|
Post by laura on Jul 15, 2008 14:36:42 GMT -5
Hello
I am new to this site and I wanna know if there were any songs during the original AT40 era (1970-1995) that were climbing up the top 40 one week, and the next week, it fell out of the top 40. I knew during the later years (1998-2004), there were popular songs that were falling, then went up a notch or two the next week, then were completely off.
If I confused any of you, I will try to reword it.
|
|
|
Post by vto66 on Jul 16, 2008 14:30:38 GMT -5
Hello I am new to this site and I wanna know if there were any songs during the original AT40 era (1970-1995) that were climbing up the top 40 one week, and the next week, it fell out of the top 40. I knew during the later years (1998-2004), there were popular songs that were falling, then went up a notch or two the next week, then were completely off. If I confused any of you, I will try to reword it. The only one that I can think of is Romeo Void's "A Girl In Trouble Is A Temporary Thing." In the Fall of 1984, it debuted at 40, moved up to 35 the following week, then dropped off the survey the week after that. Strange!!!!
|
|
|
Post by at40petebattistini on Jul 16, 2008 15:07:17 GMT -5
Actually, within the #40-#30 range, there are quite a few. In fact, we'll hear an example of a song moving up (as a debut record) the July 25, 1970 chart this weekend. The Delfonics climbed up to #40 (from #42) and the following week was gone from AT40.
Many of the songs that had one or two weeks in the Top 40 were climbing at the time but lost their momentum and dropped out of AT40.
Some other examples: Don't Cross The River (America; 37-35-53) Kiss in the Dark (Pink Lady; 38-37-93) Part of the Plan (Dan Fogelberg; 35-31-45) Devotion (Earth, Wind & Fire; 35-33-48) Happiness is Just Around The Bend (Main Ingredient; 37-35-43) Diamonds And Rust (Joan Baez; 40-35-54) D.O.A. (Bloodrock; 38-36-41) W.O.L.D. (Harry Chapin; 40-36-48)
|
|
|
Post by laura on Jul 28, 2008 13:06:57 GMT -5
Haven't heard of any of those songs! Still, it was nice to know about soe of those songs.
|
|
|
Post by jdelachjr2002 on Jul 28, 2008 15:47:16 GMT -5
Wow! a 56-notch drop in one week. Is that a record for the biggest drop within the Hot 100?
|
|
|
Post by Hervard on Jul 28, 2008 21:40:01 GMT -5
No, that would go to the Beatles Medley (the one by the Beatles, not Stars On 45). The song peaked at #12 for three weeks in May, 1982, fell to #20, then took a humongous drop to #92 the week after that. That's a 72-point drop, my friend, somewhat dwarfing the 56-notch fall of "Kiss In The Dark". That, however, might hold the record for the biggest fall of a song moving up the week before.
Speaking of which, I know of one more song, more recent than any of the ones mentioned, that fell clean off the AT40 chart after moving up the week before. In November, 1989, "Licence To Chill" by Billy Ocean moved 38-32, then fell off the next week. It was obviously in a soft part of the chart, as the week it took the aforementioned six-spot move, it did not have a bullet. I seem to remember around the same time, Annie Lennox's "Don't Ask Me Why" moved 47-40 without a bullet, then dropped, thus spending only one week on AT40. Granted, there were lots of songs that spent only a single week on AT40 (many of them at #40), but they generally came from right outside the Top 40, rather than all the way down at #47.
|
|
|
Post by mkarns on Jul 29, 2008 11:40:24 GMT -5
Also, on 9/25/1982, Donna Summer's "Love Is In Control" moved up from #11 to #10, and then fell right out of the top 40 the next week.
This was at about the same time when Air Supply's "Even the Nights Are Better dropped 5-6-42; what was with all these huge drops in the early 80s?
|
|
|
Post by reachinforthestars on Jul 29, 2008 12:02:51 GMT -5
Also, on 9/25/1982, Donna Summer's "Love Is In Control" moved up from #11 to #10, and then fell right out of the top 40 the next week. This was at about the same time when Air Supply's "Even the Nights Are Better dropped 5-6-42; what was with all these huge drops in the early 80s? I have monitored and studied Billboard charting since the 70's and I can tell you why this was happening in the early 80's. Billboard went to a multi-level star system for about two years (1981 & 1982). A clear star represented significant increase in sales and airplay and a solid star was given to lesser gains. They seemed to have a policy or procedure where a clear star would have to convert to a solid star and then go to no star before the record would be allowed to drop. Thus, a record with a clear star would not be allowed to drop until three weeks. This often times created a log jam in the Top 40 and as a result, sometimes records dropping would be forced to fall a significant number of places. They finally figured out the nightmare they created for themselves and discontinued the multiple star system in favor of just the solid star to represent the significant gain in sales and airplay.
