Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2017 22:17:48 GMT -5
YouTube data is in for the week along with Spotify: YouTube22.8 - Despacito (+1.1) 19.6 - XO Tour Llif3 (+1.0) 19.4 - That's What I Like (-0.2) 18.2 - Mask Off (-5.2) 17.3 - I'm the One (=) 14.7 - Shape of You (-0.1) 14.6 - Congratulations (+1.7) 13.9 - HUMBLE. (-0.2) 13.9 - iSpy (-0.5) 11.8 - Rolex (-0.1) Spotify16.4 - Despacito (+0.4) 16.1 - HUMBLE. (-1.0) 13.6 - I'm the One (-0.9) 11.0 - XO Tour Llif3 (+0.1) 10.2 - Mask Off (=) 09.4 - DNA. (-0.7) 07.6 - Malibu (NEW) 07.5 - Congratulations (+0.5) 07.4 - 18002738255 (-1.5) 06.8 - That's What I Like (-0.3) Sales estimates still not up for the week, but anyone else get the sense Congratulations could challenge for the top 10 based on this major stream boost? Where did you get these data (especially the youtube one)? Do you have a top 50/100? For on-demand can you only find Spotify data? What about Apple Music and other on-demand streaming services? |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 0:14:56 GMT -5
Every week there is a number one. It is the opposite of special. It is the most common thing possible, because it is always happening.
Nearly 11% of these number ones (within the past 25 years or so) are spending 10+ weeks at the top. While this is notable, it is not "special."
|
|
|
|
Post by .It'sGriffin on May 21, 2017 1:06:41 GMT -5
Uh, by default there can only be 5 songs a year that make it 10 weeks and you're saying "many, many"... 5 songs per year x 20 years is 100 songs. So SHape of you is easily one of the biggest hits in 20 years. Next "Massive hit" is very subjective. If around one or 2 songs a year are going 10+ weeks that is not so massive in my opinion, because they are forgettable very soon. Also, by your logic "How do I live" was not a massive hit. May I ask, what was the bigger hit? Pillowtalk or Stressed Out? |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 1:30:25 GMT -5
"Massive hit" is very subjective. If around one or 2 songs a year are going 10+ weeks that is not so massive in my opinion, because they are forgettable very soon. Also, by your logic "How do I live" was not a massive hit. May I ask, what was the bigger hit? Pillowtalk or Stressed Out? Pillowtalk isn't the best example of a song that fell hard from a number 1 debut and stressed out isnt the best example of a number 2 song blocked from the top spot. Regardless, your point is akin to mine (If you're trying to say number two songs can be bigger hits than number one songs. If you're not, then idk wtf u smokin.) Obviously, stressed out was the bigger hit. |
|
|
|
Post by kcdawg13 on May 21, 2017 2:03:30 GMT -5
Holy shit. These discussions drag on forever and never come to a good conclusion, no wonder I barely visit the forum anymore.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 2:10:18 GMT -5
Holy s**t. These discussions drag on forever and never come to a good conclusion, no wonder I barely visit the forum anymore. Never come to a good conclusion? I think the conclusion is pretty clear. 10+ weeks is not special. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 2:12:49 GMT -5
In summary:
10+ weeks at no.1:
1. Is special because...
A. Over tens of millions of songs got released during the past decades, and only 32 of them got the 10+ week at the top honor.
B. Among the songs that top the charts, from 1958-now there's been 32 songs (about 3%) that did it. And you bring the onset point to the Nielson era 25 years ago about 10% of the chart toppers have done it. Not a high chance event
C. By default 52 weeks a year, that's like 5 or less songs a year to achieve that feat if you don't count the 2 extra week. 5 songs out of millions of releases. It's special or what?
D. If special or good is a characterization of literally how "special" or "wonderful" it is, then anything could be unique by philosophy or good if someone feels this way. 10+ weeks at no.1 is just like that for some people.
......
