Comments | echo_echo: Dead to the world?

echo_echo

Dead to the world?

Jul 18, 2007 08:40

The UK singles chart used to mean something, having a number one was THE benchmark, that was the goal...along with appearing on Top of the Pops. At least when I was 16 and dreamt of such things.

I heard Umbrella for the first time yesterday. It's been at number one for 9 weeks apparently. I didn't know ( Read more... )

Comments 26

astrofeline July 18 2007, 13:09:28 UTC

nooooooo not the umbrella song *shields ears*....ack too late...its in my head agan.

lee_chaos July 18 2007, 19:55:35 UTC

There are a LOT more outlets for music than there used to be. Back in 'The Day', as long as you were paying attention to radio 1, you'd know what was in the charts.

Nowardays, songs go up the carts without being as in your face because there are many different music channels and outlets. The idea that a song can get to number one and me NOT be sick of it because it's in my face all the time driving me into a rage is, i feel, something to be celebrated!

lee_chaos July 18 2007, 20:06:04 UTC

reddragdiva July 20 2007, 15:59:42 UTC

I think it's more because nobody buys singles and so the chart is not relevant. See below.

echo_echo July 21 2007, 06:07:58 UTC

Well, obviously somebody has bought it in sufficient quantity to stay at #1 for 9 weeks, though I did hear it was around 300'000 copies for the entire period, making an average of 33'000 copies a week, which is pretty pitiful really. That used to be the kind of figure that you might scrape a #1 with in the 2nd week in January.

reddragdiva July 21 2007, 13:42:11 UTC

Hmm, that's quite a lot for a single these days I think. I must see if there are hard numbers anywhere. (As hard as chart-rigged numbers get, anyway.)

reddragdiva July 20 2007, 15:58:56 UTC

The reason is that nobody buys singles. Literally - no-one buys singles.

In the 1980s, you needed sales in the hundreds of thousands to go Top 10; these days, you can be at number one for weeks with 20,000 units shifted across the entirety of Great Britain. That would get you high in the indie chart in the late '70s.

You've never heard of these people not because you are out of touch, but because they are not actually popular at all.

Album sales are down on past years, but are still comparable. So the album chart still has a meaning. The singles chart is purest irrelevant decoration.

echo_echo July 21 2007, 06:10:45 UTC

Album sales iirc were at an all time high in 2006...though part of that was back catalogue and not new albums. Though I agree the album chart is more robust than the singles chart, which can be 'bought' or hijacked with a good media campaign.

gothadh July 28 2007, 10:08:37 UTC

I haven't got a clue about mainstream chart music at all. I know bands such as the Arctic Monkeys exist but I can't name a single song by them nor would I recognise their biggest hit. Not a clue. As for this Umbrella song - I really don't have a clue! We don't have music channels on our telly (although I could be wrong) and I became more and more oblivious when TOTP stopped.