iHype.
4x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2014
Posts: 4,549
|
Post by iHype. on Feb 26, 2021 19:41:19 GMT -5
|
|
jodakyellow
Platinum Member
Joined: July 2018
Posts: 1,497
|
Post by jodakyellow on Feb 27, 2021 1:24:16 GMT -5
Wowowowowowowow THANK YOU... the fact that Taylor’s longevity could easily take her to #2, though! Also cool to see that legacy acts like Fleetwood Mac and Queen can still move up significantly in their old age Edit: also, since the original list had 125 artists for Billboard’s 125th anniversary as a publication, maybe you can give us 127 artists now?  |
|
|
|
Post by thegreatdivine on Feb 27, 2021 1:55:27 GMT -5
Good job. This is done really well.
Drake will eventually catch up to Taylor Swift. Taylor will be handicapped by the fact that her singles don't serve the longevity they used to so all she pretty much has are points from her albums. Drake's albums in turn, chart just as well and he also remains a solid force on the Hot 100. If the list doesn't get officially updated again till say 2025, by then, they may be tied up/he may have surpassed her.
But more importantly, I think what this list highlights is the fact that we have a strong set of icons/future legends from our time who have managed to reach (and even in some cases, surpass) the greatness and achievements of legends from decades ago. Many of these people could retire today because their legacies are already set in the history books. That's nice to know.
|
|
jodakyellow
Platinum Member
Joined: July 2018
Posts: 1,497
|
Post by jodakyellow on Feb 27, 2021 3:27:57 GMT -5
^ you’re right about Drake, unless his output really slows down (like, a Rihanna-level slowdown) — Taylor’s re-recordings will accelerate her points accumulation, even if just for a short while.
Just for fun: who’s the highest-ranking artist here who y’all don’t typically think of as having been a superstar? For me it’s Rod Stewart at #14; I had no idea his career was on that level
|
|
jodakyellow
Platinum Member
Joined: July 2018
Posts: 1,497
|
Post by jodakyellow on Feb 27, 2021 3:35:22 GMT -5
iHype. Shouldn’t it be “Top Album Sales” starting from the date that songs’ points started counting toward the Billboard 200? Otherwise those songs’ points end up being counted twice... Artist of the Year uses Billboard Hot 100 + Top Album Sales + others for that reason
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreatdivine on Feb 27, 2021 4:39:35 GMT -5
^ you’re right about Drake, unless his output really slows down (like, a Rihanna-level slowdown) — Taylor’s re-recordings will accelerate her points accumulation, even if just for a short while. Just for fun: who’s the highest-ranking artist here who y’all don’t typically think of as having been a superstar? For me it’s Rod Stewart at #14; I had no idea his career was on that level I think the one thing we can count on when it comes to Drake is that he won't slow down his output and definitely not the way Rihanna has. I can easily see him in the top 2/3 at the end of this decade. As for Taylor, I'm very interested in seeing how she rolls out her rerecorded albums. Is the plan to re-release her first 6 albums or only a select few of them? It's interesting to me that she's re-releasing Fearless first because that's her second album, not her first and what do the re-releases mean as far as brand new albums from her go? A lot to unpack there. For me, it's Chicago. I didn't really know about them growing up and it's interesting seeing them that high up. |
|
|
|
Post by tobichartmaster on Feb 27, 2021 4:49:01 GMT -5
Streaming changed the charts. I noticed that when Ed had so many hits in the UK inside the top20 so they had to change the rules. Capital Bra broke the decades old Beatles record of 11 #1 hits in Germany in a span of just 12 months, thanks to streaming.
Billboard needs to do a really good job in adjusting this chart. 8 of the 10 longest running singles inside the top10 of the hot100 are from the last 5 years. All will contribute lucrative points towards an artists total. Furthermore hit singles will directly count towards album units and support the album to stay high.
