Singles that climbed to their peak between 1996-2004

BuzzJack - Entertainment Discussion _ Music Charts _ UK Charts

Latest Site News

Hozier gets a second week at number one

Hozier climbs to number one

A chart double for Beyonce

2 Pages

< 1 2

Singles that climbed to their peak between 1996-2004

Display modes

Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum

Steve201 View member profile	Mar 30 2021, 08:29 PM Post #21
Shakin Stevens Joined: 29 December 2007 Posts: 46,140 User: 5,138	Would love to have seen the chart runs in the 90s with on air releases!! The OutKast one was one of THE classic chart runs of the held back era for me, one of the best pop songs of the decade so no surprise it peaked late when the general public caught up!


jimwatts View member profile	Mar 30 2021, 09:26 PM Post #22
This custom member title has been edited by jimwatts Joined: 28 August 2017 Posts: 10,670 User: 38,591	QUOTE(kingofskiffle @ Mar 30 2021, 11:27 AM) This is a very interesting one. Up to and including the current chart, I have 35620 entries making the Top 75. I caveat with that in that each entry gets it's own TrackID, so it's this which has been the "link" to sort this out. 16537 entries (14 Nov 1952 to 3 Apr 2021) have climbed from their entry position. Entry Year of record - Amount that then climbed with that year of entry ... 1996 - 54 1997 - 27 1998 - 20 1999 - 23 2000 - 16 2001 - 11 2002 - 12 2003 - 14 2004 - 12 2005 - 21 ... Thanks for posting this! What's also surprising is how few of these climbed in their second week within the Top 40 - I think these are the numbers for each of those 10 years: 1996 - 42 1997 - 14 1998 - 8 1999 - 8* 2000 - 6 (all up 1 place) 2001 - 1 (City High - What Would You Do?: 4-3) 2002 - 4 (3 up 1 place; Scooter - The Logical Song: 7-5) 2003 - 5 2004 - 4 2005 - 8 *excludes Sporty Thievz - No Pigeons as the OCC later revised its entry position to #16


TheSnake View member profile	Mar 30 2021, 09:34 PM Post #23
Say that hiss with your chest, and... Joined: 24 May 2016 Posts: 18,441 User: 23,308	QUOTE(jimwatts @ Mar 30 2021, 10:26 PM) Thanks for posting this! What's also surprising is how few of these climbed in their second week within the Top 40 - I think these are the numbers for each of those 10 years: 1996 - 42 1997 - 14 1998 - 8 1999 - 8* 2000 - 6 (all up 1 place) 2001 - 1 (City High - What Would You Do?: 4-3) 2002 - 4 (3 up 1 place; Scooter - The Logical Song: 7-5) 2003 - 5 2004 - 4 2005 - 8 *excludes Sporty Thievz - No Pigeons as the OCC later revised its entry position to #16 For 2005 Studio B - I See Girls had an unusual chart run for the time, re-entering the top 40 for three weeks just after it had left top 40. I wonder what the reason for its unusual chart run was?


Steve201 View member profile	Mar 30 2021, 09:56 PM Post #24
Shakin Stevens Joined: 29 December 2007 Posts: 46,140 User: 5,138	QUOTE(Mangø @ Mar 30 2021, 08:26 PM) That's quite surprising that TOTP was the reason for its climb. I've been watching some of the old TOTP 1990 re-runs that are being shown, and I've actually noticed that a performance doesn't usually result in much of an boost for the song on the next chart. Quite often a song actually falls the week after, which I find really odd given how popular TOTP was back then! Do you mean in the 1990 chart run? It normally does unless it was by a fanbase act at the time where it peaked the first week like Kylie (albeit in her example her sales normal rose in the second week. How high mainly depended on the public reaction to the song).


Robbie View member profile	Mar 30 2021, 10:46 PM Post #25
BuzzJack Gold Member Joined: 4 April 2006 Posts: 3,443 User: 366	'Amazed' by Lonestar had a very impressive chart run back in 2000. Its chart run would be very impressive today. For 2000 it was unbelievable: 24-23-30-36-32-30-28-26-21-23-22-22-21-26-30-35-37-42-51-57-64-73


Steve201 View member profile	Mar 31 2021, 08:34 AM Post #26
Shakin Stevens Joined: 29 December 2007 Posts: 46,140 User: 5,138	An unbelievable run for the time! It was a huge track but being a country song didn’t register on ‘youth’ radio stations so that’s probably the reason for the strange run! Reminds me a bit of ‘Beautiful’ by Snoop Dogg in 2002 for whatever reason Radio 1 didn’t support it on their playlist but the strength of the song meant it stayed steady on the chart for ages!