2. Is not special because...
A. Over the past 25 years, at least 1/3 of the weeks have been crowned by those voracious toppers. You got used to them, like, meh.
B. 10+ weeks at no.1 used to be more rare than 1% from 1958-1992. Now it's amplified to more than 10% chance. Gettin' less cool soon enough!
C. If "special" refers to top-notch commercial success, a 1-week chart topper or 0-week chart topper could beat them out if adopting real points system (like, Radioactive vs. We Found Love)
D. Again, if special or good is a characterization of literally how "special" or "wonderful" it is, then anything could be unique by philosophy or good if someone feels this way. 10+ weeks at no.1 is not like that for some people.
E. 10+ weeks at no.1 is like, no.1. It happens. So could we please move on?
|
|
Future Captain
4x Platinum Member
hi, i'm the visual representation of untreated mental illnesses
Joined: September 2014
Posts: 4,022 
My Charts
|
Post by Future Captain on May 21, 2017 4:23:28 GMT -5
Holy s**t. These discussions drag on forever and never come to a good conclusion, no wonder I barely visit the forum anymore. Never come to a good conclusion? I think the conclusion is pretty clear. 10+ weeks is not special. Believe it or not, you're not the first person who said that for a million times, and I'm not interested in being the person who had to deal with that for months to no end. A little reminder, just because nobody is interested to join beating the dead horse malevolently with you, doesn't mean you're right. Peace. |
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 35,628
|
Post by jenglisbe on May 21, 2017 7:43:00 GMT -5
In summary: 10+ weeks at no.1: 1. Is special because... A. Over tens of millions of songs got released during the past decades, and only 32 of them got the 10+ week at the top honor. Hard to argue against this point. Meanwhile "Despacito" should have a huge lead in sales this chart week. |
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,891
|
Post by Gary on May 21, 2017 8:42:07 GMT -5
In summary: 10+ weeks at no.1: 1. Is special because... A. Over tens of millions of songs got released during the past decades, and only 32 of them got the 10+ week at the top honor. Hard to argue against this point. Meanwhile "Despacito" should have a huge lead in sales this chart week. I did earlier This is "special" from the artist point of view, not the view we were discussing. Of the tens of millions of songs, it is rare to even get #1, it is even more are to get a 10+ week #1. --- I agree However, from a chart point of view(the point of view we were discussing)....it is a guarantee that 1 song each and every week will be #1---by definition, nothing special. This narrows the songs down from tens of millions to 1065. "Special" here depends on how you want to look at it. Do you want to consider all #1's since 1958 and say that wow, only 3 songs out of every one hundred accomplish this --- pretty special ...... OR Do you want to just look at recent trends and say that every 1 in 9 songs to hit #1 will do this.....a little more common in the current market Statistics mean different things to different people Time to Pick one and move on. |
|
|
|
Post by Rose "Payola" Nylund on May 21, 2017 8:50:11 GMT -5
Or maybe we just make our own conclusions from it and move on. Seriously, this isn't a facts based discussion. You're literally arguing over how the other chooses to interpret the facts and here's another fun fact: nobody is wrong.
