If you look at artists who were big in the 70s and 80s their chart runs are often all over the place, times are just heading back that way where being a big name with a successful chart performance doesn't automatically guarantee you a Top 10 single like it did 5-10 years ago.

 

this is a good thing, all of the songs by big name artists that have missed the top ten recently all have one thing in common - they are all weaker than said artists' usual output and deserved to flop

 

obviously another factor of course is album sales blocking out second and third singles success...I'd be surprised if the second single from the new Take That album reaches the top five, because 90% of the fans will surely have it on the album so why download a song you would have already put on your iPod!?!

this is a good thing, all of the songs by big name artists that have missed the top ten recently all have one thing in common - they are all weaker than said artists' usual output and deserved to flop

 

PCD didn't deserve to flop with their new one! :(

I really hope GA keep their top ten run. I think they will though. At least for this album anyway.

 

Whether st trinians officially counts or not is irrelevant, its on thin ice anyway so nobody really counts it. Its better for the girls and tv and magazines etc to be able to say they have had 20 consecutive top tens.

 

Edited December 8, 200816 yr by Robintime11

We've already debated this a lot, for some people it does count, for others it doesnt.

 

The most important is that the medias are on the "it doesnt count" side and are still talking of a "run of 19 consecutive top10 hits" ^_^

Not many people know about ST, and the label got the song off itunes after only 3 weeks or so, while it was on its way up :)

 

And the "Every song would have an excuse of some kind" bit is so stupid and totally untrue. There's a debate because it's a very peculiar song from a soundtrack, the girls didn't promote or perform it (never), and it wasn't sent to radios aswell, it's just the video that was released somehow.

If The Loving Kind misses the top10, noone will deny it breaks their run ...

As a huge GA fan you are going to want to justify that. i understand, and i personally wish the bloody thing had never been released! but calling me stupid doesn't make it untrue, sorry berty and please refrain from being rude. I have heard people make excuses for the other artists on this list, and it is only fans who do so. They don't want the dream to end. There is no official prize for this so it doesn't really matter to anyone but them, but they are sadly still mistaken about these extenuating circumstances at times. Maybe it shouldn't count, but the video production makes this difficult to justify. Also could you quote a source for "the media" please? I've never read this sentence anywhere other than on GA fan run sites, which obviously are not the most impartial

 

Has the OCC made any comment on this? We really need official confirmation as to whether a downloaded album track counts. But then, if we had the whole top 200 every week, we would probably see more and more download album only tracks. But their not counted as we don't know them. So what should the case be? Only those that enter the top 40? As that is what is given to us by Radio 1 who delivers the official rundown and also the Virgin Hit Singles book covers only the top 40 i believe. Though does list those that enter 41-75 i think, i don't have the book so don't know for sure.

It has been established for many years that the top75 is the official chart, while the top200 is compiled only for industry purposes. However, this is confused by the fact the official chart show is only a top40 and the OCC (the authority on such things) now choose to publish a top100 on their site while only allowing others to still publish the official top75! But, for now at least the top75 is considered canon. Any chart mods who wish to second this please post away :)

Thing is, the media still say that Girls Aloud still have the consecutive thing. After The Promise was #1, they went on GMTV (or This Morning) i can't remember which and they introduced them as "beating ABBA and The Beatles in having more consecutive top 10 hits". When this happens, fans are gonna think that the run is unbroken. This is why we really do need a firm line

Thing is, the media still say that Girls Aloud still have the consecutive thing. After The Promise was #1, they went on GMTV (or This Morning) i can't remember which and they introduced them as "beating ABBA and The Beatles in having more consecutive top 10 hits". When this happens, fans are gonna think that the run is unbroken. This is why we really do need a firm line

hmmm, didn't notice it mentioned on there but you're right it would be great if OCC defined these records but they just publish the chart, they don't really consider individual records/measures of success. As far as they are concerned, if it charted on the singles chart, it's a single

Why not give them an email though? :)

This is just one media example of the Girls Aloud thing:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artist/r6p2/

This is just one media example of the Girls Aloud thing:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artist/r6p2/

Good spot. BBC is a reputable source. Thanks for posting. Only problem is, this biography is not a news article, but if you see if you scroll down (and check) it's actually just a copy paste job from wikipedia, which is not reputable as it is fan maintained!

