No one in their right mind should buy that manic single. It's awful. I dont know how anyone could get excited by that band any more. They used to be good.

 

(ditto Radiohead)

Edited February 25, 201114 yr by tonyttt31

come mid-2011 it'll be obvious if this was a normal patch or not.

 

Indeed it will. :P We'll just wait and see

Indeed it will. :P We'll just wait and see

Can you at least see how the first spat of on air/on sale releases HAS taken away from this particular period of weeks we're approaching now, though? :P

 

I don't see how you can say at least five songs that would have debuted (at least top 20) around this time debuting earlier hasn't taken away from it.

 

I'll PM you in June over this, by the way. The subject will be "Ha! I was right!" ^_^ :lol:

Don't you dare 'Who?' the voice that is Joss Stone. Yes, we know it will flop the hardest out of that list but that doesn't make her any less amazing.

is the jessie j album out on monday??if so it could produce a few new entries due to the amount of people who want to hear it.apparently she has went gold on pre-orders so far already so it could breach 100k by the time it hits the chart!!

Every week is dry in terms of new entries since the on air/on sale approach moved in. This is what the chart is going to be like all the time from now on with only one song debuting in the top 10 every now and then.

 

I disagree completely - the on air/on sale approach is the correct way of releasing singles and will not stagnate the release schedule or the chart.

Don't you dare 'Who?' the voice that is Joss Stone. Yes, we know it will flop the hardest out of that list but that doesn't make her any less amazing.

 

Indeed, her new song is actually brilliant, I am gonna be downloading it.

 

Also worth a listen is her Bond Theme for the game Blood Stone called I'll Take It All :heart:

I disagree completely - the on air/on sale approach is the correct way of releasing singles and will not stagnate the release schedule or the chart.

Well, I was never implying it'd stagnate the release schedule as such. Songs will still get released every week, as they do now, so that'd be still somewhat normal. The number of new entries overall in the top 100 probably won't be affected too much either.

 

But the number of top 10 debuts will decrease to only a few per month, and that's only reserved for major acts like Lady Gaga or Britney Spears, or acts who manage to get huge radio and video play right from the outset like Jessie J. It's more the top of the charts that will stagnate, and people here will be moaning that songs like Grenade are still in the top 10.

 

The number of top 40 entries will drop, too, as bands like You Me at Six last week rely heavily on front-loading. Just look at how they've bombed down the charts now because of that. They would never be able to sustain sales for long enough to make the top 40 without frontloading.

 

So, my point was more related to new release watching as occurs in this thread and often in other threads on this forum (particularly on Sundays in the iTunes thread) will be much more boring with more "dry" weeks for new releases like this one as Bray so aptly put it.

 

And the reason why I think March will be an exception to the new rule is that several of the more notable releases that month are actually being front-loaded from what it seems so far, compared to most of the major releases from this month (February) which were already released early, which has led to a rather slower drip of action at the top of the charts this month. Of course, it's early days though and it's subject to change. I'm interested to see how the April releases will take place though - if most of them are "on air, on sale" it could lead to March being even further packed.

 

Also, in Australia most (all?) singles are released straight away there, and their chart is also 100% sales-based like ours, so IMO this is the model we are working towards:

http://www.ariacharts.com.au/pages/charts_....asp?chart=1U50

 

By the way, I never said any of this was really bad. Personally I'm quite on the fence with air, on sale, so I wouldn't say it's the incorrect or correct way of releasing singles :)

Edited February 25, 201114 yr by superbossanova

Don't you dare 'Who?' the voice that is Joss Stone. Yes, we know it will flop the hardest out of that list but that doesn't make her any less amazing.

 

IMO her first two albums were great, but then she totally lost it.

Her third album Introducing Joss Stone is a true masterpiece, I adore it.

IMO her first two albums were great, but then she totally lost it.

 

I agree, her first 2 album were her best but Introducing Joss Stone was fantastic too as was Colour Me Free which limped in at something like #88. You may think she has lost it, but someone with that voice can't be who'd:

 

Edited February 26, 201114 yr by Davidson

Alesha Dixon feat. Jay Sean - Every Little Part Of Me

 

Even Jay Sean can't help Alesha's music career. If 'Take Control' couldn't make the top 20, this could struggle to even go top 40.

 

Elbow - Neat Little Rows

 

The music in the chorus has been used on TV - at least I recognise it. However, the song overall just isn't anywhere near as anthemic as 'One Day Like This' was. Top 40 is possible but don't see this going top 20.

