fridayteenage
5x Platinum Member
Shake it Off
Joined: April 2008
Posts: 5,493
|
Post by fridayteenage on Jul 22, 2010 20:53:09 GMT -5
They are there primarily for the music industry pros who have an actual vested interest in this, not for people on a music board stanning for faves. They can see what songs/artists they are actively promoting are doing well.
|
|
Honeymoon
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,256
|
Post by Honeymoon on Jul 22, 2010 21:31:16 GMT -5
They are there primarily for the music industry pros who have an actual vested interest in this, not for people on a music board stanning for faves. They can see what songs/artists they are actively promoting are doing well. If a song has enough points to chart on the Hot 100 than it deserves a spot, what is illegitimate about that? It's worked for the album chart. And music industry pros doing market research with the Hot 100 is irrelevant to older songs scoring enough points to make the chart, FYI
|
|
felipe
3x Platinum Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 3,058
|
Post by felipe on Jul 22, 2010 22:12:20 GMT -5
They are there primarily for the music industry pros who have an actual vested interest in this, not for people on a music board stanning for faves. They can see what songs/artists they are actively promoting are doing well. Billboard has already stated not so long ago that it's meant for the general public as much as it is for the music industry. And if an old song is selling so well that it has enough points to chart in the Hot 100, why wouldn't the "music industry pros" be interested in that?
|
|
renfield75
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 1,644
|
Post by renfield75 on Jul 22, 2010 23:11:01 GMT -5
RE Uncle Kracker- I've contacted Billboard, and, essentially this is the case. Usually, Billboard recharts tracks that go from country radio to pop- Uncle Kracker's case is a special one. Billboard does not have a filter in place that automatically detects when a track resurges, so this one slipped under the radar. Billboard will look to see where "Smile" would rank on the coming week's chart, and it should appear. So there you have it. :) The last time someone checked it, it was not close to the top 50- but, that probably was some time ago. BTW- how long has it been actively climbing the country chart, since it initially peaked? Surely not 39 weeks? Did it chart there initially, and then drop off and re-enter down the road? Thanks, peigan. Yah, I know of The Beatles' album milestones. :) Someone at UKMix drafted a list of acts with 10+ unique No. 1 albums in the UK and USA, and I may do that. A list of acts with 10 total No. 1s in the UK and USA (regardless of repeating the feat in both countries or not) would not be a lengthy list. hehe Country songs can have incredibly slow climbs...Lee Brice's "Love Like Crazy" set the record a few weeks ago, reaching the top ten in its 46th week on the chart. That's an extreme example, but it gives you an idea of how long country songs (barring new releases from superstars, like the Kenny Chesney song that debuted in the top 20 this week) can take to climb the chart.
|
|
stooki3
Charting
Here for BEYGODCE & Ke$us
Joined: February 2010
Posts: 207
|
Post by stooki3 on Jul 23, 2010 0:11:34 GMT -5
Telephone fell off.. 33 weeks is great!
Rude boy is gone too... That was quick
|
|
NeRD
Diamond Member
RIHANNA NAVY
Joined: March 2010
Posts: 15,302
|
Post by NeRD on Jul 23, 2010 10:44:41 GMT -5
The shade...
Too bad the latter actually reach the top spot.
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,923
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Jul 23, 2010 20:05:24 GMT -5
Just a note about what some were discussing, in regards to the unique No. 1 hits. I updated my blog to reflect that Billboard *does* count the Wings hits as part of Paul McCartney's tally (Ask Billboard addressed this not too long ago); therefore, he has 12 unique No. 1 hits.
|
|