Methodology for the Hot 100

[tarobe]

"Walk This Way" was played on the radio in 1975 here in KY. It became a Top 40 hit exactly a year later.

[jebsib]

Kind of makes me wonder when stations started to resemble the "Top 40" identity that has existed since the late 70s? (The jingles, contests, 10-in-a-row sweeps, etc).

I seem to recall reading that stations in the 50s and 60s played a lot of songs, but also had a large amount of news, sports and entertainment content. Not sure if this was so, but...

[pamelajaye]

I noticed that (Sweet Emotion. I have too many windows and tabs open!) on the list in the Whitburn book.

Apparently on whatever I was listening to at the time, when they managed to avoid the Top 40 in 73, Dream On was a big hit in Boston (not illogical, granted). Then Sweet Emotion was in 75 and Dream On returned in 76. Clueless teenage Bostonians (from the suburbs) thought - wait? wasn't this a hit already?

I'm going to assume I heard it on AT40, wondered why I was just hearing it "now" and then the question slipped from my mind as the web didn't exist. My first Whitburn book was Hot 100 up to 1972, so that wasn't any help, at the time.

I don't remember Walk This Way earlier but that doesn't mean it wasn't. I just really noticed it when Dream On reoccurred and wondered about it. Finding no answer, I went on with my life till I read this thread.

[pamelajaye]

Aug 31, 2012 9:29:08 GMT -5 jebsib said:

Kind of makes me wonder when stations started to resemble the "Top 40" identity that has existed since the late 70s? (The jingles, contests, 10-in-a-row sweeps, etc).

I seem to recall reading that stations in the 50s and 60s played a lot of songs, but also had a large amount of news, sports and entertainment content. Not sure if this was so, but...

And now I'm wondering - what is the definition of Top 40 format, of CHR?
A friend told me, in effect, that the difference been AC and soft AC was Barry Manilow.

[dukelightning]

Another period that warrants attention as to the methodology is from the Hot 100's inception in 1958 to at least the aforementioned change in 1968. This week's 70s show features Casey answering a question about chart longevity. 2 of the 3 records mentioned occurred in 1957. As a matter of fact, there were 12 records from 1955-57 that spent 30 or more weeks on the Top 100 chart. But once the Hot 100 began in 1958, there were none until "Why Me" in 1973 that Casey mentioned.
I know that the Top 100 chart was strictly a sales chart and I THINK that the Hot 100 chart in those early years was based on sales and airplay. So that might account for the chart longevity disparity between those 2 charts. Or it might not.....

[blackbowl68]

pamelajaye, Top 40 is essentially a singles format...the most popular singles of the day.
Since most people that buy singles are usually teenagers, the format tends to cater to this audience. It is also not suppose to favor any specific genre. Some top selling singles sound very juvenile, risque, and controversial. Therefore, some stations in this format tend to sound that way to match the music it's playing.

[pamelajaye]

blackbowl - belated thanks
I found it interesting when the stations that played AT40 did not play some of the songs on it.

[torcan]

Sept 1, 2012 9:44:48 GMT -5 dukelightning said:

Another period that warrants attention as to the methodology is from the Hot 100's inception in 1958 to at least the aforementioned change in 1968. This week's 70s show features Casey answering a question about chart longevity. 2 of the 3 records mentioned occurred in 1957. As a matter of fact, there were 12 records from 1955-57 that spent 30 or more weeks on the Top 100 chart. But once the Hot 100 began in 1958, there were none until "Why Me" in 1973 that Casey mentioned.
I know that the Top 100 chart was strictly a sales chart and I THINK that the Hot 100 chart in those early years was based on sales and airplay. So that might account for the chart longevity disparity between those 2 charts. Or it might not.....

I was always curious why songs came and went from the charts so quickly in the '60s. Some of the big Beatles songs spent several weeks at No. 1, but only 10 on the whole chart. In the '80s if you hit No. 1, you were almost always guaranteed at least 20 weeks on the chart. I just find it surprising that people stopped buying singles - or radio stopped playing them - so abruptly back then. How could a song rank in the top 30 one week, and fall completely off the next? That means 70 songs moved passed it in popularity in one week?

Regarding longevity, there was a period between 1977 and 1984 that spending 30 weeks on the chart happened fairly frequently - I think over a dozen records did it within that time period. There were also about a half-dozen near misses at 29 weeks. Between 1984 and early 1988, there were none. Songs weren't spending as long a time on the charts in those years as they were before. In 1990 and '91, there were a couple more that did it before the charts changed. Now, if a hit song doesn't spend at least 30 weeks on the chart it's unusual. It used to be a "record of longevity", but not anymore.