Let‘s see. Beyonce was the #4 artist of the 2000s and Post Malone #10 of the 10s. Beyonce also sealed a #22 placement in the 10s, so Post Malone should have work to do. However just the year 2020 made him eclipse her by 1 Million chart points.
@jodakyyellow Herb Alpert is the first name on the list that doesn‘t scream music superstar in my opinion.
|
|
Lost In Musical Reverie
2x Platinum Member
"Everything seems nice, but if you look twice, you can see it's all lies"
Joined: July 2019
Posts: 2,297 
|
Post by Lost In Musical Reverie on Feb 27, 2021 7:43:56 GMT -5
I agree with thegreatdivine that Chicago is the biggest surprise to see ranked this high. I knew they had consistent success, but enough to surpass Janet, Whitney, and Elvis? What a phenomenal debut for Post Malone - king of chart longevity (both on the Hot 100 and Billboard 200) 🔥 Delighted to see Queen and Fleetwood Mac getting a boost too. They absolutely deserve it! |
|
|
|
Post by tobichartmaster on Feb 27, 2021 8:45:54 GMT -5
Post Malone gained at least 7,6 Million points over the past 14 months. Is this a gain in points the superstar artists from other generations can keep up with in a similar time frame?
|
|
kalmanta
Gold Member
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 774
|
Post by kalmanta on Feb 27, 2021 8:51:29 GMT -5
I honestly didn’t expect Post Malone to already be over Ed. This chart seriously needs to be adjusted, especially achievements from the streaming era have to be weighted down.
|
|
|
|
Post by neverduplicated on Feb 27, 2021 10:10:44 GMT -5
Thank you so much for doing this! It blows my mind that Taylor and Drake have both gotten themselves so high in such a short time whilst still being two the top artists of the past several years and with no end in sight for their success. We might be looking at them and the Beatles as the top 3 artists of all time sometime this decade. I agree that Drake has a good chance of overtaking Taylor, but her re-recordings will mean that over the next year she will be regularly charting 7+ albums on the Billboard 200 and could get 100+ new entries on the Hot 100, so I doubt Drake will be gaining on her (or gaining much) for the next year. Either way Taylor looks poised to take the #1 female spot, and I can't see any active artists challenging that. If she can manage to get big hit singles again, that could be a game changer for her vs. Drake. iHype., do you have any idea how many points Mariah gets from her Christmas reign every year? I'm curious if she has enough juice to overtake Elton John and The Rolling Stones someday. Expect Ariana to fly into the top 100 soon, and The Weeknd into the top 50 if he has another hit album after After Hours. I know it doesn't really make sense to combine solo acts and groups, but just as a thought it is interesting that if you combine Beyonce and Destiny's Child, she would place at #14. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreatdivine on Feb 27, 2021 12:16:55 GMT -5
neverduplicated the edge Taylor currently has over Drake is the fact that she had 3 huge album eras (not just SPS wise but inverse points wise) on the Billboard 200. Those 3 eras are her self-titled era, Fearless and 1989 (2 of those happened before Drake even released his debut album). Her Hot 100 hits haven't served longevity since the 1989 era and they fall off quicker with every new era. If Folklore and Evermore can still be stable in the top 20/30/40 a year after their release then that's a good sign but basically the only place she can gain a substantial amount of chart points from now is on the Billboard 200. I also think that when she releases her re-recorded albums, people will focus on those and that will cause the original albums to fall off. I doubt the re-recordings do as much damage as people imagine they will, especially long-term. Either way, Taylor's spot in the top 5 is secured so she's good. That she's still this successful after 15 years is a huge achievement in and of itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreatdivine on Feb 27, 2021 12:19:59 GMT -5
