I was 13 in 1994 and everyone saw the charts as the biggest indicator of what was popular. People made the effort to buy a physical copy of their favourite song. Spending 15 or even 16 weeks at #1 in the 90s will be a far bigger achievement than in 2016 because with Spotify you only need to listen to 30 seconds of a track, and I still think there must be hundreds of thousands of Spotify users who just select a playlist and hit play and not even care about half the songs playing. They just want some background music, and if One Dance is benefitting from being "background music" then that's going to be reflected in the charts.
In the 90s I followed the charts with genuine excitement. The whole concept of hearing a song and loving it, going to Woolworths or Our Price to buy the CD single and then listen to the top 40 the following Sunday afternoon on Radio 1 to see where it had entered - and even then to see how the song progressed the following weeks.
I doubt many teenagers today have that same level of interest. There isn't anything these days to draw in the teenagers and get them excited about the charts. They don't have a Top Of The Pops, The Chart Show, CD:UK or any Saturday morning kids TV show where they can watch their favourite artists performing their latest single. It really is a totally different era of the UK charts and it is very much evident in the charts we have today.
They were happy days indeed! However I was just a tad older than you (19). I've still got dozens of cassettes somewhere in my garage, full of recordings of the charts! Plus a few Betamax recordings too!
You can trace that feeling all the way back to the sixties. I think that's why the state of the current charts mean so much to those of us who took an interest not just in the music but in the stats as well.
I don't think the singles chart is on many peoples radar these days-it was a considerable cross generational event across the nation back in the day.
There is some truth in this, I think there was greater interest in the charts in the past.
But nowadays it is different and young people (and old) spend their time searching around for the best quality music of the present and the past rather than listen to the charts.
At the time Bryan Adams was no 1, I was bored with the it and couldn't wait until it was knocked off the top. Its success felt like it was more to do with the associated movie than any quality in the song. I could say the same for the Wet, Wet, Wet song and the success around 'Grease' a few years before. Any idea that these songs are more deserving for 'quality' reasons is quite spurious. Drake's song is actually ok in comparison.
People always used to listen to music on the radio (they still do), but the official chart didn't include airplay as playlists could be manipulated by record companies and it wasn't a realistic measure. The same thing goes for streaming playlists, many people might get Drake on their playlist, immediately click onto the next thing rather than listening to the full song, but it still counts as a play.
The data may be genuine, but there's no way of knowing if people are actually choosing to listen to Drake or the same three Justin Bieber songs for months last year or if it just automatically plays for them in the playlists they're listening to.
If streaming counts, things like YouTube views should count as a legitimate measure of music consumption, so the Official Chart Company are actually making it up. It's sales, combined with certain online-based streaming figures, divided by an arbitrary number that somebody decided to value each stream at. If they decide to alter that figure to make streams worth less against sales, that's even more contrived than it is now.
The current chart is deeply flawed and doesn't really reflect what people are listening to at all, to get an exact chart you need all streaming sites included, including all the video sites, you need to include radio listeners, and also measure how many times people are listening to the track they bought. Maybe it's less than a hundred, maybe it's more, but it'll be spread over more than just the one week a purchase counts for in the current system.
It isn't 1991, back then the Radio 1 chart was a legitimate chart based on face that people paid attention to, while the Network Chart was made up nonsense with airplay swaying the figures. Now the Radio 1 chart is a minor show tucked away on Friday with a number one that dropped out of the top 10 of the commercial radio chart at one point (although the iTunes/airplay mix of the BigTop40 is far from perfect either).
Anyway, congratulations to Drake on getting back up to number 8 this week.
Others have said it, but I will too... brilliant post.
I will add though, that Drake has only climbed to number 8 on the sales-only chart due to his track being reduced in price to 59p on itunes.
Also, I think the fact that One Dance doesn't have a video is extremely relevant. If it did, how many people would be watching that on YouTube instead of streaming the track, and therefore contributing to its ongoing chart success?
Also, I think the fact that One Dance doesn't have a video is extremely relevant. If it did, how many people would be watching that on YouTube instead of streaming the track, and therefore contributing to its ongoing chart success?
Me for one. I've been streaming it constantly as there's no video.
