paulhaney
New Member
Joined: March 2016
Posts: 145 
|
Post by paulhaney on Jul 4, 2019 9:51:28 GMT -5
I am happy to report that this edition of Top Pop Singles is outselling the past 2 editions by a wide margin! We were concerned that it wouldn't sell as much, due to the nature of the music dominating the charts these days, but that's clearly not the case.
|
|
jebsib
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by jebsib on Jul 4, 2019 10:15:46 GMT -5
As Objective as pop chart peaks / weeks statistics are, music fans are always very emotional and subjective, so you're never going to please everyone with methodology.
Record Research has always done a great job with their ranks and calculations.
I think this is the first time they've included Era-Weighting, though (streaming titles being worth a different amount than other time periods) which shows signs of subjective rulings, but hey - what else are you going to do these days?
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,872
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 4, 2019 10:22:53 GMT -5
Yes, paul- I had commented in an earlier post that I recalled AOL, Yahoo, etc. contributing to the Hot 100 with the early streaming info. :) I haven't received the book as of yet, so looking forward to seeing it. Is the streaming weight the same for 2007-2018? And glad to hear about the sales.
jebsib- true. Weightings have become necessary. Billboard weighs eras throughout the rock era differently, based on turnover trends, which makes sense since Billboard's methodology assigns points for weekly positions. If RR was ever going to follow suit, I think it would make most sense for 1991-on, when BDS/SoundScan entered the mix.
|
|
rockgolf
2x Platinum Member
Pop music fanatic since the days of 7" 45 RPM records.
Joined: August 2018
Posts: 2,027
Pronouns: he/him/his
|
Post by rockgolf on Jul 4, 2019 10:35:25 GMT -5
This is just one way to rank artists. So, they should only get credit if they have a big enough hit??? I have huge respect for Record Research. I've bought at least 4 Top Pop Hits editions and two more Top 40 Hits books and about a dozen other of their publications. But the top 500 acts leaves me unsatisfied. Whitburn seems to be using a simple inverse point scoring (100 - HP), so 10 #91 hits or 4 #76 songs, or (more practically) 2 #51 hits are worth the same as a #1 hit. That's not an accurate reflection of chart impact. (Or at least it feels that way.) Most of Benton's hits peaked waaay outside the top 40. He should be maybe 100-200 on the chart, not just outside the top 50. In my opinion. Terrell was given full credit for her Marvin Gaye duets, including one where she didn't even perform (because she was too ill) but Motown kept her name on the label. |
|
RainMan94
New Member
Joined: July 2012
Posts: 136
|
Post by RainMan94 on Jul 4, 2019 10:35:36 GMT -5
This doesn’t really relate to this edition of Top Pop Singles, but does anyone know of any similar publications that has a similar comprehensive listing of the UK charts? I’ve recently been trying to research that chart but can’t get a good list since the chart’s inception. Thanks for any info!
|
|
rockgolf
2x Platinum Member
Pop music fanatic since the days of 7" 45 RPM records.
Joined: August 2018
Posts: 2,027
Pronouns: he/him/his
|
Post by rockgolf on Jul 4, 2019 10:42:50 GMT -5
This doesn’t really relate to this edition of Top Pop Singles, but does anyone know of any similar publications that has a similar comprehensive listing of the UK charts? I’ve recently been trying to research that chart but can’t get a good list since the chart’s inception. Thanks for any info! Guinness used to do a good job, but they stopped years ago. The website www.officialcharts.com/archive/ is a great on-line resource, but it's no Whitburn. Most recent I know of is Virgin Book of British Hit Singles from 2010, in 2 volumes. Search for British Hit Singles, on amazon.co.uk for more. |
|
paulhaney
New Member
Joined: March 2016
Posts: 145
|
Post by paulhaney on Jul 4, 2019 11:26:54 GMT -5
Every ranking system has its flaws. We give bonus points for those songs with multiple weeks at #1, 2 & 3, so the huge hits do get some extra credit.
|
|
rockgolf
2x Platinum Member
Pop music fanatic since the days of 7" 45 RPM records.
Joined: August 2018
Posts: 2,027
Pronouns: he/him/his
|
Post by rockgolf on Jul 4, 2019 11:32:23 GMT -5
Every ranking system has its flaws. We give bonus points for those songs with multiple weeks at #1, 2 & 3, so the huge hits do get some extra credit. Thanks for the insight. As long as The Beatles, Elvis & Madonna are higher than the Glee Cast... |
|
RainMan94
New Member
Joined: July 2012
Posts: 136
|
Post by RainMan94 on Jul 4, 2019 13:12:00 GMT -5
This doesn’t really relate to this edition of Top Pop Singles, but does anyone know of any similar publications that has a similar comprehensive listing of the UK charts? I’ve recently been trying to research that chart but can’t get a good list since the chart’s inception. Thanks for any info! Guinness used to do a good job, but they stopped years ago. The website www.officialcharts.com/archive/ is a great on-line resource, but it's no Whitburn. Most recent I know of is Virgin Book of British Hit Singles from 2010, in 2 volumes. Search for British Hit Singles, on amazon.co.uk for more. Thanks so much! I’ll check it out. |
|
jebsib
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by jebsib on Jul 4, 2019 13:41:52 GMT -5
Glee is excluded from the artist lists because of the unusual nature of the act and the fact that there are so many varied singers.