 

Foo Fighters - Rope

 

A return to form? Well, I've always liked Foo Fighters and this track suggests they've returned to a rockier sound that should please the die hard fans. However, with rock music not really doing well in the singles charts in the last 2/3 years, could 2011 be a turning point? I'd hope so as 'Rope', imo, is a great track.

 

Hurts – Sunday

 

Have to admit as much as I like 'Wonderful Life' and 'Stay', this is easily the weakest of their singles so far. I'll be gobsmacked if this was even a top 75 hit. :(

 

Joss Stone - Back In Style

 

I've not heard this anywhere which suggests UK media are just not interesting in Joss Stone anymore. No Radio 1 backing, no music video (is there a video?) getting heavy rotation on the music channels. So yes, taking everything into account - except the actual song - it'll flop. It's probably a brilliant track but all the clues suggest a flop on the horizon.

 

Katy Perry feat. Kanye West - E.T.

 

Easily the weakest single so far from the album and not even a rap from Kanye West can save this song imo.

 

Manic Street Preachers - Postcards From A Young Man

 

As already mentioned, the last single failed to go top 40. I'd be surprised if the loyal fanbase had the selling power to gt this into the top 40. 2k physical sales won't make much difference (assuming this will be released on 7"/cd). Also no signs of a music video so even moreso can't see this being a hit.

 

Slash feat. Fergie - Beautiful Dangerous

 

Has this been around for ages? If so, I've never heard it. I can't see this being a hit either even if it's a decent track.

 

Tiësto vs Diplo feat. Busta Rhymes - C'mon (Catch 'Em By Surprise)

 

Likely to climb into the top 40 tomorrow so could well climb but probably into the top 30.

And I don't think the lack of major new releases in the next few weeks is directly caused by OA/OS as that has yet to fully take over, there's still only been a handful of OA/OS releases, it's just a coincidence a particularly 'dry' release schedule happened to occur after OA/OS started. Correlation does not always equal causation and etc. Although I agree the release schedule will get a bit less packed once OA/OS takes over

Exactly. The on air/on sale release is essentially the singles chart i grew up with (the late but i assume all of the) 80's to EARLY 90's - the further back in the 80's the rarer song debuting in the top 10 or higher - there was no such thing as front loading, back then, that created a ridiculously unstable chart in the late 90s,when a majority of the top 10 would frequently all change by the next week.The closest to front loading was Heavy Metal groups who fans so devoted/organised to achieve a high new entry that would never connect with the GP and just as uniquely bomb straight out the chart.

 

My point - despite the lower frequency of HIGH new entries this was NOT a stagnant chart IN ANY PART. Just like suggesting this approach now will make stagnancy in any part the norm is complete OXYMORON because that implies a unexplainable, constant disappearance of new big hit records on the chart. Even though records peaked lower with more stability, there was still also movement, the continual flow + exchange as singles reached the peak from the positive feedback of promotion/position but unlike the unbelievable ENDLESS "DESERT of new hits" over the past few weeks, new hits would regularly rise/take off leaping quickly at first as they move to the top in a wave of succession - like with the usual (ie not last few weeks) Sunday digital new releases progressing up iTunes but played out over weeks rather than hours/a couple of days.

 

I disagree. If it wasn't for on air/on sale, we'd have Britney Spears, Avril Lavigne, Dr Dre, Noah and the Whale all debuting around this time, and all getting significantly higher than they would have done from their early release.

Britney would have NOTHING LIKE the bigger impact those other earlier released records would have had , it was nothing but her 'cult victim' fan base hit that made no connection with the public disastrously EVERYWHERE outside the US/Canada, it bombed/ accelerated out the chart regardless of increasing exposure from the radio + all the web hype, EVEN the vestiges of her immense video (cultural) act have made little difference.

 

I'll PM you in June over this, by the way. The subject will be "Ha! I was right!" ^_^ :lol:

This you will find a difficulty since you will have LONG since have died from an attack of excessive SHAME . ;)

 

 

.........top 10 debuts in the next few weeks will be Jennifer Lopez (based on its success in Europe, Australia and the US already),..........

How the HELL is forgettable average duff actress, forgettable average duff Pop singer, forgettable fake/shallow mind, unforgettable FAT ARSE making a come back from the forgettable success( + time of) she had, at her age when its supposed to be difficult?What credible excuse can 'Madge record banning' Radio 1 possibly have to play it? HOW On Earth can Shakira FAIL so dismally but an even more tired and worn out,FAKER,older version of her succeed??? I can't believe it can be anything other a NOVELTY hit?

