Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,808
|
Post by Gary on Jul 7, 2016 11:13:34 GMT -5
Top Artists
old rank new rank artist
1 1 Elvis Presley 2 2 Beatles 5 3 Mariah Carey 3 4 Madonna 4 5 Elton John 7 6 Michael Jackson 17 7 Taylor Swift 6 8 Stevie Wonder 8 9 Janet Jackson 9 10 James Brown 22 11 Rihanna 10 12 Rolling Stones 11 13 Aretha Franklin 12 14 Whitney Houston 13 15 Pat Boone 20 16 Usher 14 17 Rod Stewart 16 18 Paul McCartney 15 19 Marvin Gaye 18 20 Prince
Big Movers 51 33 Eminem 46 34 Beyoncé 165 45 Justin Bieber 72 50 Chris Brown 70 56 Lil Wayne 110 58 Katy Perry 142 78 Maroon 5 300 93 Nicki Minaj 123 98 Brad Paisley
Missed one 185 38 Drake
|
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,808
|
Post by Gary on Jul 7, 2016 11:14:33 GMT -5
Decade top artist 1. Taylor Swift 2. Justin Bieber 3 Drake 4 Rihanna 5 Nicki Minaj
|
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,808
|
Post by Gary on Jul 7, 2016 11:31:28 GMT -5
New UK #1 hit indicators. Cash box/world number ones indicators Redefine what a re entry is Expanded honor roll of hits Updated artist bios
The re entry thing is in reponse to the recent practice of releasing every song at the same time for one week runs only to have them renter when it becomes a proper single
|
|
renfield75
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 1,627
|
Post by renfield75 on Jul 7, 2016 12:01:17 GMT -5
Joel can be so arbitrary sometimes. I just noticed that he split Jefferson Airplane and Jefferson Starship/Starship into two different listings as two different artists (?!?!?!?!?!?). But he still combines George Michael and Wham! as one act. Plus he's now giving Prince full co-billing for Sheila E's "A Love Bizarre" (which was never listed on the single's label) but doesn't list "The Monster" or "Love The Way You Lie" amongst Rihanna's hits because they were featured credits. This new edition seems a little dodgy in places.
|
|
|
Post by areyoureadytojump on Jul 7, 2016 12:54:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ListenToItTwice on Jul 7, 2016 22:11:36 GMT -5
I ordered my copy a month ago and don't have it yet.. :/
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,886
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 8, 2016 9:54:32 GMT -5
Whitburn's all-time points methodology is more cut and dry than Billboard's, and easier for anyone wanting to keep track/update, post-publication. Billboard's, being more complex, with weighting and such, would be more difficult- though I've been a fan of the latter methodology since introduced in 2008. (Also, prior to 2008, Billboard did not publish an all-time top acts list, to my knowledge).
Record Research, of course, includes pre-Hot 100 information. If Billboard did the same, Elvis Presley may rank No. 1.
Rihanna must have easily entered the top 10 with this year's info, and top 5 probably isn't that far out of reach.
|
|
jebsib
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by jebsib on Jul 8, 2016 13:47:44 GMT -5
Funny how fast things change. Taylor Swift was the #1 artist of the 2010's by a long stretch in this book (Info includes debuts up to Dec 2015)
Drake would be the #1 artist of the 2010s by a long shot (were the book to include info up to this week). Those crazy 20 debuts!
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,886
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 8, 2016 14:23:09 GMT -5
Gary- does the book still treat re-entries in the same manner, counting them as separate hits each time they chart (after a six-month gap)?