In 1994, Wet Wet Wet had their biggest hit, a cover version of The Troggs' single "Love Is All Around", which was used on the soundtrack to the film Four Weddings and a Funeral. It was a huge international success and spent 15 weeks atop the British charts. The week before it could have equalled the record for the longest-standing number-one single, held by Bryan Adams' "(Everything I Do) I Do It for You", Pellow insisted on its deletion because he wanted to focus on getting their next album, Picture This, finished. However, even after its deletion, there were still enough copies in the shops to get the song to number 2 in its 16th week, finally knocked off the top spot by Whigfield's debut single "Saturday Night". In any event, it remained in the Top 40 for the remainder of the year.
As of February 2016, it has sold 1.88 million copies in the United Kingdom, making it the country's best-selling love ballad of all time.
I bet we won't be sharing the same info about Drake in 22 years time!
i cannot abide wet wet wets destruction of the troggs classic. they sucked all the emotion out of the track, like a poor karaoke version.
on that basis, i prefer drake.... even though i hate the track...
The Spotify charts have updated. Major Lazer and Justin Bieber are BEHIND One Dance. Looks like another week at the top for boring Drake zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
streaming is ridiculous, the fact you can be in the charts without selling is stupid, why don't they include youtube views next. Drake has been number one for 15 weeks without ever even being in the top five best on SALES (Drake won't equal Bryan Adams record because the King of Pop Justin Bieber will be number one this friday)
Hope you are right, but Drake is still no1 on Spotify (worldwide and in the UK), however Biebs is no1 on iTunes, but that does really count for much.
Both Bryan Adams and Wet Wet Wet had long spells at number 1 when people cared about the charts and bought CD singles, making their achievements bigger
Drake is much better than Bryan Adams. I hope he gets the record.
Says a 15 year old.
It's like me buying a cd then the chart company counting how many times I play it. In that case Bat Out of Hell should have charted longer
Both Bryan Adams and Wet Wet Wet had long spells at number 1 when people cared about the charts and bought CD singles, making their achievements bigger
I tend to agree. Looking at the top 20 yesterday in the paper I certainly would not listen anymore, I was surprised to see just 1 song that wasn't in the top 20 the previous week and something like the top 8 are unchanged. There is no excitement now.
As a solution the problem why not have a sales top 40 and a steaming top 40.
Says a 15 year old.
It's like me buying a cd then the chart company counting how many times I play it. In that case Bat Out of Hell should have charted longer
I'm not 15.
I don't see how streaming matters that much as it still takes 100 plays before it counts as 1 sale. I doubt many people are playing Once Dance 100 times. I probably have over several weeks...
I tend to agree. Looking at the top 20 yesterday in the paper I certainly would not listen anymore, I was surprised to see just 1 song that wasn't in the top 20 the previous week and something like the top 8 are unchanged. There is no excitement now.
As a solution the problem why not have a sales top 40 and a steaming top 40.
People do have different opinions on music, I wouldn't have put One Dance anything further than a top ten hit and I don't see its hook, but many clearly disagree.
The chart situation though is a shambles and needs a lot of thought and maybe some science too. It just doesn't seem fit for purpose currently.
Including streaming Drake's "sales" figures for One Dance are at around 1.4m in the UK.
And from that figure less than 500 000 people have actually bothered to buy it after it's 15 weeks at No.1.
It was only the biggest 'selling' song for 3 of those 15 weeks.
Listening to a song for 30 seconds for free contributing towards it's streaming and ultimate 'sales' is a bit of a joke.
I haven't even heard the Drake song - I've managed to avoid it somehow! Every song of his that I have heard in the past I hate with a passion so I have no desire to hear this one!
I adored Bryan Adams in the 1980's, with albums like Cuts Like A Knife, Reckless and Into The Fire and I went to see him in concert in 1987. When Everything I Do first came out I thought "yeah, nice ballad but not his best song". I was pleased he was back on the scene with new music, after taking a break for a few years, but I wasn't overly enamoured by the song, to me it was just pleasant. After about it's 8th week at number one I was pretty tired of hearing it. After 16 weeks I was sick to death of it! Sadly (for me, as a big fan) it was the start of my going off him as an artist as I found his following work quite bland, compared to his 80's stuff. I only liked the odd song here and there. Most of it I found quite watered down, bland rock and overly syrup-y rock ballads with stupid shallow lyrics. None of the lyrics with depth like on Into The Fire, for example. Maybe he got better in later years with some of his album tracks that I haven't heard, I don't know but I just gave up on him, after hearing boring single after single, year after year.
