's not controversal in the least bit lmao! and it getting back to #1 will only fan those flames even more, unfortunately... I'm not sure that's what will happen. I agree that this is a 'tarnished' #1 right now, but I think that if it goes to #1 legitimately, which I agree should happen in the next 2-3 weeks, then it will 'redeem' it, so to speak. If it manages to hit the top on its own merit, then I think it will go from being a #1 with an asterisk to a legitimate #1 hit.
|
|
Marv
6x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 6,308
|
Post by Marv on Nov 17, 2007 21:55:17 GMT -5
That #1 stunt remains the most reprehensible chart episode that I know of in the 41 years I've been reading BB.
Quite a black eye for BB, isn't it folks?
|
|
John77
Diamond Member
Carrie Pass
Joined: December 2005
Posts: 11,149
|
Post by John77 on Nov 17, 2007 23:04:25 GMT -5
That #1 stunt remains the most reprehensible chart episode that I know of in the 41 years I've been reading BB. Quite a black eye for BB, isn't it folks? Most certainly is... and lately, they've had quite a few of those black eyes...
|
|
Zazie
5x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 5,144
|
Post by Zazie on Nov 17, 2007 23:14:26 GMT -5
That #1 stunt remains the most reprehensible chart episode that I know of in the 41 years I've been reading BB. Quite a black eye for BB, isn't it folks? No, it isn't. It may have been reprehensible for country radio to give the song all that airplay. (I'll assume it was, for the purpose of this post. Some people no doubt think it was completely legitimate.) But all Billboard did was report the news. When a newspaper reports the existence of corruption, that doesn't give the newspaper a black eye. Do you think they should have not counted the audience? Retroactively kicked stations off the panel? Not published a chart that week? Which impressions should they have left out? How should they have decided that?
|
|
sbp17
8x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 8,485
|
Post by sbp17 on Nov 18, 2007 5:22:48 GMT -5
No, it isn't. It may have been reprehensible for country radio to give the song all that airplay. (I'll assume it was, for the purpose of this post. Some people no doubt think it was completely legitimate.) But all Billboard did was report the news. When a newspaper reports the existence of corruption, that doesn't give the newspaper a black eye. Do you think they should have not counted the audience? Retroactively kicked stations off the panel? Not published a chart that week? Which impressions should they have left out? How should they have decided that? I agree, Zazie. There is no way that Billboard can get any 'blame' for this. And I happen to be one who thinks it is legitimate. But then I think Reba's Sombody was a legitimate number one and I think Carrie's So Small that stalled for weeks before surging will be a legitimate number.
|
|
|
Post by 43dudleyvillas on Nov 18, 2007 9:35:36 GMT -5
My issue with MtaM's initial ascent to #1 was that it was entirely programmer/label-driven without any real effort to ascertain listener response to the song. To be honest, I'm still not totally sold on the song's new run to #1 because I don't think it is supported by callout. The song hasn't even cracked the top-20 on R&R Callout America, despite the removal of a number of songs that have gone recurrent, for example. It is #8 on Mediabase National Callout, so that's something, I guess, but the #1 country airplay songs of the past several months have fared quite a better on both callout services.
I understand that labels work the charts to prolong chart runs and/or to get to #1, but I have less of a problem with that when I see that work supported by callout. Given callout, I don't see this new MtaM run to #1 as having been "on its own merits." I see it as a more gradual climb meant to lend legitimacy to the initial stunt, but one that's still something of a smokescreen.
Note: I don't take callout as gospel; I also like to look at other indicators, such as downloads and albums sales, to get a sense for the appeal of a song, but obviously, individual download numbers for MtaM are not available because Brooks declined to make MtaM available for individual download.
ETA: I agree with Zazie and sbp17 that Billboard was merely reporting something that programmers and Brooks' label had engineered.
|
|
Zazie
5x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 5,144
|
Post by Zazie on Nov 18, 2007 16:32:04 GMT -5
I don't question the legitimacy of anything without evidence in hand. Slow to anger, and slow to libel, that's Zazie. I do think the Reba and Terri chart runs were funny-looking, but I've been following country charts for a long, long time and I'm aware that the charts of the 1980's were all based on deliberately-falsified counts. And I don't lose sleep over that.
