|
|
Post by Mike on Dec 26, 2012 20:15:25 GMT -5
Run Around stuck around because there was not much to challenge it on the playlists of many radio stations at the time it was out there (March 1995-Feb 1996)--that playlist data was reported to RR and at the time there was no recurrent rule (that came in the summer of 1996---songs that had been on the charts for 26 or 27 weeks and were below #25 were removed). Had Top 40 radio not been in a slump with tight playlists, "Run Around" probably would not have done as well. The fact that there was no recurrent rule (at least, not on R&R) at the time is probably the strongest point here. Probably the song most comparable to its chart situation is the only one to last longer on the chart, Real McCoy's "Another Night". That still holds the overall longevity record at 52 weeks, but had R&R's first recurrent rule of 25/26 (Charting for at least 26 weeks already, and falling below #25) been implemented earlier, that total would've been reduced by almost 20, down from 52 weeks to 33 - it fell from 24 to 27 on R&R's 4/21/95 chart. (But having said that, that's still a few weeks before R&R started going down to 50.) "Run-Around", in contrast, spent a little longer closer to the area of its peak position, and would have lasted 38 weeks, only 10 less than it did. (It fell from 22 to 26 on the 12/8/95 chart.) It's also worth noting, in comparing the two, that the follow-up to Real McCoy's song debuted while "Another Night" was still Top 5. But Blues Traveler's follow-up didn't appear until "Run-Around" had been out of the Top 10 for at least a month - and even then, it didn't catch on nearly as quickly as "Run-Around" did (which was also not the case for Real McCoy). Something else to consider is: How long would many, many songs in this era of "recurrent" rules have lasted on the charts if there were no recurrent rules? As long as Blues Traveler did, perhaps? Real McCoy? Or perhaps...even longer? Here's something I have wondered: Why did it take R&R just over two years after switching to PPW, to finally implement a recurrent rule? From what I've been able to see in Billboard's Top 40 Mainstream charts, they had a recurrent rule nearly from the beginning - it looks like it was implemented sometime in May or June 1993. (This chart began on their 10/3/92 chart, and actually their first rule of 20/26 would not have become active until 4/3/93, but even then, it's looking like that wasn't the week it was first utilized. Or if it was intended to be, then...they hadn't quite gotten it exactly right as yet.) |
|
|
|
Post by jdelachjr2002 on Dec 26, 2012 20:29:51 GMT -5
"Run-Around", in contrast, spent a little longer closer to the area of its peak position, and would have lasted 38 weeks, only 10 less than it did. (It fell from 22 to 26 on the 12/8/95 chart.) Did "Run Around" still have a bullet on the 12/1 chart (or the 12/8 one for that matter)? |
|
|
|
Post by woolebull on Dec 26, 2012 21:06:23 GMT -5
This is really fascinating stuff. I think the writers understood the confusion of playing the Fun Factory song. In the intro and outro, Casey didn't make any mention of it never hitting the top 40, just saying that it was a big hit in Europe. IIRC, when Klymaxx hit number 3 for 1986 after peaking at 5, Casey made a pretty big deal out of it.
That's why I love 1995. Not so much for the music, but for the anomaly that it is. I don't think you'll ever again see an artist or group have two songs in the Top 100 for the year, with the higher of the two peaking at 21!
|
|
|
|
Post by freakyflybry on Dec 27, 2012 11:48:03 GMT -5
This is really fascinating stuff. I think the writers understood the confusion of playing the Fun Factory song. In the intro and outro, Casey didn't make any mention of it never hitting the top 40, just saying that it was a big hit in Europe. IIRC, when Klymaxx hit number 3 for 1986 after peaking at 5, Casey made a pretty big deal out of it. That's why I love 1995. Not so much for the music, but for the anomaly that it is. I don't think you'll ever again see an artist or group have two songs in the Top 100 for the year, with the higher of the two peaking at 21! Not only did Fun Factory do that in 1995, so did Soul For Real. Both of their top 40 hits, neither of which was a top 20, made the top 100 of 1995. |
|
|
|
Post by Hervard on Dec 27, 2012 12:22:24 GMT -5
Here's something I have wondered: Why did it take R&R just over two years after switching to PPW, to finally implement a recurrent rule? From what I've been able to see in Billboard's Top 40 Mainstream charts, they had a recurrent rule nearly from the beginning - it looks like it was implemented sometime in May or June 1993. (This chart began on their 10/3/92 chart, and actually their first rule of 20/26 would not have become active until 4/3/93, but even then, it's looking like that wasn't the week it was first utilized. Or if it was intended to be, then...they hadn't quite gotten it exactly right as yet.) R&R seemed to have an unwritten recurrent rule in 1994, when the PPW era started, since many songs dropped off the chart from unusually high positions. I would find it hard to believe that, after bouncing around between positions #15 and #22, that "Come To My Window" by Melissa Etheridge would all of a sudden just disappear. Especially, since it hung around on the Billboard Top 40 Mainstream chart for several more weeks after it dropped from the R&R charts. In 1995, when the figuring system changed (it was originally figured by points, although I'm not so sure how that worked), that was when songs started hanging around longer. |
|
|
|
Post by woolebull on Dec 27, 2012 13:50:56 GMT -5
