My Random Music

If I had to pick a favourite Swedish act I would probably say Eric Prydz. I thought the members of Swedish House Mafia were decent as individual DJs previously but I can't say I'm a fan of Swedish House Mafia. The definition of "good artists and bands" is subjective and most of those you've listed aren't my cup of tea. However in terms of successful bands and artists I would say Max Martin and his fellow Swedish songwriters play an important part and it's their philosophy of making music for the masses by following a certain formula. ABBA arguably started that trend, I can recall one of the blokes from ABBA saying it was a bit of a surprise that writing something a bit corny was so well received but because it worked so well they kept on doing it.

Yes the only big happy hardcore hit here was "I Wanna Be A Hippy" by Technohead. There were some minor happy hardcore hits in the mid-90s from the German acts such as Scooter and Mark Oh who were much bigger in their native. It was huge in Holland, even though Technohead were British they were based in Holland at the time and topped the Dutch charts with "I Wanna Be A Hippy" a year or so before it hit the UK charts by which point one of the members had sadly passed away. Force & Styles had a go at cracking the charts with "Heart Of Gold" in 1998 with Kelly Llorenna on vocals but only made 55.

You're right that "Shooting Star" was a b-side on one of the CDs but that wasn't what made it popular. The original of "Shooting Star" was a happy hardcore record by Bang! and was one of the biggest happy hardcore tunes of the late 90s, all the DJs were playing it. At the end of the 90s the popularity of happy hardcore had plummeted but started to turn the corner in late 2001. One of the tactics for growing the popularity of hardcore again was by getting a big label (AATW) to put out commercial watered versions of old happy hardcore records to hook people in and get them listening to actual hardcore records. Other examples include "Heart Of Gold", "Field Of Dreams" and "Pretty Green Eyes" which were all originally by Force & Styles. I was one of those who liked the originals and hated the remakes, though 21st century happy hardcore was never really my thing.

I've said what I've wanted to say about your points. I don't think there's anything wrong with the fact you stream music instead of buying it, this is how a lot of people consume music these days and perfectly legal. I've also highlighted some of the ways streaming can be beneficial to the artist. What I don't like is the attitude of the artists not deserving a penny from you because you can legally listen to everything they've ever spent time and money producing for free.

There's a strong case for both sides of the argument, however I can't say I agree with many of the points you make. At the end of the day somebody has put a lot of time and money into make that music, the same way a farmer has put time and money into providing food. Addressing your points: some people do buy food direct from farmers or books direct from authors. In theory you pay the shop, the shop pays the farmer/author. You don't pay the streaming platform, so it's different the CEO of Tesco is most likely a millionaire too, doesn't mean we should get our weekly shop for free it's Hobson's choice for a lot of them, either only sell physical products in the knowledge you're narrowing your audience or at least make a small amount of income by widening your audience yes a physical format isn't much good without anything to play it on, but it's like saying you only steal food you can eat raw because you have no cooker true, the same way that not paying £1 for a loaf of bread isn't going to make a difference to the bread company but if everybody decided to just take a loaf of bread instead of not paying for it then the bread company won't last much longer neither are a lot of people, doesn't mean we can just take anything we can't afford that's like justifying stealing from a shop because you've paid your bus fare to get there. Plus if streaming didn't exist I'm sure you'd still pay for your wifi and device and they don't owe you any music to listen to at your leisure I do agree with you on that point it does raise an important issue, but there's lots of things I'd like to have but don't because I can't afford them I buy CDs because I prefer to have a physical product which is mine forever. I can't really say I'm supporting the artist because more often than not I buy them from a charity shop. I'm old and hate 99% of modern music so it's really my only option these days for CDs, any CDs available at HMV that interest me are ones I already have generally speaking. As a youngster before even the internet was a thing I did have several copied tapes. When I first got pocket money it was £2 a week, the bus to town and back was £1.30 and a CD was around £13 so if you do the maths it didn't allow me to buy too many CDs. That said I did probably spend more on CDs than anything else. Plus I did buy some of the copied tapes on CD when I was older and had more money. I know there will always be people that will get things for free if that's an option but I do think the combination of expensive CDs and musicians flaunting their wealth was a big factor in turning people towards illegal downloads once this was a possibility. A regular CD isn't particularly expensive these days but we still have the issue of musicians flaunting their wealth and doing blatant money grabs. The problem is there's not that many artists in the grand scheme of things who are that rich but people assume they are. I too thought everyone who appeared on Top of the Pops in the 90s were millionaires but a lot of them work in regular jobs now, not something you'd do if you could afford not to. I do however think that streaming has it's advantages for both the listener and the musician. There are certain artists I've seen in concert whose music I would not know had I not had the ability to listen to it on the internet. There's also a bunch of music that was deleted long before streaming came along that you can now listen to on streaming platforms, so no sales have been lost on that basis.