|
|
renfield75
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 1,627
|
Post by renfield75 on Jul 8, 2016 15:41:50 GMT -5
Gary- does the book still treat re-entries in the same manner, counting them as separate hits each time they chart (after a six-month gap)? I'm not Gary, but I can answer...Joel doesn't seem to have a strict rule on this. Re-entries like "I Will Always Love You" and "Billie Jean" and "All I Want For Christmas Is You" are listed separately. But iTunes preview tracks or songs that charted for a week when the album came out before being re-promoted later (like all the Taylor Swift or Drake tracks) are now combined into one with a footnote explaining the weeks when they charted. So that took a number of Taylor's chart entries from the previous edition away, when he listed them all as separate entries.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,692
|
Post by jenglisbe on Jul 8, 2016 15:51:46 GMT -5
Gary- does the book still treat re-entries in the same manner, counting them as separate hits each time they chart (after a six-month gap)? I'm not Gary, but I can answer...Joel doesn't seem to have a strict rule on this. Re-entries like "I Will Always Love You" and "Billie Jean" and "All I Want For Christmas Is You" are listed separately. But iTunes preview tracks or songs that charted for a week when the album came out before being re-promoted later (like all the Taylor Swift or Drake tracks) are now combined into one with a footnote explaining the weeks when they charted. So that took a number of Taylor's chart entries from the previous edition away, when he listed them all as separate entries. That makes sense to me and seems somewhat 'strict.' Basically if a single has two (or more) separate chart lives, then it counts twice. If it has a one-off from an initial release with no promotion and then charts when it's pushed, it isn't treated as a re-entry in the sense of a new chart run. Holiday singles are questionable; it seems odd to treat them all as one run, but it also seems odd to let them have so many chart runs.
|
|
renfield75
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 1,627
|
Post by renfield75 on Jul 8, 2016 16:15:21 GMT -5
I guess it just seems that there are so many other arbitrary things in this new edition (like separating Jefferson Airplane/Starship into two separate listings and changing credit on singles for certain artists). It also strikes me that he makes changes to keep people from surpassing Elvis on the all-time lists. Glee has more chart entries than Elvis? Well they don't count as a real act. Lil Wayne passes Elvis? Well featured credits no longer count. When Taylor and Drake pass Elvis I wouldn't be surprised if he lists countdown singles and charting album cuts separately and disqualifies them from all-time lists.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,692
|
Post by jenglisbe on Jul 8, 2016 17:26:40 GMT -5
I guess it just seems that there are so many other arbitrary things in this new edition (like separating Jefferson Airplane/Starship into two separate listings and changing credit on singles for certain artists). It also strikes me that he makes changes to keep people from surpassing Elvis on the all-time lists. Glee has more chart entries than Elvis? Well they don't count as a real act. Lil Wayne passes Elvis? Well featured credits no longer count. When Taylor and Drake pass Elvis I wouldn't be surprised if he lists countdown singles and charting album cuts separately and disqualifies them from all-time lists. I can see some of those being bothersome, especially the seemingly random credits where solo acts and bands are concerned. I get his Glee thing because even if the technical credit is the same, the actual artists on all those songs are wildly different. Counting them all the same would literally be like lumping Drake and Rihanna's hits all together as one act. I don't agree with feature credits not counting at all, but I do like the method some sources have used where they count less than a solo credit.
|
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,808
|
Post by Gary on Jul 8, 2016 18:58:08 GMT -5
In the 2010 book, High School Musical and Glee Cast were excluded due to their "various artists" nature. In 2010 Glee Cast would have been the 23rd biggest artist of the rock era and the top artist of the 2000s
Also excluded in the 2012 book for the same reason. Glee all time rank #2, right ahead of the Beatles
Featurings left in 2012 because a "featured" artist is exactly that. Not equal credit. Might only be in one verse or listed to promote the song and not even sing at all (i.e Rihanna featuring Paul McCartney)
The #2 artist of all time Glee Cast, also ecluded from the current book.
|
|
renfield75
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 1,627
|
Post by renfield75 on Jul 8, 2016 19:49:15 GMT -5
In the 2010 book, High School Musical and Glee Cast were excluded due to their "various artists" nature. In 2010 Glee Cast would have been the 23rd biggest artist of the rock era and the top artist of the 2000s Also excluded in the 2012 book for the same reason. Glee all time rank #2, right ahead of the Beatles Featurings left in 2012 because a "featured" artist is exactly that. Not equal credit. Might only be in one verse or listed to promote the song and not even sing at all (i.e Rihanna featuring Paul McCartney) The #2 artist of all time Glee Cast, also ecluded from the current book. He does give Paul McCartney full credit for "Four Five Seconds" though, because it's listed as Rihanna & Kanye West & Paul McCartney. Just because they used the word "and" instead of "featuring" Sir Paul gets full credit for that but Rihanna gets nothing for "Live Your Life" or "Love The Way You Lie". He also gives Aloe Blacc credit for "Wake Me Up" even though his name was never officially credited. It seems like this time he's just kinda choosing for himself what counts and what doesn't. But I don't envy Mr. Whitburn trying to make sense of the craziness of chart methodologies and artist credits over the last few years.