Gambo View member profile	Apr 1 2021, 02:47 PM Post #27
BuzzJack Climber Joined: 29 July 2014 Posts: 198 User: 21,106	Thanks KOS for posting these and an ample demonstration of just how embedded the held-back, front-loaded tactic in marketing singles had become by the late '90s and how dominant it remained until the mid '00s. I presume it would've dug-in even longer had it not been for the complete shift in consumer preference from CD to download during the late '00s, and later from download to streaming, which most would agree has unfortunately taken chart turnover and movement too far back the other way. Thank God this entry-at-peak behaviour was broken in the end though; surely we were heading for nigh-on brand new Top 10s or even 20s almost every week! So much damage was done to the conceptual reputation and perceived relevance of the UK chart during that time, as it was seen - correctly - that marketing might had taken over completely and bent consumer habits to suit its will, thereby skewing the more natural chart patterns of behaviour seen prior to the '90s. Saying that, whatever one's preference, that period saw some very lofty sales figures logged on the back of this approach, at least up the early '00s when physical took its final dive and digital was yet to be legalised. A fair number of the one or two-place rises seen during the affected period were likely just due to a quiet market that week (even during such a frenetically busy era of weekly turnover we did get the odd uneventful week for new releases). If one scrutinises the Music Week charts of the time which used to denote which singles in the Top 75 had posted a sales increase week-on-week, one would likely find many of those so-called 'climbers' actually gained a higher chart foothold on falling sales. Needless to say, there were singles that did the opposite in very hectic big-selling weeks - they'd fall from their entry position but did so on rising sales. A factor that's not been highlighted above as far as I could see was the occasional premature entry of a single ahead of its official release date, owing apparently to small numbers of sales accruing in the days leading up to it through in-store 'leaks'. Steps' single in Jan '01 was a classic example - and the inorganic climb it registered on its second week charted after it'd been issued officially gave it what was then (still might be though would need to check) the highest within the 75 ever seen, of 70 places. Another post-new year example of this was a year later when Puretone's 'Addicted To Bass' logged a 66-place rise to No 2. Outside the 75 threshold, Westlife's cover of 'Mandy' is often cited in this context too, as it appeared on leaked sales at No 200 before climbing all the way to No 1 with its full release a week later, though arguably this doesn't compare, given the 76-200 positions were subject to exclusions and so in reality 'Mandy' would've been some way off the actual 200th bestselling single on its leaked buys alone. There were also the odd deliberate little marketing spins operated by labels too. Probably the most obvious was Parlophone's decision to deliberately circumvent the OCC's newly-inaugurated rule on allowing downloads but only where there was an equivalent physical product on release in respect of their Gorillaz single 'Feel Good Inc'. They issued a limited edition vinyl 7" on 11 Apr '05 allowing it to chart at No 22 W/E 23 Apr based on the vinyl and download releases alone. The former quickly fell away but the latter were chart-eligible due to the presence of a physical issue, and sufficient to keep the song hovering around the No 20 position for 3 weeks until it leapt up to No 2 W/E 21 May, following full CD release on 9 May. I still can't get my head around 'Amazed' by Lonestar though! Why was that song more-or-less the only single to buck the prevailing pattern and stick around for such an extended period, never getting into the Top 20? Such an oddity and more akin to what we see in current charts. This post has been edited by Gambo: Apr 1 2021, 02:50 PM


My Random Music View member profile	Apr 11 2021, 09:19 PM Post #28
BuzzJack Climber Joined: 24 February 2021 Posts: 78 User: 124,622	A lot of records in that era had already been played to death by the time they charted. I also remember in the latter days of Top of the Pops they would mostly have songs that were yet to chart. Therefore most people who have decided they're going to buy it would have waited a while until they got that opportunity so inevitably they buy it in the first week of release.


gooddelta View member profile	Apr 12 2021, 09:52 AM Post #29
Hello? Joined: 8 March 2006 Posts: 83,022 User: 116	QUOTE(Gambo @ Apr 1 2021, 03:47 PM) I still can't get my head around 'Amazed' by Lonestar though! Why was that song more-or-less the only single to buck the prevailing pattern and stick around for such an extended period, never getting into the Top 20? Such an oddity and more akin to what we see in current charts. A lot of country songs around that time had odd chart behaviour, hanging around for ages and bouncing up and down - Shania Twain, LeAnn Rimes, The Mavericks and then Lonestar. I guess marketing for them wasn't all geared towards week one, so they had lower peaks but more spread out sales as people discovered the songs over time.


vibe View member profile	Apr 12 2021, 10:19 AM Post #30
BuzzJack Platinum Member Joined: 31 August 2010 Posts: 8,788 User: 11,763	People also were keen to buy in first week of release because a cd single was £1.99 first week and then increased to £3.99 after. Record companies did however put CD singles that were bound to hit number one £3.99 first week. Cassettes would jump from 99p to £2.29 Gabrielle’s - Give Me A Little More Time had a unique chart run for 96 and this was helped by huge radio support.


