OK so I realise there are still about 3 months until the wonderful Number 1 album sessions hosted by Bré finish. Given we’re planning to follow it with #2 singles sessions, and there’s a reasonable likelihood I’ll be hosting (though if anyone else would like to host more than happy to leave it to them) I’m starting to think ahead.

 

For me it would be fun to depart from the chronological format and play them in another order. We haven’t settled on what order that will be but one interesting suggestion was a points system based on Top 40 chart runs. This would mean we get more variety rather than a couple of weeks of only 50s at the beginning and all the later sessions being full of recent songs we all know well.

 

However I can also see there are reasons why some might prefer to stick with the chronological approach.

 

If we did go with the points method or some other pre-determined order it would need a fair bit of planning, hence me doing this poll now. :)

 

 

Voted for chronological just because my brain is quite rigid and likes doing things in order. But I can see the appeal of mixing it up in terms of keeping it interesting. Either way I’ll be there :P

I like the idea Julian suggested to me, where in the first week we play the 1st, 26th, 51st #2s etc. up to the 1001st, the next week play the 2nd, 27th, 52nd, etc. and so on for 25 weeks, then everything from the 1026th onwards in the final week. Wouldn't need any more prep since all the #2s are numbered, and would give a variety of eras each week, while there would still be some continuity from one week to the next.

 

I'm happy to prep the chart runs as I did for #1s towards the end, and also which song(s) kept them off #1. I'd be OK with hosting although I'd have to leave the songs to play themselves on my laptop and move to my phone as I usually do while having dinner.

 

We'd also have to rethink bonus sessions, unless it's just new #1 singles, new #1 album tracks, RIP slots, and Jamelia-inspired randomness :D

I voted Chronological just cos I quite like the experience of going through time musically, and while there is a slog in the late 90s and triple Ronan Keating blandness in 2004, we also get some wonderful years in the early 80s, including Birdie Song going into O Superman :cheeseblock:

 

Saying that, I'll be there either way so I wouldn't mind mixing it up either. The only way I can think of would be based on weeks in the chart from most to least so we wouldn't miss any new ones.

 

Bonuses I guess could be #3-#5s? Alongside those mentioned ofc.!

Chronological, it's like moving in time

 

A point system wouldn't be the worst but not sure

 

But a random order now 1st, now 99th, would be too messy, then I'd probably pass then

I voted for chronological order as there's very little from the last 25 years that I would want to listen to. I would do the same as I did for the number 1 singles and stop attending once we get to the 21st Century.

Doing them chronologically has the advantage of showing how tastes changed and which hits were ahead of their time (or old-fashioned for the time).

I do think the idea of shaking it up is interesting but ngl I do personally like it being chronological (and that seems to be the majority x)

Sounds like the majority want chronological - that’s easier for the host anyway so absolutely fine with that if it’s me! Thanks for voting / commenting. :)