DanChartFan

One track that came close to a BBC ban was Lola by The Kinks, not because of the references to a tranvestitism/transexuality, but because of the mention of the trademark Coca-Cola in the lyrics. I think I read that it was the BBC that pressured The Kinks to change the lyric to 'cherry cola' to avoid advertising. Of course about 30 years later the beeb was strangely less concerned about mentioning the Coca-Cola brand when they were the chart sponsors.

You know what I don't think a very high percentage of the general public would remember Holler/Let Love Lead The Way. By the time of this single they had just released their third album, which compared to the previous two was something of a flop, and overall the buzz and public interest in the Spice Girls was very much on the wane, hence no 4th studio album, and no more singles releases until Headlines, which was basically a passable bonus track from their greatest hits anyway. I have to agree with @Knightr634 that Who Do You Think You Are/Mama would be remembered by rather more people than Holler/LLTL, and in any case there are plenty of double-a side releases by other artists that would be even more famous still. Tbh the double A-side was already on the way out even in 2000, due to it being over used as a marketing tool by the big record labels, alongside the whole CD1 and CD2 racket, and people therefore becoming wary of them. P.S. @fchd I remember buying Here And Now/You'll Be Sorry when it was out, and still have the cassingle somewhere, and I think I still remember what it sounded like. I think the lyrics were something like "Here and now, I'm gonna be the one for you, and everything you want me to, so I'm saving all my love, here and now", but I'm just going to find the Steps greatest hits to see if my memory is serving me correctly.

Boyzone's No Matter What was taken off the shelves quite abruptly for their next single, which missed the top spot. And of course who knows how long Wet Wet Wet's Love Is All Around would have gone on for if the band hadn't personally halted the single whilst it was still at number one.

Last weekend I heard an uptempo version of Angels in at least two different clubs, so possibly they are getting behind this, and I intended to find and download the uptempo version anyway, so may as well do it this week and add my vote to the total.

Just to add that in the days of generic sleeved vinyl, the promotion of one side and then the other side, alongside the fact that often people never bothered to play the b-sides of the records they owned, meant you could potentially fool the same fans into buying the same disc again simply by promoting the second side as the act in question's 'new single' without mentioning that it was the other side of their last single. This tactic is rumoured to be why Boney M's Rivers Of Babylon/Brown Girl In The Ring managed 2m sales and such chart longevity.

In the days of physical records, particularly 7" vinyls, there was a track on each side of the disc, the lead track, the one being promoted, was the A-side, and the other side was the B-side. Sometimes the B-side was an inferior track, but often there were some good songs there. In the case of some artists the record label decided to promote both sides, for example Elvis Presley had different followings on each side of the Atlantic in the late 50s and early 60s, so one side would be more to US tastes and one to UK tastes. In these case where both sides were being promoted, either at the same time, or a few weeks apart to prolong the chart life of the record, they would be said to be 'Double A-sides'. When the age of the CD came in and more tracks began to be put on a disc, the double a-side began to lose it's role in the marketing of singles, although TV crooners Robson and Groan managed to have a number one with a treble A-side at one point in the mid 90s. In the age of the download the rules for double a-sides governing which sales can be added together and which have to be excluded are rather complicated, and the exclusions can make or break a singles success, as Leona Lewis found out when they made the difference between Better In Time/Footprints In The Sand from getting the top spot and not getting it, although this is nothing new as the various charts disagreed about combining or separating the sides even in the early 50s, which is odd considering you either bought the disc with both sides on it, or bought no disc.

I've done a little research here, and wonder if there is some sort of error. According to the bbc website Nick Grimshaw played Scatman twice consecutively and then one more time after one other track during his show on 20/01/2014. On his next show on 21/01/2014 Nick apparently played Scatman 5 times consecutively. So he would appear to account for all 8 plays in just two shows!!!!!!

How is Scatman John being played 8 times in one week by Radio 1? Is there some sort of campaign or re-emergence of the track that I should be aware of? I would love to see the track re-chart and gain new fans (and also see my younger friends faces when 20 years practice of lip synching to the track make me almost perfect at it lol).

Interesting thread. So before the change to a Sunday chart were Music Week publishing on the same day (Tues/Weds) that Radio 1 were first announcing the chart. Could it then have been an agreement that would theoretically have been in place for nearly 20 years at that point, to the effect that although Radio 1 had first announcement rights to the chart they would not announce the charts until the same day that Music Week published them, so as to not negatively affect Music Week's sales, which would presumably have been somewhat reliant on having the exclusive new chart in each issue. I'm just guessing though.

Re the emboldened part, there was certainly an example in the last year or two where the chart listed about three featured artists, yet they were not all on the same version so the credit as listed on the chart did not in itself match any of the versions, unfortunately I can't remember which track it was. I may have exaggerated somewhat by saying there was a tendency to do this, but there equally is the possibility for this to happen with any track that has multiple versions featuring different artists on different versions, so there must be at least a few incidences out there.