Assuming I understand your methodology correctly, one big factor would be that you used to get a lot of bands in the chart but you don't get many these days. Bands tend to be more male generally speaking meaning you'd need more female artists to even it out. For example, UB40 had a hit every year in the 80s and they had 8 male members so you'd need 8 female singers to even that out alone. There's loads of other factors at play, for example Texas would be 4 or 5 males (depending on era) and 1 female, but the female member is the only member the general public know and they're a band that's helped raise the profile of women in music. If we look at 1952, the first year of the charts, there were a total of 19 artists, 12 male and 7 female so 63% male and 37% female. There were duets, but all were solo artists so no bands skewing the figures. There's no real accurate way of measuring, any methodology would raise question marks but fair play for doing it.

It's come full circle. Before The Beatles you had more American acts than UK acts in the charts. In 1952, the first year of the charts, the only UK born acts to chart were Vera Lynn and Max Bygraves.

I don't have a solution, but the combination of there being fewer new entries in the Top 40 these days and a handful of modern artists clocking up a large number of Top 40 hits in a short space of time isn't a good one. What I will say though is I don't think the Top 40 has ever been a true reflection of what's popular. When I was at school in the early 90s the most popular band by far amongst my peers at school was Nirvana but they never had a number one. I also remember how sick people were getting of Bryan Adams 16 week chart topper, yet enough people went out and bought the single 16 weeks later to still keep it at number one. The point the article makes about Drakes chart topper is a valid one. I don't think I ever heard it during it's 15 weeks at number one, I did listen to it some time later out of curiosity but immediately forgot how it went. If you were around in 1991 it would be almost impossible not to know the Bryan Adams record.

I would say it's pretty common. The reality is that if you want to make a healthy living from making music then you need to make music that will sell to the masses. Aside from that, I cannot think of a single artist where I like every tune they've made so I can't imagine an artist liking everything they've done either.

I found it interesting when Nigel Martin-Smith said that Gary Barlow was good at writing ballads but struggling with the more uplifting numbers. Never thought about it before, but their uplifting hits are either covers, written by someone else or Gary Barlow has had help from other songwriters. I knew that East 17 members aside from Tony didn't make a lot of money, but didn't think it would be as little as £150 a week. That was a poor wage even in the 90s, would have almost certainly been under minimum wage if it existed then. It seemed like Damage didn't think much of their music, they wanted to be the British Jodeci but ended up being a pop group. I do find it a shame when people have to make music they don't like in order to make a living, but I'd do the same myself if I had the opportunity. I recall from The Big Reunion that they didn't make much money and went back to the day jobs apart from the member who married Emma Bunton and hasn't had to work again.

In my opinion all the best music was made in the 90s but when you look back on what was actually in the charts there was a lot of dross in there too. We had variety though, partly because of the sheer quantity of records that made the Top 40. There were over 700 new entries in the Top 40 in 1997, these days we get in the region of 200-250 new entries a year. If streaming was around I think it would have been mostly the dross that would chart, a bit like it does these days. Generally people are lazy and just listen to whatever Spotify recommends them or whatever is popular.

Quite a few, some I still liked once they became popular, many I didn't. Some good ones: Scooter - although they'd been in the charts in the mid-90s most people I knew had never heard of them before "The Logical Song" Roni Size - had a few tapes of his before the Mercury Music Prize win Pied Piper and the Master of Ceremonies - heard their big hit way before it charted, but also had Pied Piper tapes and also heard many sets with MC DT on it where he'd use the "we're loving it loving it loving it" line long before that tune existed Ones I stopped liking: DJ Fresh - he was part of Bad Company in the 90s who were good but the commercial drum & bass he was releasing with the female singers years later was dreadful Swedish House Mafia - more the individual DJs really who were initially known collectively as the Swedish House Mafia before it was really a thing. The actual music they released as Swedish House Mafia was the start of all that EDM nonsense that I hated Styles & Breeze - again more them separately, Styles was part of Force & Styles and before that Force & the Evolution who were excellent. Was listening to Breeze too in the 90s. When they came together making hardcore it wasn't really my cup of tea, but the watered down versions of hardcore tunes that charted later were even worse. An in between one: DJ Zinc - started off as a drum & bass DJ and I liked his garage record "138 Trek" that was his first hit. The music he made in later years not so much.

You're right that the interview played it's part in reggae getting its reputation and yes reggae has been blacklisted in many places as a result. However that time when reggae was huge in the charts in the early 90s came after the interview. 1993 and 1994 were the main years. The only big reggae hit of 1992 was a posthumous Bob Marley hit and there weren't any big reggae hits in 1991. It also got big again in the early 00s with Shaggy's comeback plus the likes of Sean Paul and Beenie Man.

