Well, we could argue without Calvin Harris, Rihanna wouldn't have a #1. :lol:

 

Although she does have Kanye West, Stargate, Ne-Yo, etc. at the click of a finger, so she probably could've got another #1-worthy song anyway. :lol: I'm excited to hear the album.

When is her new album coming out, is there a fixed date?

 

Not a die hard fan of hers so I don't know the date :P , but I am looking forward to it and hopefully there would be more S&M type of tracks :D

WTF. Someone Like You #2 on Radio Songs AGAIN. It better not peak there :drama: It's been #1 for at least 2 weeks on the airplay chart posted on BuzzJack!

 

Great to see it holding Hot 100 #1 though. I suspect Rihanna will knock her off next week.

 

Foster The People finally off #3 then - unfortunately going down instead of up :( It had the second longest stay at #3 without going higher in Billboard's history though so that's cool.

 

"As Adele's prior single, "Rolling in the Deep," led the Hot 100 for seven weeks beginning in May, the singer/songwriter becomes just the fourth woman in the chart's history to reign for at least five weeks with multiple songs in a year."

 

The achievements just keep on piling up :cheer: Not a first or a record on this occasion but one of four is pretty good. One of two with two songs getting 6+ weeks if it can manage just one more week.

 

"Upon its entrance, "Mistletoe" is the third-highest-charting holiday hit in the Hot 100's history, following the Chipmunks' "The Chipmunk Song (Christmas Don't Be Late)" (No. 1, four weeks, 1958-59) and New Kids on the Block's "This One's for the Children" (No. 7, 1989). (Variations in chart rules over the years prevented certain seasonal songs from appearing on the list)."

 

WTF? What kind of stupid rule would stop Christmas songs from entering the chart?! (Oh wait, Hot 100 rules would -_-)

Edited October 27, 201113 yr by Bré

But aren't you glad Justin Bieber isn't qualified to chart on the Hot 100? It technically makes him #-100 if that pleases you :kink:

 

How much did he sell digitally this week I wonder.

Cool!! @ #43 Kaskade (feat. Neon Trees) - Lessons in Love

But aren't you glad Justin Bieber isn't qualified to chart on the Hot 100? It technically makes him #-100 if that pleases you :kink:

 

How much did he sell digitally this week I wonder.

 

It is qualified to chart :P But according to that loads of Christmas songs which would have gone top 10 on the Hot 100 got disqualified for some reason.

The Billboard charts have the strangest rules. And yet I've never seen anything as bizarre as Paradise not being eligible in the UK!

Why would a chart that doesn't allow songs beyond ### years old not eligible to chart is something I never get. The chart is meant to reflect the most popular songs at current time, whether if this includes old songs or new hits.

The Billboard charts have the strangest rules. And yet I've never seen anything as bizarre as Paradise not being eligible in the UK!

 

why was it ineligible??

Why would a chart that doesn't allow songs beyond ### years old not eligible to chart is something I never get. The chart is meant to reflect the most popular songs at current time, whether if this includes old songs or new hits.

 

right, it doesn't matter if the song is old or new as long as they're selling...

A week after his death, Michael Jackson had 6 songs in the sales top 10 yet none of them charted in the official charts.... that was cruel... :arrr:

^ I remember the top 10 on iTunes being Boom Boom Pow, I Gotta Feeling, and then 8 Michael Jackson songs. :lol:

Blah blah blah

 

True chart fans understand the beauty of Hot 100. The point of Hot 100 IS NOT to crown the biggest selling single. It's not a singles chart.

 

AND THERE ARE OFFICIAL SINGLES CHARTS TOO

 

Sorry :P

Edited October 28, 201113 yr by SKOB

What's the point of the Hot 100 then?

Christina Perri - A Thousand Years #45

 

This is doing so well! I hope it manages to outpeak Jar of Hearts.

Christina Perri - A Thousand Years #45

 

This is doing so well! I hope it manages to outpeak Jar of Hearts.

 

I remember seeing it in the top 20 the other day.

It was at like #70 yesterday evening!

What's the point of the Hot 100 then?

 

It's a hit chart for current songs and new releases (even the name HOT 100 says it) and frankly, a 25 year old recording that somehow gets boosted by a tv performance or butchering in Glee does not belong to the chart.

 

Yes, it might sell well and get acknowledged elsewhere, on Digital Songs chart for example but the key is that all songs have just one opportunity to become a hit on Hot 100 (of course they can re-enter within the rules).

 

Hot 100 and the album chart are the best indicators of truly popular acts in the US. You can have a one download single selling well for a couple of weeks boosted by whatever tv show or a web campaign but if your fame doesn't continue further, you don't get much attention on Hot 100 and rightly so.

 

 

It's a hit chart for current songs and new releases (even the name HOT 100 says it) and frankly, a 25 year old recording that somehow gets boosted by a tv performance or butchering in Glee does not belong to the chart.

 

Yes, it might sell well and get acknowledged elsewhere, on Digital Songs chart for example but the key is that all songs have just one opportunity to become a hit on Hot 100 (of course they can re-enter within the rules).

 

Hot 100 and the album chart are the best indicators of truly popular acts in the US. You can have a one download single selling well for a couple of weeks boosted by whatever tv show or a web campaign but if your fame doesn't continue further, you don't get much attention on Hot 100 and rightly so.

 

No it doesn't, what if some VERY popular musician died (Michael Jackson is an example) and then all their songs became popular instant and lasted for weeks. Due to the rule, they're not ineligible to chart so it doesn't always show the best indicators of truly popular acts.

It's a hit chart for current songs and new releases (even the name HOT 100 says it) and frankly, a 25 year old recording that somehow gets boosted by a tv performance or butchering in Glee does not belong to the chart.

 

Yes, it might sell well and get acknowledged elsewhere, on Digital Songs chart for example but the key is that all songs have just one opportunity to become a hit on Hot 100 (of course they can re-enter within the rules).

 

Hot 100 and the album chart are the best indicators of truly popular acts in the US. You can have a one download single selling well for a couple of weeks boosted by whatever tv show or a web campaign but if your fame doesn't continue further, you don't get much attention on Hot 100 and rightly so.

 

Yes it does belong in the chart. If enough people are buying it to make it one of the most popular songs of the week the it should bloody well be reflected as such on the official chart regardless of whether it's only there for 1 or 2 weeks or whether it's there for an extended period of time. Journey's Don't Stop Believin' only reached the peak of its popularity in the UK 27-odd years after its release. Under Billboard rules it would have stayed as a UK #62 hit when it was popular enough to have been top 10 for 2 months, just because the time of its popularity didn't coincide with the time of its release. What's the point in only giving a song one chance to be a hit? That makes no sense at all. You don't need to get a lot of 'attention' (you don't on the UK chart either, the vast majority of older songs re-entering are only there for a couple of weeks) but it's completely stupid to make something ineligible for the chart just because it's old.

 

The album chart is a good indicator of popularity in the USA. The Hot 100, with its ridiculous rules, is absolutely not. After Michael Jackson's death you could look at the Hot 100, see he has no entries and think that no one bought his songs after his death when in reality he had 8 songs in the iTunes top 10 at one point, they just can't 'officially' chart because they're old which for some reason means they're not 'Hot'. One of MJ's songs could be all over the radio and sell 10 times as much as any other song and be beaten by a song that comparatively few people are talking about/listening to/buying because the chart rules insist that song is 'hotter' because it's more recent.

Edited October 28, 201113 yr by Bré

Exactly, the Billboard Hot 100 I don't understand why it can't just delete the ridiculous rules and do sales only or sales + airplay - rules.