Chart Commentary 14/6/08
Paul Hyett
-------
This week's #1 was just as unimaginable 9 days ago, as the Melua/Cassidy
duet was, late last year.
Mint Royale appear from absolutely *nowhere* (well, #28 last week),
solely due to their version of 'Singing In The Rain' being used on the
final of 'Britain's Got Talent' a week ago.
New Entries/New Peaks
---------------------
Top 10 : Ne-Yo #5, Sara Bareilles #6, Gabriella Cilmi #7 :)
Top 20 : Chris Brown #11
Top 30 : Snap #23, Morrissey #24, Alex Gaudino ft Shena #25, Lil Wayne
#26, Fall Out Boy #27, Mystery Jets #28, Maroon 5/Rihanna #29
Top 40 : Scooter #36, Elbow #39
Re-entries T40 : Radiohead (Creep) #37
New Entries outside the top 40 (plus new peaks) : Flo-Rida (Elev) #43,
Rihanna (Disturbia) #47, One Republic (S-AIN) #51, Fergie (LoL) #56,
Tigerstyle #62, Shannon/Earle #67, Jennifer Hudson #72
Re-entries : Nickelback (Ph) #52, Neil Diamond (SC) #65, Jordin Sparks &
CB (NA) #74
NB, #75 was missing from the chart I worked from.
Albums
------
Paul Weller's fanbase propel him to his 3rd #1 album, though a 2nd week
there would be extremely unlikely, even *without* Coldplay... :)
New Entries/New Peaks
---------------------
Top 10 : Radiohead #4, Zutons #6, Alphabeat #10
Top 20 : Alanis Morrissette #15, Disturbed #20
New outside the top 20 : Paul Simon #27, Opeth #34, Hall & Oates #35,
Eddie Cochran #40, Royworld #52, Ladytron #75, Coldplay (Live 2006) #60
Re-entries : Tom Petty (GH) #38, Credence Clearwater Revival (GH) #46,
Abba (Gold) #62, Coldplay (X&Y) #64, Foo Fighters (ESPG) #66, Usher (C)
#68, Linkin Park (MTM) #70, Foo Fighters (IYH) #72, Celine Dion (DoS)
#74
Next Week
---------
Singles
-------
Though Mint Royale's sales should be slipping fast, they did have a
*very* big lead, so...
My personal preference would be Ms Cilmi, of course.
Top 5 : Gabriella Cilmi,
Top 10 : Chris Brown, Alex Gaudino
Top 20 : Scooter, Maroon 5/Rihanna
Top 30 : Jesse McCartney
Top 40 : Foals, Sonny J, Rihanna (Dist)
Any other possibilities?
Albums
------
It doesn't take a genius to predict that Coldplay, despite not releasing
until Thursday, will annihilate all opposition!
They'll probably outsell the rest of the T10 combined.
Doesn't seem a lot of point anyone else even releasing an album this
week - but some have anyway :
Top 10 NE : Fratellis (#2)
Top 20 NE : Weezer
Others : Armin Van Buuren, Ashanti, BWO, Dolly Parton, Jason Mraz,
Journey, Lil Wayne, Nerd
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)
Chris Brown
"Paul Hyett" <vidc...@invalid83261.co.uk> wrote in message
news:LMR+onbZ...@blueyonder.co.uk...
> Singles
> -------
> This week's #1 was just as unimaginable 9 days ago, as the Melua/Cassidy
> duet was, late last year.
If you mean nine days before it was Number One, yes.
> Mint Royale appear from absolutely *nowhere* (well, #28 last week),
Itself the biggest genuine jump to the top this century (ie, not counting DJ
Otzi and the Sugababes, whose singles were aided by increased availability).
> solely due to their version of 'Singing In The Rain' being used on the
> final of 'Britain's Got Talent' a week ago.
Needless to say, it's their first Top 10 hit as credited artists, although
their mix of Terrorvision's 'Tequila' reached Number 2 in 1999. It's also
the first Number One since (at least) 2001 to contain the word "rain" in the
title, though of course Rihanna was at the top this time last year with
'Umbrella'.
> New Entries/New Peaks
> ---------------------
> Top 10 : Ne-Yo #5,
It's probably not the effect he was aiming at, but this reminds me he of
Thom Yorke's solo single 'Harrowdown Hill'. For that reason alone, it's my
favourite of his hits.