I still like following charts, and Garth's week-one ascendancy to the top is questionable -- but within the context of following charts, this is not way out of line. The whole history of charts is the history of questionable events, and recent times have been, however imperfect, an improvement in integrity.
Thanks for supporting my opinion about Billboard, sbp17and 43dudleyvillas.
|
|
WamuFive
Platinum Member
Joined: March 2007
Posts: 1,007
|
Post by WamuFive on Nov 18, 2007 21:03:24 GMT -5
No, it isn't. It may have been reprehensible for country radio to give the song all that airplay. (I'll assume it was, for the purpose of this post. Some people no doubt think it was completely legitimate.) But all Billboard did was report the news. When a newspaper reports the existence of corruption, that doesn't give the newspaper a black eye. Do you think they should have not counted the audience? Retroactively kicked stations off the panel? Not published a chart that week? Which impressions should they have left out? How should they have decided that? I agree Zazie--as is usually the case on matter of this nature.
|
|
John77
Diamond Member
Carrie Pass
Joined: December 2005
Posts: 11,149
|
Post by John77 on Nov 18, 2007 22:20:06 GMT -5
While I agree that Billboard just "reported the news" to a point, I also think they should have done something to those stations that gave it a ridiculous number of spins that first week...
Do any of you remember the stunt a couple of years ago a couple of stations pulled with George Strait's "She Let Herself Go"??? A couple of larger weighted stations (one was in Seattle, I forget where the other was) started playing it once an hour or so in overnights to help it get it to #1... and although those individual spins weren't a lot, added together they had a pretty good sized impact and were enough to BARELY get it to #1 in R&R...
In order to keep some sort of integrity, I think any individual station engaging in those kind of shenanigans should be removed from the panel for some length of time (say 3 months)...
|
|
John77
Diamond Member
Carrie Pass
Joined: December 2005
Posts: 11,149
|
Post by John77 on Nov 18, 2007 22:37:28 GMT -5
Just taking a look at the numbers -- anybody think 127 spins in Tampa over the last week was sufficient? After all, there are 168 hours in a week -- there's plenty of room for improvement. Plenty of unGarthed hours. I want to hear from people in Tampa who didn't get their fill of the song. Or how about 84 spins in Phoenix? 12 spins a day, I can do the math -- for every hour they played it, they missed one. I'm sure the complaints are flowing in. 22 stations in all played Garth 48 times or more. Brand new song. OK, Garth's been away; his return is news no matter how many returns he makes. Play the song. He's sold 100 million, he's no Amy Dalley, so play the song. He's a proven artist, to say the least, so give it some spins. But I think what they actually did is pathetic. I'm playing "thread catch up" as I'm kind of intrigued by this whole thing... totally agree that this was "pathetic" as you say, Zazie.
|
|
John77
Diamond Member
Carrie Pass
Joined: December 2005
Posts: 11,149
|
Post by John77 on Nov 18, 2007 22:40:44 GMT -5
I'm not really sure what we call this... all I know is it was wrong, whatever it was.
|
|
John77
Diamond Member
Carrie Pass
Joined: December 2005
Posts: 11,149
|
Post by John77 on Nov 18, 2007 22:55:36 GMT -5
I don't think Hit Predictor is all that reliable, though I wouldn't dismiss it totally. The way the tests work, the listener typically hears a 30 second chorus (with the hook), followed by about a minute and a half of the song (verse and chorus), then the 30 second chorus/hook clip again. That may have changed recently...I think it may now be 2 minutes or so of the song, followed by the 30 second chorus/hook clip. In any case, the two big marks against Hit Predictor are: Other national callout services, like those published by Mediabase and R&R, do use random samples, and they also run regular tests from week to week. So you can get a sense of trends (both in terms of like and dislike), burnout factor, etc. The knock on the callout results that Mediabase and R&R use is that it takes a while for newer songs to catch on, and so those callout services are arguably slower to identify hits. But I see their results as more indicative of listener response than Hit Predictor. Nice analysis, dudleyvillas... I agree, the HitPredictor isn't very reliable... many songs that have scored in the 60's or 70's have turned out to be HUGE hits, while some songs scoring over 90 haven't fared nearly as well... it's especially true on the CHR/Pop chart... I also recall a recent issue of RateTheMusic where the scores of the songs were always ending in "0" for a partcular demo... 3.90, 3.80, 3.70, etc... indicating the sample used for that particular demo was only TEN people!!!