I honestly didn’t expect Post Malone to already be over Ed. This chart seriously needs to be adjusted, especially achievements from the streaming era have to be weighted down. They're already adjusted and weighed down. The points Post Malone gained are based on his performance on both the Billboard 200 and the Hot 100 where he has remained a dominant and consistent force. His 4 year-old album still moves upwards of 500K units every year on the Billboard 200, something that's only manageable because it still charts in the top 50 even after that many years. That's a testament to his strength as a mainstream artist. It's not something he or anyone else should be punished for because every act benefits from streaming, even legacy acts. |
|
nickd
4x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2017
Posts: 4,411 
|
Post by nickd on Feb 27, 2021 12:55:00 GMT -5
I honestly didn’t expect Post Malone to already be over Ed. This chart seriously needs to be adjusted, especially achievements from the streaming era have to be weighted down. I would say that Post Malone being over Ed kind of makes sense. Ed Sheeran should probably be ahead if this was an international chart, but Post is bigger in the US. For Ed, only Divide was a really huge era in the US, and yet... Stoney, which is Post's smallest album, is not far below on the Billboard 200 this week despite being a few months older (#66 for Stoney vs #57 for Divide). So Post Malone has 3 huge albums/era in the US, while Ed has only one huge album (Divide), one big one (Multiply), one medium one (No 6 Collaborations) and one small one (Plus). |
|
kalmanta
Gold Member
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 774
|
Post by kalmanta on Feb 27, 2021 13:40:55 GMT -5
I honestly didn’t expect Post Malone to already be over Ed. This chart seriously needs to be adjusted, especially achievements from the streaming era have to be weighted down. They're already adjusted and weighed down. The points Post Malone gained are based on his performance on both the Billboard 200 and the Hot 100 where he has remained a dominant and consistent force. His 4 year-old album still moves upwards of 500K units every year on the Billboard 200, something that's only manageable because it still charts in the top 50 even after that many years. That's a testament to his strength as a mainstream artist. It's not something he or anyone else should be punished for because every act benefits from streaming, even legacy acts. People back in the day had to buy a full body of work, investing some bucks of hard-earned money, mostly not because they love one it two songs, but the whole record. Fast forward to today, one mega song is enough to fuel the „sales“ of an album in order for it to chart. That‘s a clear advantage for albums of the streaming generation, and the chart-placements and certifications are proving my point. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreatdivine on Feb 27, 2021 14:23:21 GMT -5
They're already adjusted and weighed down. The points Post Malone gained are based on his performance on both the Billboard 200 and the Hot 100 where he has remained a dominant and consistent force. His 4 year-old album still moves upwards of 500K units every year on the Billboard 200, something that's only manageable because it still charts in the top 50 even after that many years. That's a testament to his strength as a mainstream artist. It's not something he or anyone else should be punished for because every act benefits from streaming, even legacy acts. People back in the day had to buy a full body of work, investing some bucks of hard-earned money, mostly not because they love one it two songs, but the whole record. Fast forward to today, one mega song is enough to fuel the „sales“ of an album in order for it to chart. That‘s a clear advantage for albums of the streaming generation, and the chart-placements and certifications are proving my point. Um, this is so not true, lol. MC Hammer sold 21 million copies of his Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em album because no one could find U Can't Touch This as a single to buy and they had to buy his album as a result. There are many other older albums which only sold as much as they did because of 1 or 2 songs which appeared on the album. There's nothing happening in the music industry today that hasn't happened in some shape or form in the past. |
|
|
|
Post by tobichartmaster on Feb 27, 2021 18:16:26 GMT -5
When Drake reaches the second position at 37M chart points, is the more likely scenario that he declines significantly to create more points and stays #2 or he really goes all the way, collects 14 Million more chart points for #1 all time?