> Sara Bareilles #6,
She's not going to write us a love song, apparently, because she only seems
to know one note.
> Gabriella Cilmi #7 :)
With her and Sam Sparro, there are two Aussie expats in the Top 10. What
have we ever done to them?
> Top 30 : Snap #23,
As my wife asked, "Was this record ever good?"
The answer is of course no, but seeing what's directly below there is some
fun in it.
>Morrissey #24,
The modestly-titled 'All You Need Is Me' is the second new track from his
Greatest Hits album, and once upon a time it would have been a laudable
gesture to put it out as a single so that fans could obtain it without
duplicating all the other tracks; of course in these days of downloads
that's irrelevant.
Apparently this was the Number One physical single of the week, but on
combined sales it gets him his lowest chart position since 'Satan Rejected
My Soul' peaked at 39 in the first chart of 1998.
>Alex Gaudino ft Shena #25,
Out tomorrow on CDs & 12". Watch out! Lazy record.
>Lil Wayne #26,
Climbing a respectable number of places on physical release, but still no
more than a minor hit here. In the US, meanwhile, it's still keeping
Coldplay off Number One.
> Fall Out Boy #27,
I said everything interesting about this record last week. Dunno why it's
still climbing.
> Mystery Jets #28,
Second single from the album, perhaps, but this has charted higher than the
first to become only their second ever Top 30 hit. Perhaps people appreciate
the sophisticated eighties sound here.
I was sort of hoping this would go in at 30, so I could point out that it
mentioned the tatty old 12" of 'Marquee Moon', which also peaked at that
position.
>Maroon 5/Rihanna #29
Presumably planned for physical release at some point in the future: at
least one of these acts needs it. The official download single seems to be
coming out at the end of the month.
It's strange to think that there were a couple of weeks last month when
there were no Rihanna records in the Top 40!
> Top 40 : Scooter #36,
Out on CD tomorrow.
>Elbow #39
A minor milestone for them: the first time they've scored back-to-back Top
40 hits from the same album. I think this is a better track than 'Grounds
For Divorce'.
> Re-entries T40 : Radiohead (Creep) #37
Available as a single download (in its uncensored version, of course) for
the first time, hence its belated reappearance.
Perhaps surprisingly, 'Creep' missed the UK Top 100 when it was first
released, but after it went Top 40 in the US (their only such hit until last
month) a re-release with new B-sides reached the Top 10 in September 1993.
> New Entries outside the top 40 (plus new peaks) : Flo-Rida (Elev) #43,
Also featuring Eurovision winner Timbaland. I presume the physical must have
come out this week instead of last week, for all the good its done.
> Rihanna (Disturbia) #47,
Another of the new additions to the re-issue of Good Girl Gone Bad, which
you'd think had sold enough already.
>One Republic (S-AIN) #51,
A record that starts out sounding like Enya covering 'Super Trooper' and
still manages to go downhill, drifting into a ballad that would bore
Westlife.
>Fergie (LoL) #56,
Not having seen the film, I haven't heard this. But I'm not in a hurry to
change that.
> Tigerstyle #62,
Supposedly a mash-up of 'Billie Jean' and 'Ice Ice Baby' although I can't
really hear the Vanilla Ice element. Of course, that means there are three
singles in the Top 75 based on tunes from Thriller.
>Shannon/Earle #67,
Just as well they banned cigarette adverts, then.
>Jennifer Hudson #72
Another star of the Sex & The City movie, among others.
> Re-entries : Nickelback (Ph) #52,
Out again on CD on the 23rd.
I presume this must be getting airplay somewhere to appear like this, since
the download's obviously been available for three years.
>Neil Diamond (SC) #65,
Not my favourite of his songs, shall we say. Originally Top 10 in 1971.
>Jordin Sparks &
> CB (NA) #74
Is that a re-entry?
> NB, #75 was missing from the chart I worked from.
Still AWOL.
MW don't seem to be giving their subscribers the best service at the moment.
> Albums
> ------
> Paul Weller's fanbase propel him to his 3rd #1 album, though a 2nd week
> there would be extremely unlikely, even *without* Coldplay... :)
Well, presumably not only them, since this is only the third official
chart-topper out of nine. It may help that for the second time in his
career, he finds himself accidentally signed to Universal.