|
|
leilamaurizia
6x Platinum Member
Joined: December 2005
Posts: 6,760
|
Post by leilamaurizia on Nov 21, 2007 9:27:06 GMT -5
Garth gets his #1 on Country Albums (w/ Ultimate Hits) after all. Now all is right with the world.
|
|
|
Post by carriefan0209 on Nov 21, 2007 10:06:20 GMT -5
yay! go garth! does anyone know what his next single will be, if he releases one?
|
|
rowdawg21
6x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2005
Posts: 6,127
|
Post by rowdawg21 on Nov 21, 2007 10:15:11 GMT -5
yay! go garth! does anyone know what his next single will be, if he releases one? I haven't heard anything about what the next single will be, but I'm guessing it will be "Midnight Sun" for four reasons: 1. It's the only new song on the first disc besides "More Than A Memory." 2. "Workin' For A Living" is a cover, so I don't think it's the best choice for a second single. 3. "Leave A Light On" is listed as a "bonus track" and although that doesn't really mean anything, it makes me think it won't be the next single. 4. "Midnight Sun" is probably the best new song remaining. Of course I can't speak for other people, but it's definitely my choice for the next single.
|
|
|
Post by carriefan0209 on Nov 21, 2007 10:56:27 GMT -5
Good i was hoping its "midnight sun". prolly one of my top 10 favorite garth songs....i kinda wish MtaM hit #1 of its own accord tho, just to prove to the haters that garth doesnt need producers to hit #1
|
|
|
Post by somebody60 on Nov 27, 2007 19:17:51 GMT -5
Zazie, I'm taking your quote from the Carrie Underwood "So Small" thread and moving it here, since it discusses Garth, and I don't want to get the other thread off-topic. No doubt Garth's label has it in its power to drive Memory back to the top, but I don't see any sign that they're going to make the effort. If they do have the power to get the song #1, I don't understand why they wouldn't attempt to. I think that would gain some credibility for the song after its insane debut at #1 because it would prove that the song can go to #1 without the "It's a new Garth song! craze that was occurring on Country radio the first week it came out . Sure, it would require a push (I believe all songs are pushed somewhat..some more than others), but it wouldn't be quite as obvious as the "push" to get it to debut at #1. I'm still thinking that Garth could be #1 at the end of the week. If it doesn't, I believe it might partly be because of the poor call-outs this song seems to be receiving (at least on R&R). It is just at #19 on the R&R Call-out chart (and this is the highest I have seen this song get). I'm not sure about other call-out charts, but if they are like this, I think the general public may not be loving the song as much. And, even though some people may think that Country radio doesn't care about these call-outs, I do think they are taken into consideration. Most of the songs I see on the Top 10 on this call-out chart end up making the Top 10 (at least) on Country radio.
|
|
WamuFive
Platinum Member
Joined: March 2007
Posts: 1,007
|
Post by WamuFive on Nov 27, 2007 20:37:05 GMT -5
If they do have the power to get the song #1, I don't understand why they wouldn't attempt to. I think that would gain some credibility for the song after its insane debut at #1... How would a push by the label to get the song back to #1 give it credibility? There may be perceived credibility by folks who don't know any better, but in reality, is that any better than the initial marketing tactics? How do you know the label isn't pushing right now? You pointed out yourself that callout numbers are relatively low for a song this high up on the charts. At the end of the day, credibility is all in the ear of the beholder. By now, people already have their minds made up on this song so whatever the label decides to do with it and however the song's remaining chart history unfolds will not change anyone's opinion of the song's "#1 worthiness". Also keep in mind, I personally am not against Garth obtaining a #1 hit. It's the nature of the #1 that I took exception to. Whether the song returns to #1 or not will have no bearing on my feelings about its debut. In my mind, there were principles that were compromised. This will never change regardless of what the song does 2 months down the line. The events of the past few months have destroyed one of my pastimes--and I have Garth's song as an event to either thank for opening my eyes to the corrupted industry we call country radio or thank for being a major contributor to my loss of interest. I no longer have any faith in what a peak chart position stands for.
