|
Post by Private Dancer on Feb 22, 2022 22:00:00 GMT -5
Take A Bow, and Disturbia didn't feel like #1's to me. I do remember them vividly, but I do remember my local radio station playing Disturbia a lot around Halloween time. I don't know how Disturbia managed to be Rihanna's 2nd best selling single in the US. Especially when Umbrella outsold it worldwide and domestically at one point in time by a huge margin.
|
|
iHype.
4x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2014
Posts: 4,554
|
Post by iHype. on Feb 22, 2022 22:14:26 GMT -5
I think Disturbia sold well and had longevity because she used to always move onto new singles so fast, and that was the one time she didn't.
"Disturbia" was pushed June 2008, and then she finished the era and didn't release another single until "Russian Roulette" in November 2009. Well over a year later.
That doesn't seem long, but the entire digital era she would have eras bleed into each other.
"We Found Love" was released while "Cheers" (the previous era's final single) was still top 10... "Diamonds" was released two months after "Where Have You Been" (previous era's final single) was top 10. "Umbrella" was released the same month "Break It Off" (previous era's final single) was top 10. "SOS" was released two months after "If It's Lovin That You Want" peaked"
All her singles were succeeded by other hits shortly after, whether it other singles from the same album or another album era starting immediately after.
|
|
|
Post by Private Dancer on Feb 22, 2022 22:25:47 GMT -5
Basically, Rihanna was the Madonna of the 2000s.
|
|
aussie1
2x Platinum Member
Joined: March 2018
Posts: 2,243
|
Post by aussie1 on Feb 23, 2022 2:21:27 GMT -5
I think Disturbia sold well and had longevity because she used to always move onto new singles so fast, and that was the one time she didn't. "Disturbia" was pushed June 2008, and then she finished the era and didn't release another single until "Russian Roulette" in November 2009. Well over a year later. That doesn't seem long, but the entire digital era she would have eras bleed into each other. "We Found Love" was released while "Cheers" (the previous era's final single) was still top 10... "Diamonds" was released two months after "Where Have You Been" (previous era's final single) was top 10. "Umbrella" was released the same month "Break It Off" (previous era's final single) was top 10. "SOS" was released two months after "If It's Lovin That You Want" peaked" All her singles were succeeded by other hits shortly after, whether it other singles from the same album or another album era starting immediately after. She actually pushed Rehab after Disturbia and for a 7th single it peaked at #19. Meanwhile she was smashing with Live your life. GGGB era was actually huge my god.
|
|
85la
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by 85la on Feb 23, 2022 22:28:07 GMT -5
^ yeah, there were actually quite a few other songs of hers released in that late 2008 to 2009 period to keep purchasers busy, even if she wasn't technically a lead artist or they weren't on her albums. Other songs released in that period include If I Never See Your Face Again with Maroon 5 and Run This Town with Jay-Z and Kanye. Disturbia's two weeks at #1 might have been weak, but overall I guess it would go on to be one of her more consistently-selling and well-remembered jams over time.
|
|
|
Post by Private Dancer on Feb 24, 2022 0:49:39 GMT -5
I read somewhere that Beyonce Irreplaceable is the biggest radio hit by a female artist...I'm confused when Mariah literally had 200M in audience for 5 weeks and broke the record at that time..
|
|
85la
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by 85la on Feb 24, 2022 9:26:12 GMT -5
^ Where did you read that and what criteria were they using? Even though We Belong Together broke the record and had higher peaks for a few weeks, Irreplaceable came close and could have accrued more listenership overall over time.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,534
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 24, 2022 11:24:08 GMT -5
^ Where did you read that and what criteria were they using? Even though We Belong Together broke the record and had higher peaks for a few weeks, Irreplaceable came close and could have accrued more listenership overall over time. I guess it's possible, but "We Belong Together" spent 16 weeks at #1 on Hot 100 Airplay, with many multiple record-breaking weeks. It was also a #1 at Adult R&B and a top 3 at AC, both of which have more recurrent play than something like Top 40. "Irreplaceable" spent 11 weeks at #1 on Hot 100 Airplay without any of them being record-breaking and didn't do as well at Adult R&B (#4 peak) or AC (#10 peak). "Irreplaceable" also 'only' spent 30 weeks on the Hot 100, whereas "We Belong Together" spent 40+ weeks on the Hot 100 (i.e. it had more longevity). So, it would be surprising if "Irreplaceable" has been bigger overall at radio. I can't say it isn't possible, though. (brock has asked about things in this thread before based on things he read elsewhere that turned out to be inaccurate, so maybe the other source is just off.)