So anyway, whilst I STILL prefer Everything I Do compared to anything I've ever heard by Drake, it's a bittersweet song for me because for me it spelt the decline of Bryan Adams' music for me.
Comments
They were happy days indeed! However I was just a tad older than you (19). I've still got dozens of cassettes somewhere in my garage, full of recordings of the charts! Plus a few Betamax recordings too!
It seems that 100 'downloads' equates to 1 single 'sold',
There is some truth in this, I think there was greater interest in the charts in the past.
But nowadays it is different and young people (and old) spend their time searching around for the best quality music of the present and the past rather than listen to the charts.
At the time Bryan Adams was no 1, I was bored with the it and couldn't wait until it was knocked off the top. Its success felt like it was more to do with the associated movie than any quality in the song. I could say the same for the Wet, Wet, Wet song and the success around 'Grease' a few years before. Any idea that these songs are more deserving for 'quality' reasons is quite spurious. Drake's song is actually ok in comparison.
100 streams accounts for 1 sale, not downloads.
Others have said it, but I will too... brilliant post.
I will add though, that Drake has only climbed to number 8 on the sales-only chart due to his track being reduced in price to 59p on itunes.
Also, I think the fact that One Dance doesn't have a video is extremely relevant. If it did, how many people would be watching that on YouTube instead of streaming the track, and therefore contributing to its ongoing chart success?
Me for one. I've been streaming it constantly as there's no video.
i cannot abide wet wet wets destruction of the troggs classic. they sucked all the emotion out of the track, like a poor karaoke version.
on that basis, i prefer drake.... even though i hate the track...
Hope you are right, but Drake is still no1 on Spotify (worldwide and in the UK), however Biebs is no1 on iTunes, but that does really count for much.
Says a 15 year old.
It's like me buying a cd then the chart company counting how many times I play it. In that case Bat Out of Hell should have charted longer
I tend to agree. Looking at the top 20 yesterday in the paper I certainly would not listen anymore, I was surprised to see just 1 song that wasn't in the top 20 the previous week and something like the top 8 are unchanged. There is no excitement now.
As a solution the problem why not have a sales top 40 and a steaming top 40.
A seperate sales-only chart already exists and has done for a while
http://www.officialcharts.com/charts/singles-sales-chart/
Drake is only 8 on that one.
Who cares? Bryan Adams is shite anyway.
I'm not 15.
I don't see how streaming matters that much as it still takes 100 plays before it counts as 1 sale. I doubt many people are playing Once Dance 100 times. I probably have over several weeks...
People do have different opinions on music, I wouldn't have put One Dance anything further than a top ten hit and I don't see its hook, but many clearly disagree.
The chart situation though is a shambles and needs a lot of thought and maybe some science too. It just doesn't seem fit for purpose currently.
That is the one that should be used.
And from that figure less than 500 000 people have actually bothered to buy it after it's 15 weeks at No.1.
It was only the biggest 'selling' song for 3 of those 15 weeks.
Listening to a song for 30 seconds for free contributing towards it's streaming and ultimate 'sales' is a bit of a joke.
I thought that about that stupid Cheerleader song, the weakest ever No 1. If you don't count all the stupid Novelty songs that got to No 1.
I adored Bryan Adams in the 1980's, with albums like Cuts Like A Knife, Reckless and Into The Fire and I went to see him in concert in 1987. When Everything I Do first came out I thought "yeah, nice ballad but not his best song". I was pleased he was back on the scene with new music, after taking a break for a few years, but I wasn't overly enamoured by the song, to me it was just pleasant. After about it's 8th week at number one I was pretty tired of hearing it. After 16 weeks I was sick to death of it! Sadly (for me, as a big fan) it was the start of my going off him as an artist as I found his following work quite bland, compared to his 80's stuff. I only liked the odd song here and there. Most of it I found quite watered down, bland rock and overly syrup-y rock ballads with stupid shallow lyrics. None of the lyrics with depth like on Into The Fire, for example. Maybe he got better in later years with some of his album tracks that I haven't heard, I don't know but I just gave up on him, after hearing boring single after single, year after year.
So anyway, whilst I STILL prefer Everything I Do compared to anything I've ever heard by Drake, it's a bittersweet song for me because for me it spelt the decline of Bryan Adams' music for me.