|
|
WamuFive
Platinum Member
Joined: March 2007
Posts: 1,007
|
Post by WamuFive on Nov 27, 2007 21:03:21 GMT -5
Continuing the discussion in a more appropriate place.... Zaclord: Garth didn't cheat. He didn't force radio to play his music. He didn't buy his way to #1. This topic has been drug out, but I can't stand it when people accuse him of that. It's not cheating. Yep, I didn't really want to say anything about this situation since everyone has already talked about it before, but now I have to say I agree with you. Garth didn't cheat. I would say he took advantage of Billboard's system, and why shouldn't he be able to do that? Your question may have been rhetorical, but I'll pose a response nonetheless. I won't say that Garth cheated since he did not violate any written rules. What he did do was cause me to rethink how I view the charts. I used to feel that they represented the national popularity and listener demand for a song. I now view them in much the same way I view a weather or stock report. Nothing more, nothing less than a factual report of data. It was my own ill-conceived assumption that airplay was generated by listener demand and that we could infer that because a song was the most played, t was the most requested/most popular. My bad. For those of us who think of the airplay charts as a barometer for song popularity, I think you can see why some people were offended by the stunt. The integrity of what the charts supposedly stood for was compromised. However, if we choose to view the charts for nothing more than what they are--simple data lists that report what radio stations are playing without an exacting interpretation to what these playlists represent, then you're corrrect Rowdawg, there's no need to get our panties in a bunch. In the eyes of label execs and artists, radio is nothing more than a medium for mass marketing and Garth took all of his contemporaries to school on how to perfect that. Since I don't make it a routine to follow advertising campaigns as a hobby, I have since lost considerable interest in chart watching (see above post). Now, it's only about the music for me.
|
|
|
Post by somebody60 on Nov 27, 2007 21:36:50 GMT -5
If they do have the power to get the song #1, I don't understand why they wouldn't attempt to. I think that would gain some credibility for the song after its insane debut at #1... How would a push by the label to get the song back to #1 give it credibility? There may be perceived credibility by folks who don't know any betterThat's actually what I mean. Sure, some people (like yourself) won't think this is credible, but other people may because of the fact that it was able to climb back up the chart to #1 instead of dropping off after hitting #1. It makes it "seem" more credible (and, of course, it would look good in the presses). The whole business is perception anyways (actually, the whole world is). I think you may have misunderstood me a little. I didn't say that Garth's team wasn't pushing the song. Zazie said it appears that Garth's team isn't making the push to #1 and that they have the power to. I was responding to Zazie saying that I don't understand why Garth's team wouldn't push for it. I actually do think Garth's team wants the song to go back to #1 (for the reasons I mentioned), and I pounted out the call-outs for a reason why this song might possibly not go back to #1, regardless if Garth's label pushes (though, I still think it will go back to #1).
|
|
Marv
6x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 6,308
|
Post by Marv on Nov 27, 2007 21:37:52 GMT -5
I didn't think that the totally reprehensible chart episode involving 'Somebody' could be topped for being very suspect until 'MTAM' came along.
The fact that 'Somebody' mysteriously gained 1,000 spins after seven+ months on the charts reeks of blatant manipulation, a problem which was supposed to have been corrected by the labels themselves after a major meeting involving all of the label CEOs and the EICs (Editors-In-Chief) of both BB & R&R held in Nashville thirteen months earlier.
For this reprehensible episode to come at the expense of the biggest country single in decades ('Live Like You Were Dying') is also hideous.
Suffice it to say, that objective was never carried out, and now we have this.
WQYK/Tampa, which is supposedly a country station, played 'MTAM' 125 times in a single week, which is indefensible; that's a CHR/Pop station's M.O.
Of course this is the same allegedly country radio station which airs Bob Kingsley's 'CT40' at 5:00 A.M. on Sunday mornings, so if you want to vote for the most ineptly and stupidly programmed country station in America, here's your runaway winner.
That makes about as much sense as ABC airing 'Grey's Anatomy' at 6:00 AM any day of the week, or CBS doing likewise with '60 Minutes' or 'CSI'.
I guess that nobody at Billboard had the guts to really punish such reprehensible behavior by any of the record labels out there, did they?
|
|