AcerBen View member profile	Apr 12 2021, 04:23 PM Post #31
BuzzJack Gold Member Joined: 18 May 2007 Posts: 3,628 User: 3,429	QUOTE(gooddelta @ Apr 12 2021, 09:52 AM) A lot of country songs around that time had odd chart behaviour, hanging around for ages and bouncing up and down - Shania Twain, LeAnn Rimes, The Mavericks and then Lonestar. I guess marketing for them wasn't all geared towards week one, so they had lower peaks but more spread out sales as people discovered the songs over time. And they probably sold a considerable number of copies to older buyers who didn't necessarily follow the charts regliously or buy the latest releases every week, but every now and again a song like this would take their fancy. Probably after hearing it on Magic (or Melody as it used to be called!).


My Random Music View member profile	Apr 12 2021, 07:45 PM Post #32
BuzzJack Climber Joined: 24 February 2021 Posts: 78 User: 124,622	QUOTE(vibe @ Apr 12 2021, 11:19 AM) People also were keen to buy in first week of release because a cd single was £1.99 first week and then increased to £3.99 after. Record companies did however put CD singles that were bound to hit number one £3.99 first week. Cassettes would jump from 99p to £2.29 Gabrielle’s - Give Me A Little More Time had a unique chart run for 96 and this was helped by huge radio support. When did that happen? I remember CD singles going down to £1.99 as standard because sales were dwindling around the mid-00s but don't remember CD singles being that cheap prior to that and there were definitely CD singles I bought in the first week though admittedly I never bought that many.


Robbie View member profile	Apr 12 2021, 08:30 PM Post #33
BuzzJack Gold Member Joined: 4 April 2006 Posts: 3,443 User: 366	QUOTE(My Random Music @ Apr 12 2021, 08:45 PM) When did that happen? I remember CD singles going down to £1.99 as standard because sales were dwindling around the mid-00s but don't remember CD singles being that cheap prior to that and there were definitely CD singles I bought in the first week though admittedly I never bought that many. mid to late 90s if I recall. My singles buying days were largely over by then but I'm sure the few CD singles I did buy in that period were £1.99 in week 1.


Smint View member profile	Apr 12 2021, 09:14 PM Post #34
BuzzJack Gold Member Joined: 21 February 2021 Posts: 3,547 User: 124,514	Oh it was extremely common for singles to be £1.99 in the 90s in their first week. Even in 94 that was the case.


My Random Music View member profile	Apr 12 2021, 09:37 PM Post #35
BuzzJack Climber Joined: 24 February 2021 Posts: 78 User: 124,622	QUOTE(Robbie @ Apr 12 2021, 09:30 PM) mid to late 90s if I recall. My singles buying days were largely over by then but I'm sure the few CD singles I did buy in that period were £1.99 in week 1. OK makes sense, I didn't buy many singles around then. One that I still have that's still got the price sticker on is "On A Ragga Tip 97" by SL2 which is £3.99 but I remember buying that after hearing it in the Top 40. The only times I really bought singles were if I didn't think there would be an album (there wasn't an SL2 album for example) or if I didn't like the artist enough to buy the album but liked that particular song.


Sempachorra View member profile	Apr 14 2021, 08:16 PM Post #36
Let's Go Brandon Joined: 6 April 2006 Posts: 22,646 User: 421	QUOTE(The. Snake. @ Mar 30 2021, 08:59 PM) Love that song, I prefer No Mercy's version to the La Bouche original. Weird that No Mercy released the song in January when it is so summery sounding. To be fair, they did release the single in late summer in Europe during 1996.


robbied View member profile	Apr 15 2021, 12:03 AM Post #37
New Entry Joined: 17 October 2010 Posts: 28 User: 12,047	Yeah I remember cd singles definitely being £1.99 certainly by the late nineties. Interesting that there’s a big drop off between 1996 and 1997. In ‘96 there’s still a lot of songs climbing to peak position but that dwindles massively the following year. Maybe songs being added to radio playlists much earlier and therefore getting more pent up demand in its opening week?


Steve201 View member profile	Apr 15 2021, 05:27 PM Post #38
Shakin Stevens Joined: 29 December 2007 Posts: 46,140 User: 5,138	I always remember people used to be bored of me on here saying OAOS should be enforced during the download era!