|
|
Glove Slap
Administrator
Sweetheart
Downloading ༺༒༻ Possibilities
Joined: January 2007
Posts: 29,516
Staff
|
Post by Glove Slap on May 21, 2017 9:00:00 GMT -5
Or maybe we just make our own conclusions from it and move on. Seriously, this isn't a facts based discussion. You're literally arguing over how the other chooses to interpret the facts and here's another fun fact: nobody is wrong. Unless it doesn't make the year-end chart. Then things are so terrible that they should just delete the masters :sip2: . |
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,891
|
Post by Gary on May 21, 2017 9:03:23 GMT -5
Or maybe we just make our own conclusions from it and move on. Seriously, this isn't a facts based discussion. You're literally arguing over how the other chooses to interpret the facts and here's another fun fact: nobody is wrong. What I posted were the three points being made. I said pick one and move on, I suppose a 4th conclusion could be made too... So we said the same thing  |
|
|
|
Post by .It'sGriffin on May 21, 2017 9:05:59 GMT -5
May I ask, what was the bigger hit? Pillowtalk or Stressed Out? Pillowtalk isn't the best example of a song that fell hard from a number 1 debut and stressed out isnt the best example of a number 2 song blocked from the top spot. Regardless, your point is akin to mine (If you're trying to say number two songs can be bigger hits than number one songs. If you're not, then idk wtf u smokin.) Obviously, stressed out was the bigger hit. I used them because they surfaced around the same time (not really). |
|
|
|
Post by Rose "Payola" Nylund on May 21, 2017 11:15:26 GMT -5
Or maybe we just make our own conclusions from it and move on. Seriously, this isn't a facts based discussion. You're literally arguing over how the other chooses to interpret the facts and here's another fun fact: nobody is wrong. What I posted were the three points being made. I said pick one and move on, I suppose a 4th conclusion could be made too... So we said the same thing I didn't mean you, I meant the others.  Though you do get mad at Billboard for how they interpret them, even though they aren't wrong either. Though it's helpful to reminder readers of Billboard that their presentation of the facts is a bit skewed too. |
|
DJ General
5x Platinum Member
Dupe
Joined: March 2010
Posts: 5,932
|
Post by DJ General on May 21, 2017 11:36:04 GMT -5
10% of songs is extremely special to me. What's the point of an elusive club if no one is part of it?
|
|
85la
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 3,919
|
Post by 85la on May 21, 2017 16:48:32 GMT -5
In summary: 10+ weeks at no.1: 2. Is not special because... A. Over the past 25 years, at least 1/3 of the weeks have been crowned by those voracious toppers. You got used to them, like, meh.B. 10+ weeks at no.1 used to be more rare than 1% from 1958-1992. Now it's amplified to more than 10% chance. Gettin' less cool soon enough! C. If "special" refers to top-notch commercial success, a 1-week chart topper or 0-week chart topper could beat them out if adopting real points system (like, Radioactive vs. We Found Love) D. Again, if special or good is a characterization of literally how "special" or "wonderful" it is, then anything could be unique by philosophy or good if someone feels this way. 10+ weeks at no.1 is not like that for some people. E. 10+ weeks at no.1 is like, no.1. It happens. So could we please move on? To me this is the key point. The fact that 10% or whatever of #1 songs have made it to 10+ weeks over the past 25 years does not equate to 10% of the time, proportionately, that they are at the top. Obviously, since they spend ten or more weeks at the top, they take up more time at the #1 position, as was noted maybe around 30% of weeks. So to put it another way, for roughly one third of the weeks out of the year, a song that will end up spending 10+ weeks at #1 will be holding the top spot (and this is on average over the past 25 years, it's becoming increasingly more common). This, to me, and I'd imagine to many other people, does not seem very "rare". |
|
Au$tin
Diamond Member
Pop Culture Guru
Grrrrrrrrrr. Fuckity fuck why don't you watch my film before you judge it? FURY.
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 54,624
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his/him
|
Post by Au$tin on May 21, 2017 17:50:40 GMT -5
IMO, it's special to the song/artist when they reach that milestone. Like, it's a huge deal to be that successful.
However, it's not that special of a chart feat because of how frequent it is.
And this is where the argument comes from. It's different depending on how you look at it. Which makes this nearly weekly discussion so boring and ridiculous.