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreatdivine on Feb 27, 2021 18:46:55 GMT -5
When Drake reaches the second position at 37M chart points, is the more likely scenario that he declines significantly to create more points and stays #2 or he really goes all the way, collects 14 Million more chart points for #1 all time? No one knows what will happen. We'll just have to wait and see. |
|
jodakyellow
Platinum Member
Joined: July 2018
Posts: 1,497
|
Post by jodakyellow on Feb 27, 2021 19:04:16 GMT -5
People back in the day had to buy a full body of work, investing some bucks of hard-earned money, mostly not because they love one it two songs, but the whole record. Fast forward to today, one mega song is enough to fuel the „sales“ of an album in order for it to chart. That‘s a clear advantage for albums of the streaming generation, and the chart-placements and certifications are proving my point. Um, this is so not true, lol. MC Hammer sold 21 million copies of his Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em album because no one could find U Can't Touch This as a single to buy and they had to buy his album as a result. There are many other older albums which only sold as much as they did because of 1 or 2 songs which appeared on the album. There's nothing happening in the music industry today that hasn't happened in some shape or form in the past. ^^ This exactly. The industry did everything it could throughout the 90s to force people to essentially pay a full album price to hear just one song. There were even "throwaway" albums meant to have one massive hit and a bunch of filler — cheaper to make, but big sellers nonetheless! Natalie Imbruglia isn't a one-hit wonder by chance: it was by design. |
|
garrettlen
Gold Member
Joined: April 2017
Posts: 882
|
Post by garrettlen on Feb 28, 2021 16:50:31 GMT -5
People tend to forget that The Beatles not only STILL have the most Billboard Hot 100 #1 hits, they also have the most #1 albums (19) on the Billboard album chart (which is currently called ) the Billboard 200.
That is a significantly large reason why they are so far ahead at #1 in overall points.
I honestly don't see anybody catching up or surpassing them anytime soon.
|
|
atg
2x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2016
Posts: 2,991
|
Post by atg on Feb 28, 2021 21:36:42 GMT -5
People tend to forget that The Beatles not only STILL have the most Billboard Hot 100 #1 hits, they also have the most #1 albums (19) on the Billboard album chart (which is currently called ) the Billboard 200. That is a significantly large reason why they are so far ahead at #1 in overall points. I honestly don't see anybody catching up or surpassing them anytime soon. Unless Drake or Post Malone releases 20 albums in the next 10 years, i don’t see it happening either. |
|
Myth X
Platinum Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 1,163
|
Post by Myth X on Mar 1, 2021 12:15:39 GMT -5
iHype do you have an estimation for Nicki Minaj and Cardi B chart points?
|
|
renfield75
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 1,624
|
Post by renfield75 on Mar 1, 2021 12:54:16 GMT -5
People back in the day had to buy a full body of work, investing some bucks of hard-earned money, mostly not because they love one it two songs, but the whole record. Fast forward to today, one mega song is enough to fuel the „sales“ of an album in order for it to chart. That‘s a clear advantage for albums of the streaming generation, and the chart-placements and certifications are proving my point. Um, this is so not true, lol. MC Hammer sold 21 million copies of his Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em album because no one could find U Can't Touch This as a single to buy and they had to buy his album as a result. I get your general point, but this is a bit unfair to Hammer. The unavailability of "U Can't Touch This" as a CD or cassette single absolutely did drive his album sales up, of course, but they were sustained throughout the rest of 1990 by the top 5 successes of "Have You Seen Her" and "Pray" (which went all the way to number 2). Revisionist history has basically reduced him to only "U Can't Touch This" but he was a phenomenon in 1990 firing off multiple hit singles and dominating pop culture. Albums don't spend 21 weeks at number one and go diamond solely from one song. That's like saying Britney's debut album went diamond solely because of "...Baby One More Time". That was the prime motivator but obviously she had other hits from that album and appealed to people beyond the one song. MC Hammer didn't ultimately have her longevity but he was a genuine superstar in 1990/91. |
|
jodakyellow
Platinum Member
Joined: July 2018
Posts: 1,497
|
Post by jodakyellow on Mar 17, 2021 0:41:32 GMT -5
iHype. Shouldn’t it be “Top Album Sales” starting from the date that songs’ points started counting toward the Billboard 200? Otherwise those songs’ points end up being counted twice... Artist of the Year uses Billboard Hot 100 + Top Album Sales + others for that reason Bumping this question because I’m still curious about this and how it does/doesn’t affect the rankings as you’ve presented them? |
|
iHype.