22 Dreams is an ambitious set, which Weller presumably regards as a double
album though it's all on one CD - it's certainly his longest record at 68
minutes and 21 tracks (despite the title!). It's very diverse too, and if
reviews are to be believed rather better than the single suggests, perhaps
even as good as Wild Wood.
A deluxe version of the album adds a further eight alternate versions or
unreleased songs.
> New Entries/New Peaks
> ---------------------
> Top 10 : Radiohead #4,
With the relationship between the group and EMI now definitively severed, it
was inevitable that the label would choose to exploit the catalogue it owns,
firstly with last year's albums box set and now this compilation. No
Surprises, as the surprisingly clever NME headline put it.
The Best Of Radiohead (great title there!) collects all the Top Ten singles,
most of the other best-known hits and a few selected album tracks, including
a couple from the single-free Kid A. A special double-CD (or quadruple-LP)
version mops up the remaining hits and other favourites, including 'Talk
Show Host', which has never before appeared on a Radiohead album.
Conspicuous by its absence is the hard-to-find non-album single 'Pop Is
Dead', though it does appear on the simultaneously-released DVD.
>Zutons #6,
Third album from the Liverpudlian good-time rockers. Produced by George
Drakoulias, who apparently required them to change their working methods,
recording track-by-track.
>Alphabeat #10
The irrepressible Danes unveil their briefly awaited debut LP, including
both the hits.
The track 'Touching Me, Touching You' is not the Squeeze song of the same
title, but manages to be even worse.
> Top 20 : Alanis Morrissette #15,
Everyone's favourite Canadian songstress, according to Amazon. I demand a
recout!
Anyway, this is her first studio album since 2004 and finds her
experimenting with electronic sounds as well as her usual style.
It repeats the Top 20 success of Jagged Little Pill Acoustic, but she still
seems more of a cult act nowadays. Still, it's better than the single did.
> Disturbed #20
When I saw one of their albums in a shop at Pittsburgh Airport last week
labelled "PA Version" I was wondering whether they'd done all fifty states.
Then I realised it stood for Parental Advisory.
Anyway, this is their fourth album and reportedly their heaviest yet.
Naturally, there's a version with an extra track and documentary DVD.
> New outside the top 20 : Paul Simon #27,
At least the fourth compilation of his solo work to chart, this double CD
assembles 36 tracks from 1972-2006.
An extra few quid gets you a bonus DVD with six promo videos and four
television performances.
>Opeth #34,
Ninth album from the Swedish prog-metallers since 1990, though there's
apparently only one original member left.
A deluxe edition adds a DVD with 5:1 mixes of all the tracks and three extra
songs, though that still only makes ten.
>Hall & Oates #35,
Their first chart album under this billing, The Singles delivers more or
less what you'd expect. I don't think these are literally all the singles
they ever released, but all the famous ones are here.
> Eddie Cochran #40,
30 track collection from the Rock & Roll legend, which covers all the
obvious hits and other classics. Not a bad job, there.
>Royworld #52,
A band who claim to be halfway between the Feeling and the Futureheads, but
are evidently nowhere near as popular as either of them.
> Ladytron #75,
Fourth album from the Liverpool retro-electro group.
> Coldplay (Live 2006) #60
Live 2003, actually, a CD/DVD set which does what it says, and also includes
the otherwise unreleased song Moses.
> Re-entries : Tom Petty (GH) #38,
Actually credited to Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers, although with all due
respect to them most people don't seem to notice whether the Heartbreakers
are there or not. In fact, this is their second release in as many weeks,
after last week's album as Mudcrutch, which failed to chart.
AFAICT, this isn't quite the same album as their 1993 Greatest Hits, but it
does appear to contain most of the same tracks in a different order.
> Credence Clearwater Revival (GH) #46,
It doesn't seem that long since their last compilation. And indeed it isn't.
BTW, they actually spelt it Creedence, for some reason.
> Abba (Gold) #62,
Presumably discounted for the Father's Day market.
>Coldplay (X&Y) #64,
Presumably discounted to promote new material.
> Foo Fighters (ESPG) #66,
They're touring the UK this week. I'm slightly surprised there isn't a new
single to tie in with it.