 

Potential rules regarding physicals/videos aside (although if we applied them as six weeks suggested St Trinians would count), my own feeling is St Trinians should not be considered to break their run. I am less sympathetic regarding Madge and Kylie's counter arguments however, though i think it's tragic in Kylie's case, she really wasn't up for that single (bloody record companies). The download era has thrown up many grey areas though. As i mentioned earlier, look at Disturbia for an example of this going the other way- or indeed Run! There isn't a single download is there? All sales are just album cherrypicks?

Edited December 8, 200816 yr by spicefunk

Downloads have certainly had an impact. Usually, 1st and 2nd singles from an established artist do ok but the 3rd or 4th single seems to struggle which is definately the case with Madonna, Kylie, Britney, Take That and quite a few others.

I guess if they are B-sides, then it's not counted...

As a huge GA fan you are going to want to justify that. i understand, and i personally wish the bloody thing had never been released! but calling me stupid doesn't make it untrue, sorry berty and please refrain from being rude.

 

I said it was stupid to say we would find excuses for any song to miss the top10. If it was "whole lotta history" or "see the day" or any other proper single of them, we wouldn't even suggest not to count it.

 

2nd singles even struggle now... ofc there's always exceptions, but just look at the likes of Kaiser Chiefs, Razorlight, Snow Patrol, Sugababes etc.! Although I think a lot of that can be put down to the fact their current material is pretty bad...

 

It's disappointing that all these single runs are coming to and end, but that'a part and parcel of the new era. Fanbases don't count for as much these days to how much they did 5-10 years ago.

 

 

Thing is, the media still say that Girls Aloud still have the consecutive thing. After The Promise was #1, they went on GMTV (or This Morning) i can't remember which and they introduced them as "beating ABBA and The Beatles in having more consecutive top 10 hits". When this happens, fans are gonna think that the run is unbroken. This is why we really do need a firm line

 

Yes I know that statement got through to Beatles forums I frequent and they were not happy, as the Beatles song that broke their run of 21 consecutive Top 4 hits (1963-1970) was an old song they recorded in Germany in 1960 before they got a proper record contract with Parlophone (EMI) in 1962 and released on import in 1964.

 

So if GA are going to claim that they have a better chart run than The Beatles because of a non-proper single counting (Ain't She Sweet) then their St Trinians track should count, in which case they failed to beat The Beatles run.

 

Mind you they've got off lightly compared to what Simon Cowell said on Saturday's X-Factor about Abba being the greatest band of all-time. :angry:

I said it was stupid to say we would find excuses for any song to miss the top10. If it was "whole lotta history" or "see the day" or any other proper single of them, we wouldn't even suggest not to count it.

 

Exactly.

 

I mean its such an up in the air thing, no one can confirm anything.

 

I'm kinda over the consecutive thing now anyway though, more top tens than any girl band in uk ever baby :cheer:

It's all the downloading. Some tracks are further down the charts because people are busily downloading christmas songs, or x factor songs, or songs on adverts etc. That never happened when people went to a shop to buy a newly released CD. Even if you wanted to do that these days, they are so hard to find, except when there's a special single released, and shops make a point of stocking them. It's really not fair, IMO, and only current chart releases should be allowed to feature in the 'official' chart.

 

Some artists will be prejudiced by their fan base too. I'd guess the majority of downloaders are under 25 - and grew up with computers. Many artists have older fan-bases who are less likely to know how, or be inclined to download a track, and therefore they no longer stand a chance in hell of having another hit single.

 

I think they should do away with the singles charts altogether :o Just have an album chart - every week a run-down of top 40 albums which features different tracks from that album. That would be so much more interesting than the current top 40 show. Albums could still have their lead singles - or a selection of them, to release to radio. The public would then get a chance to hear a few tracks before actually buying the album for themselves. Artists could still make their videos to go with certain tracks etc.

 

I'm a Will fan, and whilst disappointed that Grace didn't chart higher, I fully understand the reasons for that. I'd be very worried if his album hadn't continued to sell off the back of that track though, but it has, so fine. There are artists around at the moment who have huge hit singles, but whose albums don't sell well at all. There's no money for record companies in that. Yet it's the singles charts that seem to attract so much of the kudos :cry: :unsure:

 

To do well in both charts is going to be the privilege of very few artists, those who are 'flavour of the month'. To do badly in both is a disaster, and there have been some big artist and band in that position too. :(

I think you're idea of a top 40 album chart run-down sounds great, but just one thing, I wish we had both an album and on a seperate day the singles chart run-downs. It would be nice if the monitoring week began on a different day for albums, so that chart would still be up to date when it came out. Doesn't/Didn't Radio 2 do on Monday evenings the Album chart run-down anyway?