|
|
DistrictTwelve
2x Platinum Member
comfort you can feel
Joined: September 2016
Posts: 2,954
Pronouns: he/him
|
Post by DistrictTwelve on May 21, 2017 19:31:40 GMT -5
Could 'Crying In The Club' debut pretty high? I feel out of place asking this question with the previous replies, lol.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 20:53:55 GMT -5
What about an artist debuting two songs in top 10 simultaneously? Only 2 artists since the beginning of 2017 in the entire history have done it
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 21:45:04 GMT -5
What about an artist debuting two songs in top 10 simultaneously? Only 2 artists since the beginning of 2017 in the entire history have done it This is perfect for demonstrating my point. Not even the Beatles could debut 2 in the top 10! |
|
|
|
Post by Golden Bluebird on May 21, 2017 22:28:36 GMT -5
What about an artist debuting two songs in top 10 simultaneously? Only 2 artists since the beginning of 2017 in the entire history have done it This is perfect for demonstrating my point. Not even the Beatles could debut 2 in the top 10! Comparing the chart performance of artists in the 2010s to artists in the 1960s is not a good way of determining how special a certain milestone is. You have to factor in the changes the music industry has experienced since then that allowed these milestones to occur today but not back then. |
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,891
|
Post by Gary on May 21, 2017 22:36:53 GMT -5
What about an artist debuting two songs in top 10 simultaneously? Only 2 artists since the beginning of 2017 in the entire history have done it This is perfect for demonstrating my point. Not even the Beatles could debut 2 in the top 10! They did. Just Not simultaneously They did it 4 times(3 through 1970). Until 1995 they were the only artist to do it at all. The 4th time occurred in 1996 |
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 35,628
|
Post by jenglisbe on May 21, 2017 22:54:41 GMT -5
What about an artist debuting two songs in top 10 simultaneously? Only 2 artists since the beginning of 2017 in the entire history have done it This is perfect for demonstrating my point. Not even the Beatles could debut 2 in the top 10! Did they ever release two songs at the same time for it to even be a possibility? I actually think Hot 100 records should start fresh with the streaming era. The charts are no longer even comparable. It's a stretch post-BDS/Soundscan, but at least the Hot 100 was still sales and airplay before and after 1991. With the inclusion of streaming, it's not parallel at all really. |
|
|
|
Post by emperortigerstar on May 21, 2017 23:23:12 GMT -5
Between 1958 and 1992 a grand total of TWO songs spent 10 weeks at #1 In the 25 years since, there have been 32. 10+ weeks at #1 before 1992 was special, now not so much. I will bet it will happen again at least one more time before the year is out. Billboard though still writes these up as "special" events. Saying that out of 1065 #1's ONLY 3% have made it to double digits. Hopefully Billboard will quit doing that at some point I'd say it'd be good to "inflate" the 10 week achievement to 12. But even 12 is becoming more crowded. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2017 0:07:25 GMT -5
You're all replying to my comment with my own point smh...
|
|
inverse
2x Platinum Member
Your mind is in disturbia...
Joined: December 2015
Posts: 2,095
|
Post by inverse on May 22, 2017 0:37:15 GMT -5
I honestly think it's ridiculously stupid to say that a song that hits number 1 for ten weeks isn't a huge hit or isn't special. Honestly to be on the hot 100 at all you need to have a pretty big amount of buzz in the first place, to hit number 1 for 10 weeks only like 40 songs have ever done, when you look at the history of all songs released that's the elite crowd.
I also think the How Do I Love point is really good, that song (unfortunately) was a much bigger hit than Blurred Lines, Low, or Irreplaceable and it peaked at 2.
I do think that maybe DEflating it to like 7 from 10 for songs before 1990 might be reasonable.
|
|
Harx
5x Platinum Member
Joined: August 2016
Posts: 5,049
|
Post by Harx on May 22, 2017 0:57:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by kcdawg13 on May 22, 2017 4:31:51 GMT -5
Back to the topic, does anyone have an early prediction for Strip That Down, Crying in the Club, and Swish Swish's first week sales?
|
|
Future Captain
4x Platinum Member
hi, i'm the visual representation of untreated mental illnesses
Joined: September 2014
Posts: 4,022
My Charts
|
Post by Future Captain on May 22, 2017 6:49:56 GMT -5
Back to the topic, does anyone have an early prediction for Strip That Down, Crying in the Club, and Swish Swish's first week sales? That's what kworb is for Strip That Down - 47k Swish Swish - 33k Crying in the Club - 22k |
|