|
|
|
Post by phieaglesfan712 on Feb 24, 2022 11:40:43 GMT -5
^ Where did you read that and what criteria were they using? Even though We Belong Together broke the record and had higher peaks for a few weeks, Irreplaceable came close and could have accrued more listenership overall over time. I think could be another Happy/Blurred Lines situation. Could it be possible that Irreplaceable set the record on Mediabase, but not the official Billboard record?
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,534
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 24, 2022 14:07:49 GMT -5
^ Where did you read that and what criteria were they using? Even though We Belong Together broke the record and had higher peaks for a few weeks, Irreplaceable came close and could have accrued more listenership overall over time. I think could be another Happy/Blurred Lines situation. Could it be possible that Irreplaceable set the record on Mediabase, but not the official Billboard record? Its Wikipedia page mentions it passed 200 million audience via Mediabase but doesn't mention it holding a record, so I doubt it. Obviously Wikipedia and my assumption aren't concrete, but you'd think the page would make the claim if it was even possible.
|
|
|
Post by Private Dancer on Feb 24, 2022 15:02:14 GMT -5
I saw it on a forum and then i looked it up to be sure. I didn't believe it.
I found it hard to believe speaking that We Belong Together had 5 weeks with over 200M and broke the daily and weekly audience impressions number. Irreplaceable didn't do the numbers WBT. I know it was inaccurate.
Beyonce and Mariah have over 200M in the day from mediabase...but BDS only Mariah had the bigger song.
|
|
|
Post by phieaglesfan712 on Feb 24, 2022 15:09:03 GMT -5
I think could be another Happy/Blurred Lines situation. Could it be possible that Irreplaceable set the record on Mediabase, but not the official Billboard record? Its Wikipedia page mentions it passed 200 million audience via Mediabase but doesn't mention it holding a record, so I doubt it. Obviously Wikipedia and my assumption aren't concrete, but you'd think the page would make the claim if it was even possible. For what it’s worth, I just checked the page for Happy, and they didn’t make any mention of the Mediabase record or the fact it was the only song that surpassed 300M aud on Mediabase.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,534
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 24, 2022 15:11:14 GMT -5
Its Wikipedia page mentions it passed 200 million audience via Mediabase but doesn't mention it holding a record, so I doubt it. Obviously Wikipedia and my assumption aren't concrete, but you'd think the page would make the claim if it was even possible. For what it’s worth, I just checked the page for Happy, and they didn’t make any mention of the Mediabase record or the fact it was the only song that surpassed 300M aud on Mediabase. Right. It doesn't mention Mediabase at all, whereas the "Irreplaceable" page does.
|
|
iHype.
4x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2014
Posts: 4,554
|
Post by iHype. on Feb 24, 2022 16:14:07 GMT -5
Higher peak on overall radio (Billboard): We Belong Together (212 million) > Irreplaceable (196 million) Higher peak on overall radio (Mediabase): We Belong Together (223 million) > Irreplaceable (202 million)
We Belong Together had a bigger run on overall radio... more weeks #1, more weeks top 10, etc. If you're talking cumulative radio audience, then there's multiple female songs that have more than both.
Irreplaceable wasn't bigger, nor the biggest female hit in any aspect. Anyone can say something but that doesn't mean it's true.
(I also hate how songs with bigger audience peaks are referred to as bigger. We don't go off how high something peaked in sales/streams for a singular week to determine how bigger they are. I suppose that is radio industry's fault because they never put out information on all-time cumulative numbers though)
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,534
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 24, 2022 16:16:17 GMT -5
Higher peak on overall radio (Billboard): We Belong Together (212 million) > Irreplaceable (196 million) Higher peak on overall radio (Mediabase): We Belong Together (223 million) > Irreplaceable (202 million) We Belong Together had a bigger run on overall radio... more weeks #1, more weeks top 10, etc. If you're talking cumulative radio audience, then there's multiple female songs that have more than both. Irreplaceable wasn't bigger, nor the biggest female hit in any aspect. Anyone can say something but that doesn't mean it's true. Thank you. When did overall impressions even start getting tabulated (and reported, which may be different)? I am wondering from what point a cumulative radio audience even exists.
|
|
iHype.
