Posted July 19, 201113 yr ISTM this year has had especially slow turnover, especially in the higher regions of the chart? There used to be a website that had graphs of new entry totals, but I can't remember which it was now?
July 19, 201113 yr The site is polyhex.com The graphs are under the UK/US Charts heading. A few graphs: Average new entries per week per year http://www.polyhex.com/music/singles/avgentries.php New entries per year: at number 1: http://www.polyhex.com/music/singles/newentn1.php in top 10: http://www.polyhex.com/music/singles/newent10.php in top 40: http://www.polyhex.com/music/singles/newenttop40.php Average weeks in chart: http://www.polyhex.com/music/singles/average.php Edited July 19, 201113 yr by Robbie
July 19, 201113 yr So songs spend longer in the top40 now more than EVER before. No wonder I'm bored whenever I listen to the chart show
July 19, 201113 yr So songs spend longer in the top40 now more than EVER before. No wonder I'm bored whenever I listen to the chart show That's a graph for top 75 is it not? And anyhow, of course they do. That's the effect non-limited availability (downloads) has on the charts.
July 19, 201113 yr It's strange to see that 1992 had such a low "average weeks in chart" considering it had so few number 1s and that sales were so low. You'd think with so few number 1s there was a very slow turn over in the chart.
July 19, 201113 yr It's strange to see that 1992 had such a low "average weeks in chart" considering it had so few number 1s and that sales were so low. You'd think with so few number 1s there was a very slow turn over in the chart. Must have had loads of singles with '71-x' chart runs.
July 19, 201113 yr Back then there would have been plenty of 35-x with amount of niche dance singles being released. So many rave singles on indie labels would be snapped up as soon as they were released and supply disappeared so the single would plummet. Then there's the Wedding Present with their 1 weekers also. Edited July 19, 201113 yr by HUMOURless
July 19, 201113 yr Author So songs spend longer in the top40 now more than EVER before. No wonder I'm bored whenever I listen to the chart show Surely at least 50% of the is Reggie though... :lol:
July 19, 201113 yr Author The site is polyhex.com Thanks - that's the one I was thinking of! :) It's strange to see that 1992 had such a low "average weeks in chart" considering it had so few number 1s and that sales were so low. You'd think with so few number 1s there was a very slow turn over in the chart. That is strange - I'd have thought, thanks to Bryan Adams, that 1991 would have been worse.
July 19, 201113 yr Thanks - that's the one I was thinking of! :) That is strange - I'd have thought, thanks to Bryan Adams, that 1991 would have been worse. One single spending 20 something weeks isn't exactly that unusual. It wouldn't have skewed the figures that much.
July 19, 201113 yr It's SO boring. I mean 17 new entries in a week was too many, but 2 or 3 just isn't enough. So many factors affecting this - major labels signing fewer acts, 3rd/4th/5th singles don't sell enough to make the top 40 because don't buy the download single if they have the album/unlimited supplies of big hits-are never deleted... Probably the biggest thing though is that in the olden days of the new release shelves, you could practically make it into the top 40 by virtue of being on the shelf, almost by default. Now people have to actually think to search for your single in the first place, rather than just see it, then buy it on impulse. This explains the "phenonmenon" of singles very quickly rising to the top of the chart once they make it into the top 10 - they're more visible. It would be a great help if iTunes etc improved their front pages to prominently "display" new singles.
July 19, 201113 yr It would be a great help if iTunes etc improved their front pages to prominently "display" new singles. That could be a good idea. On the front page, they could have a list of the 10 highest songs released in the past X days, or something like that. Placed alongside the list of the overall top 10 downloads. If we did that for the current new releases, these would be on the front page, and in theory, would get the top 10 effect: 1. The Adventures of Rain Dance Maggie - Red Hot Chili Peppers 2. Up All Night - Blink-182 3. Sexy and I Know It - LMFAO 4. Party Rock Anthem (feat. Lauren Bennett & GoonRock) - LMFAO 5. Champagne Showers (feat. Natalia Kills) - LMFAO 6. In the Bubble With a Bullet - Beady Eye 7. Hitz (Single Version) [feat. Tinie Tempah] - Chase & Status 8. Shelter (Photek Remix) - Birdy 9. Hitz (Wretch 32 Remix) - Chase & Status 10. One Day - LMFAO So the Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Blink-182, LMFAO, Beady Eye, Chase & Status, and Birdy would get their new releases promoted, and they would got a boost on iTunes, helping them to chart higher. Blink-182, Red Hot Chilli Peppers and Chase & Status all look like they could just miss out on top 40 this week (or only just scrape in), but that promotion would really help them I think, considering what we've seen the top 10 effect do to some songs before.
July 19, 201113 yr That could be a good idea. On the front page, they could have a list of the 10 highest songs released in the past X days, or something like that. Placed alongside the list of the overall top 10 downloads. If we did that for the current new releases, these would be on the front page, and in theory, would get the top 10 effect: 1. The Adventures of Rain Dance Maggie - Red Hot Chili Peppers 2. Up All Night - Blink-182 3. Sexy and I Know It - LMFAO 4. Party Rock Anthem (feat. Lauren Bennett & GoonRock) - LMFAO Surely "Party Rock Anthem" has been available for weeks?
July 19, 201113 yr Yeah, I guess iTunes wouldn't be able to differentiate between new versions of old songs. But sometimes the album version can be quite different to the single version, so it'd be fair enough if that's the case.
July 20, 201113 yr Author One single spending 20 something weeks isn't exactly that unusual. It ISN'T?? Only 3 songs have *ever* been #1 for 15 weeks or more...
July 20, 201113 yr It ISN'T?? Only 3 songs have *ever* been #1 for 15 weeks or more... he was talking about weeks in the chart, not weeks at number one :P
July 23, 201113 yr Is Polyhex.com down? Chose a really bad moment as I'm writing an article about this subject.. Has anyone downloaded their data? If so please PM me. Thanks! Edited July 23, 201113 yr by SKOB
Create an account or sign in to comment