4x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2014
Posts: 4,549
|
Post by iHype. on Mar 18, 2021 20:24:52 GMT -5
iHype. Shouldn’t it be “Top Album Sales” starting from the date that songs’ points started counting toward the Billboard 200? Otherwise those songs’ points end up being counted twice... Artist of the Year uses Billboard Hot 100 + Top Album Sales + others for that reason No, per Billboard themselves it's a combination of Hot 100/Billboard 200. www.billboard.com/articles/business/chart-beat/8543378/billboard-top-125-artists-of-all-time-the-beatles/iHype do you have an estimation for Nicki Minaj and Cardi B chart points? Nicki Minaj - 7.1 million~ Cardi B - 4.6 million~ |
|
jodakyellow
Platinum Member
Joined: July 2018
Posts: 1,497
|
Post by jodakyellow on Mar 19, 2021 0:46:46 GMT -5
iHype. Shouldn’t it be “Top Album Sales” starting from the date that songs’ points started counting toward the Billboard 200? Otherwise those songs’ points end up being counted twice... Artist of the Year uses Billboard Hot 100 + Top Album Sales + others for that reason No, per Billboard themselves it's a combination of Hot 100/Billboard 200. www.billboard.com/articles/business/chart-beat/8543378/billboard-top-125-artists-of-all-time-the-beatles/But doesn’t that mean songs from 2015 onward have their points double-counted? Isn’t it possible that they wrote the description that way to keep it simple? |
|
iHype.
4x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2014
Posts: 4,549
|
Post by iHype. on Mar 19, 2021 8:33:19 GMT -5
But doesn’t that mean songs from 2015 onward have their points double-counted? Isn’t it possible that they wrote the description that way to keep it simple? No. Hot 100 and Billboard 200 both have different formulas for streaming, and really only for blockbuster albums during their first 1-2 weeks do album tracks also chart on Hot 100. So no, for 99% of the time they aren't even 'double counted'. Scorpion's album tracks charted for like 2-3 weeks, but the album has been charting well on Billboard 200 for 2 years. It wouldn't make sense to not include that. Also charting at positions like #24, #42, #53, etc on Hot 100 for 1-2 weeks as album tracks gets an artist almost nearly no points. It counts very very tiny. It's all about charting in top 10 for long periods on Hot 100 (and Billboard 200), which album tracks do not do. |
|
jodakyellow
Platinum Member
Joined: July 2018
Posts: 1,497
|
Post by jodakyellow on Mar 19, 2021 11:35:16 GMT -5
But doesn’t that mean songs from 2015 onward have their points double-counted? Isn’t it possible that they wrote the description that way to keep it simple? No. Hot 100 and Billboard 200 both have different formulas for streaming, and really only for blockbuster albums during their first 1-2 weeks do album tracks also chart on Hot 100. So no, for 99% of the time they aren't even 'double counted'. Scorpion's album tracks charted for like 2-3 weeks, but the album has been charting well on Billboard 200 for 2 years. It wouldn't make sense to not include that. Also charting at positions like #24, #42, #53, etc on Hot 100 for 1-2 weeks as album tracks gets an artist almost nearly no points. It counts very very tiny. It's all about charting in top 10 for long periods on Hot 100 (and Billboard 200), which album tracks do not do. This explanation makes sense; thank you!! I appreciate you taking the time to explain that for me... I guess I was thinking "Hot 100 points" = all of a track's points, but as you point out, album tracks have extremely short chart lives. The missing piece for me is still albums whose high rankings on the Billboard 200 are largely driven by one or two massive singles... You've accounted for Scorpion's many album tracks not being double-counted, but don't "God's Plan" and "In My Feelings" get extra weight here during their Hot 100 lives? Obviously "Scorpion" is still charting when those songs have long-since left the Hot 100, but it seems like things like that can add up |
|
:format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-1470034-1287927640.jpeg.jpg)