I haven't counted, but I would assume that Glee star Lea Michelle has sung on the majority of the tracks, so that would make her the actual voice that appears on the most Hot 100 entries (regardless of Listed Artist)
|
|
thebops
New Member
Joined: October 2012
Posts: 108
|
Post by thebops on Jul 6, 2019 15:32:16 GMT -5
Joel Whitburn Top Artists 1 1 Elvis Presley 2 2 Beatles 5 3 Elton John 4 4 Madonna 3 5 Mariah Carey 8 6 Stevie Wonder 6 7 Michael Jackson 9 8 Janet Jackson 10 9 James Brown 12 10 Rolling Stones 13 11 Aretha Franklin 15 12 Pay Boone 38 13 Drake 14 14 Whitney Houston 20 15 Prince 17 16 Rod Stewart 18 17 Paul McCartney 19 18 Marvin Gaye 11 19 Rihanna 21 20 Ray Charles I've never been a big fan of Whitburn's process for the top 500 acts. Acts such as Brook Benton, and Tammi Terrell were making the list out of sheer volume of minor hits. I assume both have fallen down if not off. Interesting changes - Taylor Swift was the #7 all time artist in the 2015 book but now not even in the Top 20? I'm looking forward to receiving my copy. Looking by my front door every day! |
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,872
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 6, 2019 17:15:02 GMT -5
Also looking forward to seeing/reading about the changes and such.
|
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,641
|
Post by Gary on Jul 6, 2019 22:26:10 GMT -5
All of the top artists who were the big stars from 2007 to 2015 will see big drops in rankings due to the streaming adjustment, including Taylor Swift
|
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,641
|
Post by Gary on Jul 6, 2019 22:28:15 GMT -5
Basically instead of a 100-90-80-70-60 point distribution for the top 10
They now have 70-60-50-40-30
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,872
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 8, 2019 10:59:29 GMT -5
Book has arrived. Skimmed through- looks good. Record Research ain't playing with the featuring credits.  Now, they're not even counted among an act's hits or hits counts. I think the last edition listed "Featuring" credits listed in the featured act's section, after the hits on which that act was billed as lead. And they received some points- now, zilch. As mentioned prior, the move to combine listings for annual holiday re-entries is a good one- the same exact hit getting a new set of points each year doesn't make much sense, so kudos on that. The "Physical" entry (Glee Cast) credits it as "With Olivia Newton-John," though I had thought it was "Featuring." RE "Classic Non-Hot 100" listings- Whitney Houston doesn't have any classics listed; "All At Once" and "If You Say My Eyes Are Beautiful" could be listed under her (unless there's a rule for classics listings I overlooked). Also- RE Madonna- "Into the Groove," "Sooner or Later" and "Where's the Party," sure- but, 1994 "Forbidden Love"? And I love "Over and Over," but that just seems like a random listing. |
|
jebsib
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by jebsib on Jul 8, 2019 11:29:53 GMT -5
HolidayGuy - the Featuring dynamic has been like that for the last 2 editions (I believe - maybe just the last one, but definitely for awhile).
It makes sense from a space conservation perspective, but is frustrating when you want a big artist's chronological output.
About the Glee / ONJ billing - It WAS listed as 'featuring' on the Hot 100.
I think RR takes a few liberties to help buffer big artist point tallies (as I believe "with" is treated as a duet, whereas "feat" would be relegated to the 'featuring credit' and thus a non-appearance.)
Agreed - I love "Over & Over", but maybe huge dance club hits / famous videos like "Burning Up", or "Physical Attraction" would be more suitable.
"All at Once" even got on R&R's AC chart, so it should be with Whitney's classics.
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,872
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 8, 2019 11:40:34 GMT -5
^Thanks. I wasn't sure when "featuring" hits were removed from the featured act's list of entries (and points) with the last edition.
RR may take some liberties, sure- for instance, lumping the Wham! hits with George Michael. For "Physical," the "With" credit makes sense, given that Olivia's participation is more than just a typical "featuring" credit/role. She's not just singing the chorus, for instance.
"All at Once" was a B-side for "Saving All My Love For You," so it is listed in that spot. I wonder if other listed "Classics" had B-side lives, too. That section is great for many country acts, whose biggest hits occurred before the switch to BDS/SoundScan.
|
|
jebsib
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by jebsib on Jul 8, 2019 11:43:49 GMT -5
I agree that George Michael / Wham! or Gloria Estefan / Miami Sound Machine should be lumped together as they are essentially the same entity.
Same with all of Paul McCartney's solo iterations.
In that spirit, keeping Phil and Genesis separate also makes sense.
RR may take a few liberties, but the vast majority of their decisions are very sound.
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,872
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 8, 2019 11:59:39 GMT -5
Yes, agreed. I believe Billboard lumps Gloria/MSM and Paul M./Wings, though perhaps not Wham! with George M. When it posted the first top 100 artists list, it didn't mention the latter in the explanation for solo acts/group credits.