Btw, I think the singles chart is far more interesting than it was say 10 years ago. For one thing, I love seeing all those festive songs chart.

Also, showing just recent releases would be a specialist chart wouldn't it? I can understand where you're coming from though, but for me, nah. I like the eclectic mix.

A Track should only count as a Single Release, if it is meant to be a Single

by the Record Company. That is whether it is only available as a Download,

or as a Download & a CD, & whether it does or does not have a Video to Promote

it.

 

If a Track is NOT going to be a Single - if it is Downloaded off an Album, & the

Record Company do NOT want it to be a Single, then it should just count as a

Chart Entry for an Act. It should get added to their Weeks On Chart - but, it should

not be regarded as being an Official Single - so such Tracks cannot break an Act's

Top 10 Singles runs etc. (Like 'Ain't She Sweet' reaching No.29, for The Beatles in

1964. It was not on The Beatles UK Label, & it was not an Official Beatles Single

- so it is not counted, as regards breaking their run of 23 Top 10 Hits in a Row.

The Run would be 18 Top 10 Hits in a row, if you count 'Ain't She Sweet' as

breaking the sequence).

 

Otherwise - had we had Downloads in the 1960's & 1970's - no one would have

been able to put together long runs of Top 10 Hits. The Beatles would never have

had 23 Top 10 Hits in a row, from 1963 to 1976. ABBA would never have had 18 in

a row from 1975 to 1981. Because BOTH Acts were so big, that every New Beatles

& New ABBA Studio Album, would have seen many of the Tracks enter the Singles Chart

- as Downloads. If you counted them as 'Hit Singles', neither Group would have

strung many Top 10 Hits together at all - unless all their Downloaded Album Tracks

made the Top 10, of course. Some of their Downloaded Album Tracks may well have

made the Singles Chart Top 10 - but many - maybe most - would not have done so.

Edited December 8, 200816 yr by zeus555

It's disappointing that all these single runs are coming to and end, but that'a part and parcel of the new era. Fanbases don't count for as much these days to how much they did 5-10 years ago.

 

EXCELLENT summary quote.

 

 

A trend i've noticed and thought about too - the accessabilty/form of the chart has changed - like everything eventually does with time (except perhaps time ...or may be not even that..) music artists are dependant on a chart ranking no matter how it is measured (its all relative/subjective eg how the US single chart has been linked to airplay) despite their previous history (here centred around a sustained die hard fanbase buying physical (long) after album release - last/later post album release singles giving a typical chart run of a high (~top10) entry then HUGE chart plummet next week especially from a decently (or more) selling album - as most casual interest/fans already have access to the trk on the parent album they've bought which is enough for them them w/o all the mixes etc). As long as the same rules apply to everyone its still as 'fair' as it was.

 

 

Its like the opposite of the era when there was a HUGE promotional push building towards the single release date, new entrys were high and profuse but sales/position stability was low and records rarely didn't drop never mind rise. However contradictingly such a chart was better/relatively easier to produce/sustain consecutive high charting single runs though imo it made a mockery (the excruciating W***L*** springs to mind :puke2: - notice how they've stopped releasing as many post album release singles - i bet they will split before they break their chart run further (if they already haven't that is :cheer:) ) of those acts that obtained similar succesive (top10,20 etc) chart runs in the 80s/early 90s where gaining a top 10 etc place was much harder as a record usually reached its peak usually from RISING the following week after being a new entry - thus the potential longer/stable chart run for more sales (depending sales per relative position) than a single with a corresponding highest chart position in the late 90s/early. 00s

 

 

 

Lets not turn this into yet another Girls Aloud thread :lol: I am sure that if the St.Trinians single had made the Top 10 GA fans would be happy to include it in the bands chart run ;) The song could have course become a hit single though if the record company had not taken the decision to remove it from downloading....

Hmm, it depends what you consider a "single." If a complete single is one that is released physically and on download then Kylie, Girls Aloud, Madonna (?) and a few others haven't had their runs broken as it was never a full release.

 

That would mean that Leona with her download only release of 'Run' is not considered a single then?! :huh:

Lets not turn this into yet another Girls Aloud thread :lol: I am sure that if the St.Trinians single had made the Top 10 GA fans would be happy to include it in the bands chart run ;) The song could have course become a hit single though if the record company had not taken the decision to remove it from downloading....

 

Of course the only reason it was removed was because the film had some of the worst reviews of all-time and was absolutely tanking at the box office. They recorded a single for the film, produced a video to go with it and released the song to download.

 

A clear single. And one which flopped.