4x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2014
Posts: 4,554
|
Post by iHype. on Feb 24, 2022 16:43:42 GMT -5
Higher peak on overall radio (Billboard): We Belong Together (212 million) > Irreplaceable (196 million) Higher peak on overall radio (Mediabase): We Belong Together (223 million) > Irreplaceable (202 million) We Belong Together had a bigger run on overall radio... more weeks #1, more weeks top 10, etc. If you're talking cumulative radio audience, then there's multiple female songs that have more than both. Irreplaceable wasn't bigger, nor the biggest female hit in any aspect. Anyone can say something but that doesn't mean it's true. Thank you. When did overall impressions even start getting tabulated (and reported, which may be different)? I am wondering from what point a cumulative radio audience even exists. The 90s is when the radio industry specifically began to truly focus on measuring popularity through audience impressions instead of spins, so I assume any cumulative list is only from some point in the 90s and forward. For me, you have to realize audience is also estimated to begin with, so for all we know, these numbers could be completely inaccurate for certain periods. None of it really means much other than within the frame of a specific year or two when we are looking at estimates.
|
|
|
Post by Private Dancer on Feb 24, 2022 16:46:02 GMT -5
I was arguing with a Beyonce stan, and they tried to prove me wrong. I had the numbers to prove it. I knew I was right.
|
|
JukeboxJacob
2x Platinum Member
Banned
another day another moment of cringe
Joined: November 2019
Posts: 2,472
|
Post by JukeboxJacob on Feb 24, 2022 20:25:17 GMT -5
Irreplaceable still got played years down the road, We Yawn Together didn't
|
|
85la
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by 85la on Feb 24, 2022 21:15:10 GMT -5
Occasionally, I do hear cumulative radio totals for songs getting reported, usually in the billions of impressions. I think Nielsen/MRC Data used to or still does this in their year-end reports for the top radio songs, but obviously it's just confined to a one year period. I rarely hear about totals for longer periods of time, and all-time hardly ever, if never.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,534
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 24, 2022 21:19:24 GMT -5
Irreplaceable still got played years down the road, We Yawn Together didn't
|
|
JukeboxJacob
2x Platinum Member
Banned
another day another moment of cringe
Joined: November 2019
Posts: 2,472
|
Post by JukeboxJacob on Feb 24, 2022 23:57:52 GMT -5
Irreplaceable still got played years down the road, We Yawn Together didn't Never hearing WBT played on radio once since 2012
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,534
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 25, 2022 8:55:06 GMT -5
Never hearing WBT played on radio once since 2012 Well I have heard it on the radio since 2012, so what does that mean?
|
|
WolfSpear
Gold Member
Joined: March 2012
Posts: 869
|
Post by WolfSpear on Feb 25, 2022 17:10:33 GMT -5
By the end of the decade, digital sales were red hot and the key to being #1 on the Hot 100.
Quite a few of those chart-toppers were lacking in airplay...
|
|
85la
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by 85la on Feb 25, 2022 19:37:27 GMT -5
Mmhmm, just checking the iTunes chart all week gave a very good indication of how next week's Hot 100 would look back in those years. It would be unfathomable to think that the iTunes #1 wouldn't even chart on the Hot 100, which is starting to happen today.
|
|
lugus15
Gold Member
Joined: April 2009
Posts: 790
|
Post by lugus15 on Mar 10, 2022 20:29:53 GMT -5
Regarding the 80's, I cannot comprehend how Do They Know It's Christmas? missed the #1 spot or even a top 10 placement when it sold 1.9 million (plus 400k of the 12 inck vinyl) on it's first 11 days of release.
The only logical explanation I can find that makes sense is that most of those sales, probably more than 2 million were achieved during the tracking week of 10-16 December, 1984 (the tracking week was from Monday to Sunday, right?), and the points of that particular week (sales and airplay) were reflected on the chart of 12/29/84 which was a frozen chart that duplicated the numbers of the 12/22/84 chart.
DTKIC had already debuted at #65 on that chart (probably on the strenght of street-date violation sales) on Sunday December 09.