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,872
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 8, 2019 13:51:30 GMT -5
jeb- looked some more observation about the "featuring" credits- "Me Against the Music" was a "Featuring Madonna," though it's credited as "With Madonna." As with Olivia/"Physical," Madonna's role was pretty prominent, though.
paul, if you're reading- could you shed some light on the adjustments to some singles initially credited as "Featuring," though that are credited as "With" in the new edition? Also0 a quick FYI for the future0 under Vicki Lawrence's entry- "Mama's Family" ran until 1990. :)
|
|
paulhaney
New Member
Joined: March 2016
Posts: 145
|
Post by paulhaney on Jul 8, 2019 14:13:18 GMT -5
As far as the "with" vs "featuring", our reasoning on that is to show "with" when it's more of a straight duet OR it's the singer on a producer's song (think Quincy Jones/James Ingram). The featuring credits for a 20 second guest rap got to be SO common, that we had to come up with a solution, more to save pages than anything. So far, we've gotten WAY more compliments than complaints on that front.
As far as the "Hot 100 Classics" goes, there is no doubt some subjective selection going on there. We consider those listings to be a "bonus" feature and everybody will have their own opinions on what should or shouldn't be included. In this case, it's our book, our picks!
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,872
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 8, 2019 14:27:32 GMT -5
^Indeed. And thanks for the explanation. Thus with non-rap featurings such as the three No. 1s featuring Rihanna, "Despacito/Justin Bieber, etc.- those don't come off as straight duets.
I think the featurings shift is another good move, so no complaints from me. :) Did you guys revisit all the featuring-credit tracks to make determinations as to whether to show it as "featuring" or "with"? If so, bravo for the dedication and time.
|
|
paulhaney
New Member
Joined: March 2016
Posts: 145
|
Post by paulhaney on Jul 8, 2019 14:50:48 GMT -5
Did you guys revisit all the featuring-credit tracks to make determinations as to whether to show it as "featuring" or "with"? If so, bravo for the dedication and time. Between me and Joel, I think we caught most of them. Of course, there could be some that slipped thru the cracks, and some are too close to call either way. We generally try to address them as soon as they debut on the chart and have been doing it that way for several years now. |
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,872
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 12, 2019 14:53:38 GMT -5
^Good practice; don't want to get too bogged down when it comes time for the next book. :)
I've picked up where the new edition of Top Pop Singles left off, keeping a running database of Hot 100/Bubbling Under entries since the Jan. 5 chart. For now, I'm following the book and leaving all "Featuring" tracks under the lead act. Later on, I may go through to see if any should be "With," given the prominence of the featured act.
paul, a note- "Blue Christmas" and "Jingle Bells" are listed in the book as having debuted 12/29/18, when they, it looks, entered on 1/5/19. Though I'm glad they suck in this edition. ;)
|
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,641
|
Post by Gary on Jul 12, 2019 19:23:39 GMT -5
Years back, I started that way by building my own database off the books then decided eventually to just build the whole thing
|
|
rockgolf
2x Platinum Member
Pop music fanatic since the days of 7" 45 RPM records.
Joined: August 2018
Posts: 2,027
Pronouns: he/him/his
|
Post by rockgolf on Jul 12, 2019 21:08:01 GMT -5
paul, a note- "Blue Christmas" and "Jingle Bells" are listed in the book as having debuted 12/29/18, when they, it looks, entered on 1/5/19. Though I'm glad they suck in this edition.  *Snuck |
|
Gary
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 45,641
|
Post by Gary on Jul 12, 2019 21:49:05 GMT -5
I like the way he originally wrote it better
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,872
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 13, 2019 7:00:38 GMT -5
^I end up editing most of my posts because of a typo, but I'll leave that one in. Though the description doesn't fit them, especially "Blue Christmas." hehe One holiday song I noticed has two listings is "Run Rudolph Run"- but, the first listing had a B-side that has its own peak listed, thus that explains the multiple listings. I can't reiterate the good move in giving fewer points to 2007-present material. Just looking at some of this year's entries alone, from "album bombs"- it's too much. Same for featured acts with relatively small roles in tracks not receiving credit for those. |
|
rockgolf
2x Platinum Member
Pop music fanatic since the days of 7" 45 RPM records.
Joined: August 2018
Posts: 2,027
Pronouns: he/him/his
|
Post by rockgolf on Jul 13, 2019 7:24:23 GMT -5
HolidayGuy: You diss Jingle Bells?!? You may need to change your name!
|
|
paulhaney
New Member
Joined: March 2016
Posts: 145
|
Post by paulhaney on Jul 13, 2019 7:26:56 GMT -5
paul, a note- "Blue Christmas" and "Jingle Bells" are listed in the book as having debuted 12/29/18, when they, it looks, entered on 1/5/19. Though I'm glad they suck in this edition. It's always been Joel's policy to give those Christmas songs a debut/peak date in the December in which they are popular, thus the 2018 dates (even though 1/5/19 is technically correct). That policy is also in effect for the Pop Annual. |
|