|
|
|
Post by mkarns on Jul 29, 2008 12:21:01 GMT -5
Interesting; this may also explain why some songs camped out in the same position for what must have seemed like oddly long times before plummeting sharply. Examples included Fleetwood Mac's "Hold Me"-(7 weeks at #4, and was part of the exact same Top 5 for four weeks), Diana Ross' "Muscles" (6 weeks at #10), and Rick Springfield's "What Kind of Fool Am I" (6 weeks at #21?)
|
|
|
Post by reachinforthestars on Jul 29, 2008 12:34:24 GMT -5
Interesting; this may also explain why some songs camped out in the same position for what seemed like oddly long times. Examples included Fleetwood Mac's "Hold Me"-(7 weeks at #4, and was part of the exact same Top 5 for four weeks), Diana Ross' "Muscles" (6 weeks at #10), and Rick Springfield's "What Kind of Fool Am I" (6 weeks at #21?) You got it! There was a significant human element to charting back in the 70's and 80's that people are surprised to discover. It was not a strict and scientific result of putting numbers into a computer and expecting a complete chart to pop out. There are many examples where one could be suspicious that the charts were being manipulated. The best example would be 12/14/74 where John Lennon's "Whatever Gets You Through The Night" mysteriously held onto the #40 position for two weeks instead of dropping off. It allowed George Harrison's "Dark Horse" to debut in the Top 40 and thus, making it the first time that all Beatles members had a solo single in the Top 40 at the same time. It makes great storylines for programs like AT40, but it also makes people like me shake their heads and be suspicious about the accuracy of these charts.
|
|
|
Post by laura on Jul 29, 2008 12:51:33 GMT -5
Interesting; this may also explain why some songs camped out in the same position for what must have seemed like oddly long times before plummeting sharply. Examples included Fleetwood Mac's "Hold Me"-(7 weeks at #4, and was part of the exact same Top 5 for four weeks), Diana Ross' "Muscles" (6 weeks at #10), and Rick Springfield's "What Kind of Fool Am I" (6 weeks at #21?) Not to mention Billy Joel's "Allentown", which was at #17 for 6 weeks in 1983. That was a grading period for me in high school!
|
|
|
Post by vince on Jul 29, 2008 23:43:51 GMT -5
Reachinforthestars:
I have to agree with you that there are probably some suspicious occurences on the weekly charts. I figured out how Billboard calculated the year end charts for 1962 through 1986 and there are a lot of mistakes and odd placement of some records. The most noticible being the placement of "Some Kind Of Wonderful" in 1975. I imagine if there are mistakes on the year end charts there probably are mistakes and "human element" issues on the weekly charts as well.
Vince
|
|
|
Post by mkarns on Jul 30, 2008 11:58:48 GMT -5
Reachinforthestars: I have to agree with you that there are probably some suspicious occurences on the weekly charts. I figured out how Billboard calculated the year end charts for 1962 through 1986 and there are a lot of mistakes and odd placement of some records. The most noticible being the placement of "Some Kind Of Wonderful" in 1975. I imagine if there are mistakes on the year end charts there probably are mistakes and "human element" issues on the weekly charts as well. Vince 1962-86? That's a lot of research. If you go back one year further, I wonder how they placed Patsy Cline's "I Fall To Pieces" as the #2 hit of 1961. Great song and singer, but it only peaked at #12 on the pop chart and its chart run doesn't seem to have been unusually long. It just seems strange that Billboard ranked it above, say, Del Shannon's "Runaway", which was #1 for 4 weeks that year.
|
|
|
Post by Caseyfan4everRyanfanNever on Jul 30, 2008 12:56:02 GMT -5
How many weeks was the Patsy Cline song on the Hot 100? This happened in 1973 to Kris Kristofferson's "Why Me" which was #2 on AT40's Top 40 of 1973 although it only peaked at #16. Both weeks on AT40 or the Hot 100 and Peak position (as well as number of weeks at #1 or #2) are important determinants in calculating the year end charts.
|
|
|
Post by vince on Jul 31, 2008 1:09:04 GMT -5
The reason I only went back to 1962 was bacause earlier year end charts were complied some other way, rather than by an inverse point formula. I have tried an inverse point formula on 1955 through 1961, but the results are way off from what Billboard published. For example, for 1961 using the same inverse point formula with no bonus points used in 1962, I got "I Fall To Pieces" at #27.
"I Fall To Pieces" was on the Hot 100 for 20 weeks. Survey periods in the 60s generally ran from the beginning of January to the end of November. During that time frame in 1961 on "Tossin' and Turnin'", 1961's #1 hit was the only song to have more weeks on the Hot 100, 23.
|
|