Hot 100 Chart 11/30/91

[Deleted]

This is the week AT40 switched charts to the Radio airplay one and the Hot 100 instituted soundscan. I was just looking over that chart through that Joel Whitburn DVD and noticed something for the very first time. Billboard IMO made their own chart irrelevant in a big way. If you look at "last week" and "2 weeks ago" the charts don't match the previous weeks. It's like Pam dreaming of Bobby's death. The Hot 100 those weeks didn't happen and were a dream! Look, I know methodology changed but dont make your previous weeks irrelevant by not linking that data to the current week. What a joke!

[seminolefan]

I'm guessing that they did that so that the moves from the previous week wouldn't look as jarring as they would had they used the old Hot 100 chart. BB did the same thing on the 12/5/98 chart when they allowed airplay-only songs to chart. This is why "I'm Your Angel" by R. Kelly and Celine Dion doesn't count as a #1 debut, as it didn't appear on the 11/28/98 chart, but on the 12/5 chart, it's shown as jumping from #46 to #1.

Looking at that 11/30/91 chart, it's interesting the moves that some songs took. Some took huge jumps back into the Top 40 (like Color Me Badd's "I Adore Mi Amor" jumping from #90(!) to #36) while others took a nosedive ("Lies" by EMF falling from #18 to #66). Then there are songs that jumped right back into the Top 20 (Mariah Carey's "Emotions") or even the Top 10 (Natural Selection's "Do Anything").

It's also interesting to me how some artists saw their careers take a turn for the worse. There were some who managed to grab another Top 40 hit or two, but many would never see the Top 10 again following this chart. It's like the 80s truly ended and the 90s truly began.

[Deleted]

Jun 15, 2012 19:23:12 GMT -5 seminolefan said:

I'm guessing that they did that so that the moves from the previous week wouldn't look as jarring as they would had they used the old Hot 100 chart. BB did the same thing on the 12/5/98 chart when they allowed airplay-only songs to chart. This is why "I'm Your Angel" by R. Kelly and Celine Dion doesn't count as a #1 debut, as it didn't appear on the 11/28/98 chart, but on the 12/5 chart, it's shown as jumping from #46 to #1.

Looking at that 11/30/91 chart, it's interesting the moves that some songs took. Some took huge jumps back into the Top 40 (like Color Me Badd's "I Adore Mi Amor" jumping from #90(!) to #36) while others took a nosedive ("Lies" by EMF falling from #18 to #66). Then there are songs that jumped right back into the Top 20 (Mariah Carey's "Emotions") or even the Top 10 (Natural Selection's "Do Anything").

It's also interesting to me how some artists saw their careers take a turn for the worse. There were some who managed to grab another Top 40 hit or two, but many would never see the Top 10 again following this chart. It's like the 80s truly ended and the 90s truly began.

In my view, perhaps that week then they shouldn't have printed last week or 2 weeks ago movement and just list the positions that week. Or accept your decision to change methodology and live with the jumping around that happened. Also interesting, while "Set Adrift on Memory Bliss" is listed at #1 that week and the previous two, it has "1 week at No. 1" above it.

[dukelightning]

I liked how they did that because then you could compare the weeks of 11/16 and 11/23 since the 11/30 chart listed the previous 2 weeks using the Soundscan methodology. So you could see right away how the new methodology changed things. One song in particular would be the last #1 of the old methodology, "When a Man Loves a Woman". It was not a #1 hit using the new methodology.

[seminolefan]

Yeah, there were several songs that wouldn't have been as successful under the new methodology. Paula Abdul's "The Promise Of a New Day" wouldn't have been a #1 hit either as it didn't top the airplay or sales charts.

[ronnie21]

1991 was a terrible year for music.. it was the country cross over began.. specially the fall of that year.. even mikey jackson went bad with his whipped song black or white.. come on mike, you can do better than that.. quincy jones departure was well noticed... on dangerous..

[johnnywest]

Jun 15, 2012 18:25:00 GMT -5 @paul said:

This is the week AT40 switched charts to the Radio airplay one and the Hot 100 instituted soundscan. I was just looking over that chart through that Joel Whitburn DVD and noticed something for the very first time. Billboard IMO made their own chart irrelevant in a big way. If you look at "last week" and "2 weeks ago" the charts don't match the previous weeks. It's like Pam dreaming of Bobby's death. The Hot 100 those weeks didn't happen and were a dream! Look, I know methodology changed but dont make your previous weeks irrelevant by not linking that data to the current week. What a joke!

I agree, I was disappointed the way that Billboard handled it. There was an explanation in Chart Beat that said Billboard wanted to be consistent with the data they had from the previous weeks. Otherwise, it would've been apples to oranges.

However, I was even MORE disappointed with AT40. I was SOOO excited to hear all the fascinating chart movements (I was out of town visiting relatives for Thanksgiving that weekend and someone was taping it for me). And when I finally got to listen to that show, I wanted to shut it off. The show just wasn't what I'd grown up with.

[jlthorpe]

I've read on this forum how some people saw the new Hot 100 that week and immediately stopped following it (Paul may have been one of those people). Was there any particular song or group of songs on that chart that made them realize how bad the change had been? Was it certain songs being in the Top 10, or dropping out of the Top 40, or did the chart in general not look like what it used to look like pre-Soundscan?

