Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by FaithMonkey, Aug 14, 2019.
Yes! Yes! Yes! I agree completely.
It was #4 for 3 weeks, and the same 3 songs kept it out of #1 all 3 of those weeks: "Honey" - Bobby Goldsboro, "Young Girl" - Gary Puckett & The Union Gap and "Cry Like A Baby" - The Box Tops. "Lady Madonna" was one song of theirs I wished would have gone to #1 (and it did in the UK, at least). On my iTunes Top 25 Most Played Playlist, it was #1 for several weeks. (Yes, I keep track of that on a weekly basis ).
All she needs is one more and she'll be tied with Madonna, who has six #2 peaking songs.
The thing is Old Town Road came in from outside the industry, and, in fact Nashville intervened to keep it off the country charts. Though in their defense it really got very little airplay on country stations.
She'll just have to Shake It Off.
It doesn’t mean as much as it used to (the charts don’t seem to matter much), but I agree she’s unlucky. People still tend to refer to no. 1’s in measuring chart success, and she has five - the same number as KC and the Sunshine Band, four behind rival Katy Perry and far, far behind the likes of Rihanna who has 14. Michael Jackson had five no. 1 singles before he turned 13 years old.
But when people refer to the era, I think she’ll be viewed as one of the premier pop artists, based on aggregate sales.
Don't forget though each one of those repeat plays that counts for chart placement also generates new money in royalty payouts from ad impressions or streaming fees, so that's an important part of what the industry cares out in the charts it tracks. Also of course, in the past, just as now, radio airplay was and is a big component of the Billboard Hot 100 chart.
And before the Hot 100, Billboard had a jukebox chart, (which was a component of the Top 100, briefly a precursor to the Hot 100 in the mid '50s for Billboard).
Radio airplay, jukebox plays, and sales -- always the things that made something a chart hit -- aren't that dissimilar from radio airplay, streams and sales -- which are the things that make something a hit today. (Though of course Billboard stopped tracking jukeboxes by the time the Hot 100 was created as an all-genre, cross platform singles chart in '58, and didn't start tracking streaming until 2007.)
Obviously the internet and streaming have profoundly altered the music business, and that is reflected in these charts -- especially when you see songs staying so long in top positions, or songs that aren't released as radio singles charting. But the input components of what makes something a chart hit.
But the basic things that always made a chart hit -- radio airplay, self-selected listener play via jukeboxes or streaming platforms, and sales -- are still the same things that make a chart hit.
I was a grade schooler in the '60s and early '70s. It was the height of the "generation gap" and my experience is that musically things were much more divided then along generational lines. Now young people listen to everything from all kinds of eras, and people in their '60s are listening to Ed Sheeran and Shawn Mendes and Panic at the Disco or whatever is playing on the local Hot AC radio station. Then, older folks didn't tend to listen to any rock and roll at all, and younger folks, if they wanted to listen to Benny Goodman or Peggy Lee, were considered weirdos. What the generations listen to today is much less divided. Back then, I don't think my mother though there was any recognizable connection between Perez Prado's "Cherry Pink and Apple Blossom White" and "Honky Tonk Woman."
I think people also forget the enormity of Swift's career before 1989 or the Max Martin tunes on Red. She has seven Country number ones and had won an Album of the Year Grammy and two Entertainer of the Year CMA awards before 1989.
Personally I don't usually look at number ones -- since so many things can factor into whether or not a record makes 1, 2 0r 3 on a chart -- as much as I look at top 10s, to check an artist's pop ubiquity, and Swift as 20 of those.
I'd say she's very lucky making all that money with such marginal "talent"
See, I was in grade school in the '80s. Maybe it was my imagination, but when I was listening to stuff that was popular at the time, be it The Police, The Cars, Duran Duran, Thompson Twins, Madonna, or whatever MTV was pushing that week, I didn't feel there was much generation gap, as my parents grew up listening to The Beatles, the Stones, etc. It all sounded like pop/rock to me. Song structure wasn't all that different. They were using modern instrumentation -- synths and drum machines were big -- but at the heart, it seemed to be cut from the same cloth.
I'll be honest, those songs aren't that good. Especially "Me!", that "you can't spell awesome without me!" part is cringeworthy.
I didn't like Old Town Road at first, but it grew on me and I see why it's still popular after all these months.
They did have a #1 in the UK though, for what it's worth.
That was Buffalo Springfield.
The Beatlemaniacs already invaded this thread. That was fast.
What will she do?
And a few #1's in Cashbox, too.
It’s like grown men that complain about Star Wars movies.
Sounds pretty great to me.
Cool, another thread with old guys yelling at clouds and talking about the Beatles in a non-Beatles thread.
I dunno, with the rise of hip hop as a pop music conquering force in the 1980s, I think there was a pretty substantial structural change in the pop music of that period. Pop music styles change. The popular dance and party rhythms change in particular. If you go back 20 years, what were the big hits -- Cher's "Believe," TLC's "No Scrubs," Christina Aguilera's "Gene in a Bottle," Britney Spear's "Hit Me Baby One More Time" -- they maybe had more harmonic and melodic variation, and harmonically distinct bridges were still common in a way that they aren't really. But you know, Ed Sheeran's "Perfect," Camilla Cabello's "Havana," or this year Jonas Brothers' "Sucker" or Ariana Grande's "Thank U, Next" -- I'm not sure there's a radical break there. More a marginal evolution around the edges.
I think that what's happened is that rock music, and pop music that borrows from rock rhythms and textures, isn't really a presence on CHR radio anymore, where 20 and certainly 30 years ago, it still was. Those rock elements certainly are still a strong presence on country radio and in contemporary popular country music, but not very much in CHR music, and very little in AC music, just like swing and big band jazz elements and instrumentation, and fox trot type rhythms you could box step to, which once dominated popular radio hits in the '20s, '30s and '40s, were less present in the '50s, rapidly declining from the most popular music in the '60s, and pretty much invisible in pop music in the '70s. But I'm not sure "Get into the Groove" was any more like "I Want to Hold Your Hand" than "Honky Tonk Woman" was like "Cherry Pink and Apple Blossom White" or Nat Cole's "Mona Lisa."
Yeah, fair enough. To me, that thread that runs through the music of the 1950s through...lets say the dawn of the millennium, being gone is the straw that breaks the camel's back for me. I guess I feel like I've got more in common with the generation of parents that first heard rock & roll in the '50s than I expected to. My parents actually liked a lot of my music growing up.
An unlucky artist that still gets folks here to start threads on her such as for being just number 2 on the charts. I think that speaks volumes on the phenomena that she’s become.
I'm not denying her impact .
Separate names with a comma.