By the time the charts returned to normal or were unfrozen on 01/05/85 the inventory of the single had already been depleted and it was doing normal numbers. That week it shoot up to #20 on the BBHot100 with a sales postion of #13. It was probably doing less than 50k numbers that week, seeing that the total sales of that single were 2.5 million and it had already sold more than 2.2 million on it's first week.
Just a thought, which would make DTKIC the real number #1 (by a wide margin) on 12/29/84.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,534
|
Post by jenglisbe on Mar 11, 2022 13:39:45 GMT -5
Regarding the 80's, I cannot comprehend how Do They Know It's Christmas? missed the #1 spot or even a top 10 placement when it sold 1.9 million (plus 400k of the 12 inck vinyl) on it's first 11 days of release. The only logical explanation I can find that makes sense is that most of those sales, probably more than 2 million were achieved during the tracking week of 10-16 December, 1984 (the tracking week was from Monday to Sunday, right?), and the points of that particular week (sales and airplay) were reflected on the chart of 12/29/84 which was a frozen chart that duplicated the numbers of the 12/22/84 chart. DTKIC had already debuted at #65 on that chart (probably on the strenght of street-date violation sales) on Sunday December 09. By the time the charts returned to normal or were unfrozen on 01/05/85 the inventory of the single had already been depleted and it was doing normal numbers. That week it shoot up to #20 on the BBHot100 with a sales postion of #13. It was probably doing less than 50k numbers that week, seeing that the total sales of that single were 2.5 million and it had already sold more than 2.2 million on it's first week. Just a thought, which would make DTKIC the real number #1 (by a wide margin) on 12/29/84. All of this is possible, but also keep in mind Billboard likely didn't use actual sales numbers. If they just assigned a certain amount of chart points to the sales #1, then it wouldn't matter if that #1 sold 50 copies or 1.9 million copies. (Also, how do you know it sold that many copies its first 11 days of release?)
|
|
lugus15
Gold Member
Joined: April 2009
Posts: 790
|
Post by lugus15 on Mar 12, 2022 1:26:11 GMT -5
Regarding the 80's, I cannot comprehend how Do They Know It's Christmas? missed the #1 spot or even a top 10 placement when it sold 1.9 million (plus 400k of the 12 inck vinyl) on it's first 11 days of release. The only logical explanation I can find that makes sense is that most of those sales, probably more than 2 million were achieved during the tracking week of 10-16 December, 1984 (the tracking week was from Monday to Sunday, right?), and the points of that particular week (sales and airplay) were reflected on the chart of 12/29/84 which was a frozen chart that duplicated the numbers of the 12/22/84 chart. DTKIC had already debuted at #65 on that chart (probably on the strenght of street-date violation sales) on Sunday December 09. By the time the charts returned to normal or were unfrozen on 01/05/85 the inventory of the single had already been depleted and it was doing normal numbers. That week it shoot up to #20 on the BBHot100 with a sales postion of #13. It was probably doing less than 50k numbers that week, seeing that the total sales of that single were 2.5 million and it had already sold more than 2.2 million on it's first week. Just a thought, which would make DTKIC the real number #1 (by a wide margin) on 12/29/84. All of this is possible, but also keep in mind Billboard likely didn't use actual sales numbers. If they just assigned a certain amount of chart points to the sales #1, then it wouldn't matter if that #1 sold 50 copies or 1.9 million copies. (Also, how do you know it sold that many copies its first 11 days of release?) The Music Week magazine issue of 01/12/85 stated that DTKIC sold 1.9 million singles in 11 days Plus an article by Paul Grein of the Billboard magazine issue dated 01/05/85 said So most of it's final total of 2.5 million sales were sold on it's first week of release, which happened to be the week the chart was frozen for the Holidays.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,534
|
Post by jenglisbe on Mar 12, 2022 7:27:12 GMT -5
^ I wonder if those were sales or more so shipments since actual sales figures wouldn't have been a thing then.
|
|
85la
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by 85la on Mar 12, 2022 11:23:02 GMT -5
^Plus its airplay also wasn't too high, so that would have additionally limited its peak.
|
|
aussie1
2x Platinum Member
Joined: March 2018
Posts: 2,243
|
Post by aussie1 on Mar 17, 2022 17:13:38 GMT -5
So we're not getting 2009 onwards? :'(
|
|