I know for me, when I started following the Hot 100 in 1993, I noticed how many rap and R&B songs were hitting the chart, when the Top 40 stations I listened to at the time did not play those songs as much as the more pop and rock songs. Now part of that also had to do with the fragmenting of Top 40 radio, since the two main Top 40 stations I listened to then (WPLJ and Z100 in New York) didn't play a lot of hip-hop or R&B at the time; Hot 97 did, but by 1993 I stopped listening to that station for some reason.

[Deleted]

For the record I had no idea about the change until 92 and only then did I vaguely understand what Shadoe was talking about in his op-ed in that Billboard magazine from April/May 92 I got. I wasn't able to listen to any countdown show for most of 91 and by the time I could/was again AT40 was no longer airing on the Daytona Beach radio station any longer. As time progressed I began to see differences in the printed Hot 100 top 10 and what I was hearing on the radio. That's not to say I didn't recognize the SONGS on the Hot 100, just where they were peaking seemed odd. In my days of hearing both CT40 and AT40 there'd be some differences but it still seemed like most of the time they weren't huge. These seemed pretty big. It was probably "Whoomp! There It Is" that really showcased the difference early on more than anything else in my eyes. Here it was at #2 on the Hot 100 and IIRC didn't crack the top 20 on the chart I had come to most care about (R&R). I'd say you really saw differences come 1994 when singles were really no longer being sold by many, many mainstream acts and were being issued primarily by hip hop, rap, and country artists.

But I'll say this about the immediately stopping following it. It's hard to follow something in the pre-internet era if you don't have access to it. Dare I say most people couldn't afford Billboard magazine weekly or a yearly subscription and if they weren't hearing the Hot 100 on the countdown show they listen to, well, you lose interest. Then one day you stumble across it hanging at Turtles and see how different it looks compared to what you listen to every day on the radio and hear every week on the radio countdown show and think "Wow, this chart sucks. Who cares?!"

[jlthorpe]

Paul, that's exactly how I felt looking at the Hot 100 in 1993. In my case, the first one I checked out was, I believe, the March 20, 1993 issue. Here was the Top 10 on that chart:

1. Snow - "Informer"
2. Dr. Dre and Snoop Doggy Dogg - "Nuthin' But a 'G' Thang"
3. Silk - "Freak Me"
4. Peabo Bryson and Regina Belle - "A Whole New World"
5. Whitney Houston - "I'm Every Woman"
6. Duran Duran - "Ordinary World"
7. Jade - "Don't Walk Away"
8. Arrested Development - "Mr. Wendal"
9. Whitney Houston - "I Have Nothing"
10. Bon Jovi - "Bed of Roses"

I don't think I remember hearing "Informer" on the radio at the time, so for that to be #1 was a surprise (I do remember hearing it on the radio eventually). I don't think Z100 played "Nuthin' But a 'G' Thang", as I can't find it on their year-end Top 100 ( www.z100.com/common/top_songs/1993.html ), and anti-rap WPLJ sure as hell wasn't playing it. I don't think I would have considered "Freak Me" a #3 song that week. The rest of the Top 10 (for the most part) seems like what radio was playing back then.

[Deleted]

Well, as you can see on the chart I'm linking to, on 3/20/93 Snow took a 7 notch jump to #11. So it was getting quite a bit of airplay then. But Dr. Dre, no.

www.oldradioshows.com/ct40/032093ct40.pdf


As you can see, only 4 songs are in the top 10 on both. While 9 of these 10 listed above were or did reach the top 10, it is just such a big difference. This is what you did not experience in the 89-91 R&R/old Hot 100 comparison.

[jlthorpe]

Wasn't CT40 off by a week back then (in other words, the March 27 show corresponded to the March 20 R&R chart)? Either way, the CT40 chart seems more in line with what I was hearing on the radio then.

[Deleted]

Yes, but the chart linked to is from that weeks show (so off by a week in R&R)

[blackbowl68]

I respect Billboard because it is & still the only one that tracks sales, which to me is a more important factor than airplay. (R&R didn't even have an album chart!) But I expected the results seen on the revamped chart because of evidence from the three years before the change.

The most telling example was "Wild Thing" by Tone Loc. This single had just been certified gold when it entered the Top 10. By the time it reached its #2 peak, it was certified DOUBLE PLATINUM! No other record reached that level that year. How does a single with those stats NOT go to #1? Simple...pop radio resistance. There were so many stations that proudly advertised they don't play hip hop no matter how much it was selling. If Soundscan had been in place then, Tone Loc's single would've been #1 for a month!

[dukelightning]

I just about dropped the latest Top Pop book on my foot after hearing Stacie Orrico's "Stuck" on the 6/28/03 AT40 and seeing that it peaked at 52 on the Hot 100. Just how accurate can this chart be? I was working in Home Depot back then and this song was constantly played over the PA. Plus it sounds like something Beyonce or Christina Aguilera would do. Definitely not some AC song that only people over the age of 40 would listen to. FYI, it peaked at 11 on AT40.

Incidentally, with this show and the 70s show this week, I have heard Casey identify 2 artists as being from Nashville, Stacie Orrico and Andrea True. But you won't hear either song on country radio. Like they say, don't judge a book by its cover!