[johnnywest]

In just the last year or two, they added digital streaming to the Hot 100 methodology. I'm not quite sure what it means or how much weight factor it has.

[blackbowl68]

dukedeb, there was already a separate sales (Best Sellers In Stores) and airplay (Jockey) during the years the Top 100 existed in the 1950s. Also, any single where both sides were getting airplay charted separately on the Top 100. So, I surmise the big chart then combined sales and airplay (and likely jukebox play).

[dukelightning]

Here is the statement next to the Top 100 Sides (as it was called) chart...

This is a tabulation of dealer individual record sales listed according to the specific side requested by customers. No attempt is made to add sales together to reflect actual record sales. This is, therefore, a tabulation of sides to songs, and not records. This is the reason for any possible variation that occurs between the top 50 sides as reflected in this chart and the top 50 record sellers as reflected in the "Best Sellers in Stores" chart.

So it is a sales chart only.

[blackbowl68]

Sept 8, 2012 14:00:22 GMT -5 dukelightning said:

Here is the statement next to the Top 100 Sides (as it was called) chart...

This is a tabulation of dealer individual record sales listed according to the specific side requested by customers. No attempt is made to add sales together to reflect actual record sales. This is, therefore, a tabulation of sides to songs, and not records. This is the reason for any possible variation that occurs between the top 50 sides as reflected in this chart and the top 50 record sellers as reflected in the "Best Sellers in Stores" chart.

So it is a sales chart only.

OK, so radio airplay was not a factor. BUT...I think back in those days, "dealer" could mean a record store AS WELL AS a jukebox vendor. That could be another difference between the two charts.

[mstgator]

The early Top 100 chart appears to have changed methodology during its brief run in the magazine. Here's the description as it appeared from November 1955 to June 1957:

"A list of the Top 100 Record Sides in the nation according to a Combined Tabulation of Dealer, Disk Jockey and Juke Box Operator replies to The Billboard's weekly popular record Best Seller and Most Played surveys. Its purpose is to provide Disk Jockeys with additional programming material and to give trade exposure to Newer records just beginning to show action in the field."

"Juke Box Operator" was removed from the description for one week in June 1957, before it became a "dealer unit sales" chart only. Also, from June 1957 to December 1957, the Top 100 Sides description noted that it was based on a four-week survey period (as opposed to the normal one-week period for the Best Sellers chart). For one week in late December 1957, the chart used a two-week survey period, before finally moving to the same one-week survey period as Best Sellers (as reflected in the statement posted by dukedeb). From that point forward to the final Top 100 Sides chart in July 1958, the only difference between Best Sellers and Top 100 Sides was that Best Sellers combined double-sided hits into a single chart position. Otherwise the rankings appear to be nearly identical (with some very minor discrepancies).

[pamelajaye]

Sept 9, 2012 21:49:57 GMT -5 mstgator said:

The early Top 100 chart appears to have changed methodology during its brief run in the magazine. Here's the description as it appeared from November 1955 to June 1957:

"A list of the Top 100 Record Sides in the nation according to a Combined Tabulation of Dealer, Disk Jockey and Juke Box Operator replies to The Billboard's weekly popular record Best Seller and Most Played surveys. Its purpose is to provide Disk Jockeys with additional programming material and to give trade exposure to Newer records just beginning to show action in the field."

"Juke Box Operator" was removed from the description for one week in June 1957, before it became a "dealer unit sales" chart only. Also, from June 1957 to December 1957, the Top 100 Sides description noted that it was based on a four-week survey period (as opposed to the normal one-week period for the Best Sellers chart). For one week in late December 1957, the chart used a two-week survey period, before finally moving to the same one-week survey period as Best Sellers (as reflected in the statement posted by dukedeb). From that point forward to the final Top 100 Sides chart in July 1958, the only difference between Best Sellers and Top 100 Sides was that Best Sellers combined double-sided hits into a single chart position. Otherwise the rankings appear to be nearly identical (with some very minor discrepancies).

wow, it sounds like
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billboard_Hot_100#Hot_100_policy_changes
needs to hear from you guys (granted, I didn't read it, and I hardly ever even try to edit it anymore as it seems to have gotten a lot more complicated, but they seem to short on sources (I read the header))