I think if the ft is there to draw attention to the contribution of a new upcoming artist (for example Ella Eyre on a Rudimental hit last year), or if it's there to recognise that a particular contribution was sizable then fair enough, but when you get a list of several featured artists it's almost a mathematically certainty that their contributions were not that huge. You have to remember that even decades ago popular artists, as well as minor ones, often made contributions to other artist's music if they were in the same studios, for example check out this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncredited_background_singer, perhaps it was mildly unfair they went uncredited but it also made it instantly clearer who's single it was meant to be in the first place, and therefore easier to remember to buy it by simply remembering it as whoever's latest single. Do we really want a situation in the future where every background singer, contract musician and studio engineer and producer always has to be listed as a featured artist? I also don't like the tendency now to list multiple featured artists in situations where for example the main artist and one featured one appear on all versions, but the several other featured artists only appear on one particular version each, I mean we know there will be dozens of versions of a track available nowadays and we know that one obvious way of making alternative versions is to release versions involving every possible combination of the artists involved, but usually there is one combination that is by far the main version, and that is the only version who's featured artists need go down in chart history for that track. Finally on a related note, a little pet hate of mine is downloads, CDs and sometimes some sources of chart stats, where the featured artists become a bracketed part of the title instead of being part of the artist credits, as I've never quite understood that (apart from it possibly being a space consideration on databases maybe), so I spend ages changing the titles and artist credits on anything I download or rip from CD on my own iTunes.

Physical definitely. Firstly as I will always want a back-up plan in case iTunes goes wrong or goes altogether etc and also in the past when I've attempted to download full albums I've failed to obtain every track, despite complaining and being given renewed access to the download to try again, so to me physicals will always give me more confidence. Though having said that I only really buy Now albums (as a physical back-up of most singles now that CD singles are never stocked) and the odd reduced album nowadays.

It quite likely will be. I think I'm right in saying that the majority of new million sellers and trickle-over-the-line classics that become million sellers only get a short way over the million mark at best, whereas Will is comfortably over by quite a margin.

Interesting that in the same week that a new presenter starts on the 'network' chart show, and one with a big fanbase, the BBC chart show is giving its regular host a week off and covering for them with someone not exactly associated with chart music. Can't decide if they are waving the white flag at the commercial opposition, or whether they think the novelty of a guest host on their chart show might stop people being tempted to turn the dial to the new boyband presenter on the rival show. Probably though it's just an unfortunate coincidence.

I guess you never listened to the chart show when Reggie was presenting it then, totally unregimented and at times he seemingly forgot it was meant to be a chart show at all. In comparison Jameela has, in my opinion, actually brought back some regimentation and some semblance of an actual chart show. In the Reggie days we'd be given 'facts' that were regularly wrong, and he'd spend a lot of time reading texts like "I'm doing the washing up" and "I'm just eating sprouts" that had no place in a chart show, whereas Jameela just plays the records and concentrates on the chart itself for the most part.

Normally though Reggie or Fearne simply says "and now here's this years Xmas number one..." and the additional performance is recorded after and stitched relatively seamlessly into the show. In fact that was how they seem to have set it up this year, but only slotted in the video. I think Sam may be the first X Factor winner to not actually film a performance for them. Perhaps Simon was too upset about the Beeb' Strictly beating his show every single week on the audience ratings this year to let his act film an appearance on the other side.

Speaking of Brunswick, does anyone else feel that that label is somewhat over-represented in Colin's charts? Take a look at the list of number ones for most of the 40s and they are nearly all on Brunswick. I don't know a lot about the relative size and success of the different labels during the 40s but this seems like some sort of near monopolisation. It could be genuine although in the existing charts any label that starts to dominate does so for maybe 3 years max (i.e. PWL in 88-90 etc). Since this is based on shop orders is it possible that Brunswick offered shops a larger case size or better price per unit or something, and therefore got slightly larger orders from shops compared to the other labels?

You know I can't help thinking that after trying to axe it a couple of years ago and then having to unaxe it due to lots of complaints, they may now be trying to deliberately lose viewers so they can justify reaxing it in another year or two. I hope I'm wrong though. Of course the other problem is the annual viewers are getting older each year (I'm nearly 31 now btw) and the younger viewers (ie the teens and early twenties who were once TOTPs target) are mostly not gonna start watching each year so gradually the current music of the year will stop appealing to the die hard audience who watch out of tradition and the viewing figures are likely to drop off year-on-year anyway.

It's on at 530pm.

I did hesitate myself lol, especially as Fearne and Reggie had just plugged it a few minutes before on the show.

On New Year's Eve.

That was a wonderful performance from Ellie, but coming immediately after Ella's really energetic performance meant it felt like someone pulled the emergency brake cord momentum wise.

Wow Ella Eyre has my vote for performance of the show so far, she actually is showing lots of energy and moving around the stage and stuff...

When they do these highlights bits it feels like "here's the good stuff... but we don't want to give you that!".

Bastille's not bad, probably the best one so far, although this is the first non studio performance of the show so that say a lot about the standard back in the studio. First proper singalong for me too (though that could just be because I'm alchohol free this year for once).