|
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,808
|
Post by Gary on Jul 8, 2016 20:10:17 GMT -5
In the 2010 book, High School Musical and Glee Cast were excluded due to their "various artists" nature. In 2010 Glee Cast would have been the 23rd biggest artist of the rock era and the top artist of the 2000s Also excluded in the 2012 book for the same reason. Glee all time rank #2, right ahead of the Beatles Featurings left in 2012 because a "featured" artist is exactly that. Not equal credit. Might only be in one verse or listed to promote the song and not even sing at all (i.e Rihanna featuring Paul McCartney) The #2 artist of all time Glee Cast, also ecluded from the current book. He does give Paul McCartney full credit for "Four Five Seconds" though, because it's listed as Rihanna & Kanye West & Paul McCartney. Just because they used the word "and" instead of "featuring" Sir Paul gets full credit for that but Rihanna gets nothing for "Live Your Life" or "Love The Way You Lie". He also gives Aloe Blacc credit for "Wake Me Up" even though his name was never officially credited. It seems like this time he's just kinda choosing for himself what counts and what doesn't. But I don't envy Mr. Whitburn trying to make sense of the craziness of chart methodologies and artist credits over the last few years. Ok used the wrong example perhaps. Doesn't change the meaning of the post though. Probably should have looked it up.
|
|
jebsib
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by jebsib on Jul 8, 2016 22:20:38 GMT -5
I think I figured it out. If the main artist is a DJ or instrumentalist - and the featured artist sings the majority of the song - the featured artist 'counts' and thus the "Featuring" Billing is replaced with the word "With". Thus, it is "Santana with Rob Thomas" or "Zedd with Selena Gomez" as opposed to "T.I. feat Rihanna".
Not as arbitrary as I once thought, but it begs explanation. I also am irritated as SOMETIMES a featured artist's hook really makes the song, but they are being cheated out of credit. Huge choruses by Rihanna and Kesha come to mind.
The Sheila E switch-up is a travesty.
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,886
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 9, 2016 11:29:36 GMT -5
It's rather silly to treat re-entries of the same exact track as a separate release, especially ones that re-enter annually.
In all respects, Billboard's all-time methodology has shown to be the more sensible one. And it's fair treatment for "featuring" credits (a featured act gets 30% of the points for a track's week-to-week showing- and even less of a percentage when there are multiple featured acts). The system for duets ("and" or "Duet With") also makes sense- that they split the points, rather than both receive the full amount.
|
|
Sherane Lamar
2x Platinum Member
Banned
Long live XXX
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 2,900
|
Post by Sherane Lamar on Jul 10, 2016 0:14:59 GMT -5
In the 2010 book, High School Musical and Glee Cast were excluded due to their "various artists" nature. In 2010 Glee Cast would have been the 23rd biggest artist of the rock era and the top artist of the 2000s Also excluded in the 2012 book for the same reason. Glee all time rank #2, right ahead of the Beatles Featurings left in 2012 because a "featured" artist is exactly that. Not equal credit. Might only be in one verse or listed to promote the song and not even sing at all (i.e Rihanna featuring Paul McCartney) The #2 artist of all time Glee Cast, also ecluded from the current book. Uh... what sort of methodology ranks Glee Cast as the biggest artist of the 2000's? Whatever it is seems like a highly flawed methodology. Inverse point system of this decade puts them at like #56 or something. It seems like the only methodology which would put Glee Cast that high (as well as the oddity of Taylor Swift being #7 of all time) is if you counted the songs for their peaks and ignored how long they stayed on the chart.
|
|
85la
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 3,742
|
Post by 85la on Jul 10, 2016 0:43:25 GMT -5
Decade top artist 1. Taylor Swift 2. Justin Bieber 3 Drake 4 Rihanna 5 Nicki Minaj Odd to not see Katy Perry in the top 5. Is it because the others have had more numerous hits and he gives more points to them?
|
|
jebsib
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by jebsib on Jul 10, 2016 5:30:32 GMT -5
^ Yes, Whitburn's methodology is based on peak position primarily. This worked well for 115 years (his chart Research dates back to 1890), but thanks to downloads and streaming, the system now seems off.