This is really fascinating stuff. I think the writers understood the confusion of playing the Fun Factory song. In the intro and outro, Casey didn't make any mention of it never hitting the top 40, just saying that it was a big hit in Europe. IIRC, when Klymaxx hit number 3 for 1986 after peaking at 5, Casey made a pretty big deal out of it. That's why I love 1995. Not so much for the music, but for the anomaly that it is. I don't think you'll ever again see an artist or group have two songs in the Top 100 for the year, with the higher of the two peaking at 21! Not only did Fun Factory do that in 1995, so did Soul For Real. Both of their top 40 hits, neither of which was a top 20, made the top 100 of 1995. It almost makes me want to pull out the 1995 YE and listen to it...but I can pick, I don't know, three random shows from throughout the year and hear every song! Well, except for one. That's amazing: I could pick probably three random shows and hear 99 of the Top 100 of 1995. I could listen to every one, and still only hear 99 of the Top 100 of 1995. A little exaggeration, but not by much! |
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Dec 27, 2012 18:40:33 GMT -5
R&R seemed to have an unwritten recurrent rule in 1994, when the PPW era started, since many songs dropped off the chart from unusually high positions. I would find it hard to believe that, after bouncing around between positions #15 and #22, that "Come To My Window" by Melissa Etheridge would all of a sudden just disappear. Especially, since it hung around on the Billboard Top 40 Mainstream chart for several more weeks after it dropped from the R&R charts. In 1995, when the figuring system changed (it was originally figured by points, although I'm not so sure how that worked), that was when songs started hanging around longer. I've seen that mentioned before (could've been from you), though in looking at some of the charts from that year (thank you CT40 archives ;D), it seems somewhat inconsistent. Compare for example what happened to Melissa, to Celine Dion's "The Power of Love", which worked its way down into the 30s before it disappeared. Either it was inconsistent, or the rule would have to have been based into their points system somehow. |
|
|
|
Post by Hervard on Dec 28, 2012 10:44:01 GMT -5
^I was going to say that maybe said unwritten recurrent rule was implemented later in 1994, but I think it went into place straight off. Case in point: Found Out About You by the Gin Blossoms. On the week that the PPW era started, that song re-entered the chart at #17 and then dropped off the following week. Granted, that could have been an error, since they might have been still in the process of ironing out the kinks - after all, the system they were using was still brand new.
|
|
|
|
Post by mstgator on Dec 29, 2012 12:23:29 GMT -5
As for your opinion of the song, I expect nothing less from you Pinellas county folk. J/k of course! ;D LOL... we're no different than anyone else in Floriduh.  |
|
|
|
Post by mstgator on Dec 29, 2012 12:29:06 GMT -5
Something else to consider is: How long would many, many songs in this era of "recurrent" rules have lasted on the charts if there were no recurrent rules? As long as Blues Traveler did, perhaps? Real McCoy? Or perhaps...even longer? If you've followed AT40 since Ryan Seacrest took over, you can get a good idea of what the chart since 2004 looks like without a recurrent rule. Horribly slow in the bottom half (I think "Scars" by Papa Roach lasted over a year in the Top 40) and lots of newer music missing. I'd guess you'd have seen something similar from 1996-2003, with mainstream pop-rock songs hanging on forever. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2012 12:55:57 GMT -5
As for your opinion of the song, I expect nothing less from you Pinellas county folk. J/k of course! ;D LOL... we're no different than anyone else in Floriduh. Not true. The res of Florida thinks the Rays attendance problems will be solved by building a stadium in Hillsborough county. Pinellas residents (and me) know you can build that stadium inside a mall if you want, people aren't gonna go. |
|
|
|
Post by baylink on Jan 3, 2013 23:48:47 GMT -5
Ha. Yeah, right.
You win a couple seasons, and we'll start coming.
PS: Is it time for the Tampa Bay AT 40 Meetup? :-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2013 7:08:30 GMT -5
They aren't gonna go if the Rays win the next 7 world series titles in a row!
|
|
jebsib
Junior Member
Posts: 94
|
Post by jebsib on Jan 4, 2013 9:16:17 GMT -5
A big reason for all the slowdowns from 1994 - 1997 was that the number of top 40 stations had diminished extraordinarily. The once powerful format had been overtaken by perceived uncool AC acts like Michael Bolton, Amy Grant and Celine Dion, and could not compete with the harder sounds of contemporary hip-hop and grunge rock. As a consequence, many of the top 40 stations turned into Hot AC clones (Adult Top 40) to compete, refusing to play pure pop acts or even marginal r&b. Thus, the limited hits they had in rotation (like Blues Traveller and Counting Crows) they REALLY played to death.
This was justified by new monitored airplay charts which for the first time spotlighted how long other stations REALLY played recurrent and aging songs. This was also the first era of PDs doing dramatic (scientific) research on songs, and learning that the more familiar with songs a listener is, the more loyal they will be with the station. It changed programming strategies forever. It also co-oincided with labels haphazardly releasing commercial singles to stores, thus blurring the traditional rhythm of single releases. Whereas 5 years before, a hit album might have 5 singles in one year, (Paula Abdul), now they were lucky to push out three (Celine Dion). Only in 1997, when pop music was fully re-embraced by Top 40 and ratings started reflecting that, did the Top 40 *start* to speed up (a bit)...
|
|
|
|
Post by baylink on Jan 4, 2013 10:51:08 GMT -5
They aren't gonna go if the Rays win the next 7 world series titles in a row! I'm not sure I agree with that, but differing opinions are what makes the world go around. Well, that and inertia. What I *do* know is the stadium ain't got nothing to do with people's decisions. |
|