 

What next, Paula Abdul having a worldwide smash everywhere, just the UK to go?Any old 80's/90's hasbeen will be having a hit, making Kylie(s achievements) look like a slacker with the inevitable goodbye top 10 hits/nostalgic act era. :snif:

 

What has happened to radio support for Alesha Dixon Radio, Brummer Boy and her latest with Jay Sean are all radio friendly but commercial radio is blanking her.I suppose it would be too much to hope that she at least goes Top 40.KP and KW will probably go Top 20 if not higher.

Radio friendly doesn't necessarily imply it should be played just its "easy listening" imo, thankfully Radio realizes there are INFINITELY more worthy talent/acts that be given Air time over + above her bland forgetable insipid cack. Obviously "blanking her" is your in opinion, lots of peoples couldn't understand why 1 album release was wasted on her NEVER mind the INSANITY of a second DOA.

 

 

 

 

Don't you dare 'Who?' the voice that is Joss Stone. Yes, we know it will flop the hardest out of that list but that doesn't make her any less amazing.

Well 'amazing' is a construct of consciousness, and given that "Jos sh!t" know about her, her potential of amazing through the restricted collective consciousness availability is pretty non-existent too :)

 

 

I can't get over the odds of the ENTIRE world's Jos Stone stans ( ALL 2 of them!) being ON THIS SAME BJ THREAD at the SAME TIME!!!http://209.85.12.227/431/162/emo/yowza.gif

 

Exactly. The on air/on sale release is essentially the singles chart i grew up with (the late but i assume all of the) 80's to EARLY 90's - the further back in the 80's the rarer song debuting in the top 10 or higher - there was no such thing as front loading, back then, that created a ridiculously unstable chart in the late 90s,when a majority of the top 10 would frequently all change by the next week.The closest to front loading was Heavy Metal groups who fans so devoted/organised to achieve a high new entry that would never connect with the GP and just as uniquely bomb straight out the chart.

 

My point - despite the lower frequency of HIGH new entries this was NOT a stagnant chart IN ANY PART. Just like suggesting this approach now will make stagnancy in any part the norm is complete OXYMORON because that implies a unexplainable, constant disappearance of new big hit records on the chart. Even though records peaked lower with more stability, there was still also movement, the continual flow + exchange as singles reached the peak from the positive feedback of promotion/position but unlike the unbelievable ENDLESS "DESERT of new hits" over the past few weeks, new hits would regularly rise/take off leaping quickly at first as they move to the top in a wave of succession - like with the usual (ie not last few weeks) Sunday digital new releases progressing up iTunes but played out over weeks rather than hours/a couple of days.

 

Britney would have NOTHING LIKE the bigger impact those other earlier released records would have had , it was nothing but her 'cult victim' fan base hit that made no connection with the public disastrously EVERYWHERE outside the US/Canada, it bombed/ accelerated out the chart regardless of increasing exposure from the radio + all the web hype, EVEN the vestiges of her immense video (cultural) act have made little difference.

You cannot compare it to the late 80s/early 90s. That was the physical era - where stock decreased, more newer records were giving presedence over older ones, some songs were even deleted, radio stations were nowhere near as slow and unreceptive as these days in moving on to newer hits, etc. Therefore the chart still moved very fast and, despite songs climbing to their peak being the norm, there was no such slow turnover. Now we're in the download/iTunes era where there is essentially "endless stock" which has already led to the dramatic slowing down of the chart in the last few years. Take away/minimalise the impact of several more front-loaded releases and it gets even slower (the higher you go). Basic common sense there.

 

But you're right that stagnancy isn't the right word as such - although I don't believe I myself ever used that word - more an even further drop of high peaking hits as songs naturally peak lower due to having to lose sales over time and less songs front-loading. As such, the top 10 becomes more elite with only a small handful of newer songs making it in every month, and songs that would have peaked at, let's say, lower top 10 in a front-loading market would instead move something like 60-40-25-16-22-30 etc. The chart doesn't become stagnant, but the metaphorical well of newer hits does dry up somewhat.

 

And I fail to see your point about Britney not debuting in the top 10. If she was a fanbase hit the first time she would be a fanbase hit the second time (unless you're implying all her fans desert her every February?), and then factoring in the casual fans who might not have heard it the first week she debuted there's no reason why she wouldn't debut at #6 or even higher again. The fact that it lasted five (likely six) weeks in the top 40 suggests it did make some connection with the public, however minimal, and I'm sure at least some of the several thousand that have bought it since its first week would also buy it if its sales were held back, in addition to her fanbase.

Edited February 27, 201114 yr by superbossanova