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,886
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 10, 2016 11:08:30 GMT -5
^I don't think Record Research has published books since that time, though. Billboard's next update of the top Hot 100 acts/singles should come in 2018, for the Hot 100's 60th anniversary. And while I think the Hot 100 all-time methodology is good, the all-time albums charts are somewhat problematic, in that unlike singles, especially from 1991-2009 (when catalog albums became eligible for the BB 200), some albums went on to sell significantly more after their initial chart run. (of course catalog tracks have sold significant units digitally, but even for a number of those, that success isn't reflected for a good number in the 25-position recurrent chart). Catalog-chart consideration should come into play for all-time albums lists.
|
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,808
|
Post by Gary on Jul 10, 2016 18:26:36 GMT -5
According to the book, Glee Cast was not only the top artist of the 2000s but the top artist of the 2010s as well & #2 all time. Excluded, because he membership of what "Glee Cast" was varied from song to song. Ranked that high likely because of the 283 chart "hits", 51 of which went top 40.
Katy Perry is not in the top 5 artist list for the decade but does rank #6
Taylor Swift got in from sheer volume. (85 listings)
Note: (includes Bubbling Under)
|
|
Khia
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2013
Posts: 3,730
|
Post by Khia on Jul 10, 2016 18:58:35 GMT -5
Glee Cast was the top artist of the 2000s? The show premiered in 2009.
|
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,808
|
Post by Gary on Jul 10, 2016 19:16:24 GMT -5
Glee Cast was the top artist of the 2000s? The show premiered in 2009. Yes, the 2010 edition of the book is where that comes from. Apparently, this edition happens to lump 2010 in with the 2000s because there is only one year. The 2012 and 2015 editions do not. Anyway, the word "excluded" is an important word here as the book does not actually include the Glee Cast in any list. Not defending it, jut reporting it. For what's its worth, a good idea to exclude "Glee Cast" from these lists
|
|
Sherane Lamar
2x Platinum Member
Banned
Long live XXX
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 2,900
|
Post by Sherane Lamar on Jul 10, 2016 21:25:40 GMT -5
^ Yes, Whitburn's methodology is based on peak position primarily. This worked well for 115 years (his chart Research dates back to 1890), but thanks to downloads and streaming, the system now seems off. He should exchange that for an "adjusted for inflation" inverse point system. Heck, he could just adjust his own system for the changes in chart eras. I feel bad for the artists of 1992-2007 They must have really been put off by such a system. When the turnover rate slowed down, the average peak became a lot lower. And they didn't have digital promotional singles or "album takeovers" to balance that out. Anyway, as somebody who only started following the Hot 100 in 2012, such a system seems ridiculous to me. Just adding an inverse of the peaks... lol. Actually, I created a system like this of my own, but using the debut position, not the peak position. Rather than try to equate this number with popularity, I equated it with "fanbase power", noting that fan driven artists such as One Direction often debuted huge and then dropped off afterwards, noting that artists with huge followings would have more charting songs overall, and noting that flash-in-the-pan artists like Iggy Azalea and Macklemore would have a few huge hits, but wouldn't really have any songs that debuted high. Of course, Glee Chart was #1, but I felt it was honestly justified. Any group with a fanbase willing to by 200 of their songs can be said to have a STRONG fanbase.
|
|
85la
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 3,742
|
Post by 85la on Jul 12, 2016 0:36:30 GMT -5
When does the tracking period end for this compilation? The very end of 2015, or some earlier date?
|
|
paulhaney
New Member
Joined: March 2016
Posts: 145
|
Post by paulhaney on Jul 12, 2016 6:41:49 GMT -5
When does the tracking period end for this compilation? The very end of 2015, or some earlier date? Everything that charted thru the final charts of 2015 (12/26/15) is included in the book. Everything from 2015 was updated through the charts dated 5/28/16.
|
|
jebsib
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by jebsib on Jul 12, 2016 18:16:47 GMT -5
I wonder if they plan on releasing this digitally like the last two. A great idea.
|
|
85la
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 3,742
|
Post by 85la on Jul 12, 2016 22:26:34 GMT -5
When does the tracking period end for this compilation? The very end of 2015, or some earlier date? Everything that charted thru the final charts of 2015 (12/26/15) is included in the book. Everything from 2015 was updated through the charts dated 5/28/16. That recently? The book must not have been published yet if it includes dates just two months ago.
|
|