I'd say your music taste is quite different to mine looking at your list, but we do have 8 CDs in common: Ashanti - Ashanti Ashanti - Chapter II Honeyz - Finally Found Honeyz - End Of The Line Honeyz - Wonder No.8 Mis-Teeq - Lickin on Both Sides Nelly Furtado - Whoa Nelly Nelly Furtado - Loose

I don't completely disagree with what you're saying but it's really not as simple as his career being over as a result of those comments. Yes there was a backlash in some parts as a result. He didn't get dropped by his label until 1996 and I suspect his heyday would have been over by then anyway much like it was for the likes of Chaka Demus & Pliers and Bitty McClean.

This is an example of the history books telling you something different to what actually happened. The interview on The Word happened in 1992 and then he went on to have his 2 biggest hits in 1993 with "Mr. Loverman" making number 3 and "Housecall" making number 8. He also won the 2nd of his Grammy's in 1993.

I'm not sure this will work for WHSmith. I used to buy music and videos from WHSmith back in the day and it was widely viewed as a place to buy that sort of thing. Nowadays it's the sort of place you buy a newspaper and a few snacks from at the train station.

I have around 700 CDs at a guess. I probably had a similar number around 10 years ago but got rid of a few, mostly CD singles. I also used to have over 300 tapes, mostly tape packs from raves but converted most to MP3 and managed to sell them on eBay when I first moved to London and had a lot less space. I have multiple CD drawers/towers/racks and I also keep them in alphabetical order otherwise it would take me forever to find one.

Just voted. I don't know about others, but I don't know every record from 1957 and I'm not going to have time to listen to the entire playlist. What I have found though is more than 15 records that I consider good enough for a vote and have had to narrow it down. It's possible that I may let 1 or 2 good ones slip through the net because I don't know them, but I do think the chances of me considering a record I've never heard before to be better than a record I've liked for many years after one listen are pretty slim. It's a good thing that all chart hits are eligible, it means anyone's genuine favourite won't get left out. I wouldn't worry too much about not knowing them all, it would take some ridiculously good music knowledge to know all of them.

Some of the early 90s rave tunes such as "Sesames Treet" by Smart E's and "Raving I'm Raving" by Shut Up and Dance. Written for fun, played out at raves, gained a following in the rave scene and then crossed over into the charts. That's why they had uncleared samples, they were only supposed to be played at a handful of raves.

I was fully expecting to be the only one to vote for my top record "That's Right" because it's pretty obscure, I'd never heard it myself until a couple of years ago. It's also one of those records you either love or hate. I am however surprised to be the only one to vote for my number 2, "Rip It Up". I'll be even more surprised if the inferior Elvis version gets any votes in 1957, though me mentioning it may prompt somebody to do just that. There are some similarities I have with others though with my 3rd and 4th choices finishing in the Top 2.

It's true that his post-trance career has been more commercial, but he was definitely considered commercial as a trance DJ. He was making gabber in the 90s and then jumped on the trance bandwagon when it got popular and he was one of the commercial trance DJs being ridiculed at the time.

I gather you intended to put "DJ Tiesto Urban Train" against "1st Top 40 for this Dutch DJ who will have a long career: a lovely twinkly track with Kirsty Hawkshaw's ethereal vocals" rather than "Faithless Muhammad Ali". I find it amusing that Kirsty Hawkshaw left Opus III because she thought they were becoming too commercial, then she collaborates with Tiesto who is as commercial as it gets when it comes to dance music.

My first clear memories of pop music and the charts, Top of the Pops etc. are from 1987 so Wham! would have broken up by then, but only just. I cannot remember a time when I wasn't aware of those 5 records listed in the above post. I'd definitely put "Last Christmas" as most popular, not much in it between the other 4, perhaps "Edge Of Heaven" doesn't have such an obvious title but many people will know it from hearing it. I didn't hear "Club Tropicana" until well into the 90s when it was on a TV show about Ibiza because of its video being filmed at Pikes Hotel. I would say it enjoyed a resurgence as Ibiza got more popular in the mainstream in the 90s and introduced it to a new audience such as myself. On that basis it does feel like one of their more famous songs now, but still not anywhere near as famous as "Last Christmas".

A lot of 90s number ones got there for non-music reasons like this. The 3 longest running number ones were all in films, Bryan Adams in Robin Hood, Wet Wet Wet in Four Weddings and a Funeral, Whitney Houston in The Bodyguard. Then there were all the advert songs, most notably the Levi's advert. We also had 3 number ones from Robson & Jerome who started off singing on the TV show "Soldier Soldier".