>Usher (C) #68,
See Coldplay.
>Linkin Park (MTM) #70,
Wasn't that a re-entry last week?
>Foo Fighters (IYH) #72,
Apparently the live set ends with 'Best Of You'.
> Celine Dion (DoS) #74
Hasn't she even upgraded to Windows yet? ;-)
> Next Week
> ---------
> Singles
> -------
> Though Mint Royale's sales should be slipping fast, they did have a *very*
> big lead, so...
There aren't any very big releases to unseat it either.
Still, it's nice of that George kid to work so hard promoting it.
> My personal preference would be Ms Cilmi, of course.
I'd quite like Radiohead to climb 36 places. Your point?
> Top 5 : Gabriella Cilmi,
That would seem to depend on people buying the CD version. Which is not
impossible, I guess, but maybe a bit late.
> Top 10 : Chris Brown,
Not hard from where he is now.
>Alex Gaudino
Probably.
> Top 20 : Scooter,
Seems about the best it could manage at this stage, although it may not peak
just yet.
>Maroon 5/Rihanna
Is this getting airplay yet?
> Top 30 : Jesse McCartney
Anyone's guess really.
> Top 40 : Foals,
If they're lucky.
> Sonny J,
If he couldn't go Top 40 with the track that actually got airplay, what
chance does this have?
> Rihanna (Dist)
Without promo, it doesn't seem very likely - I suspect it may be charting
this week just because people who bought the album first time around don't
want to pay for it all over again.
> Any other possibilities?
Well, Feeder, We Are Scientists and The Music all used to be popular, but
between the three of them I've heard one of the new singles once. I suppose
Little Man Tate can't be written off, but I wouldn't rush to write them on
either.
Incidentally, Coldplay's 'Viva La Vida' will presumably become eligible to
chart this week, but sales are likely to drop off once the album arrives.
> Albums
> ------
> It doesn't take a genius to predict that Coldplay, despite not releasing
> until Thursday, will annihilate all opposition!
>
> They'll probably outsell the rest of the T10 combined.
Quite possibly, although the short release will be a good excuse if they
don't.
> Doesn't seem a lot of point anyone else even releasing an album this
> week - but some have anyway :
Surely that only makes any difference to acts who'd consider themselves in
with a chance of a Number One?
> Top 10 NE : Fratellis (#2)
...Admittedly, that probably includes these guys. Presumably the record
company set this release date before they found out the Coldplay album had
been brought forward. And before they knew the single was going to flop.
As it is, I think they may be less likely to manage even the runner-up spot
than I thought this time last month, but we'll have to see. They've got a
good chance of topping the mids anyway.
> Top 20 NE : Weezer
Possibly, although it's not much promoted.
> Others : Armin Van Buuren,
I know he's one of the world's biggest DJs, but his own records have never
really sold in this country.
> Ashanti,
I presume this is a soft launch?
To be honest, I'd kind of forgotten she existed.
> BWO,
AFAICT they released three albums here in March, and nothing since.
>Dolly Parton,
Obviously a re-release, but with promo this time.
>Jason Mraz,
If lucky.
> Journey,
They were a bit more successful than I realised, so that's possible.
>Lil Wayne,
Maybe, although the single hasn't been massive.
>Nerd
A bit of a surprise to me that this is coming out since it's had amazingly
little attention for an act who were so big. Perhaps that's deliberate.
Also, Emmylou Harris is probably a good bet for Top 75. There may be some
seasonal re-entries too.
Chris
Chris Brown
"Paul Hyett" <vidc...@invalid83261.co.uk> wrote in message
news:LMR+onbZ...@blueyonder.co.uk...
> Singles
> -------
It's 'Umbrella', Like the last time, that's almost a disappointment, but it
does make a nice juxtaposition with 'Singin In The Rain' at the other end.
> Albums
> ------
Forgot to mention that both the Number 41 and 42 this week are called
Legend - by Bob Marley and Willie Nelson respectively.
Chris
--
"It's always hard meeting your heroes. Especially when they punch you in the
face."
http://thehitparade.blogspot.com
More of my blathering is available at
http://faynights.users.btopenworld.com
Paul Hyett
wrote in uk.music.charts :
>> Singles
>> -------
>> This week's #1 was just as unimaginable 9 days ago, as the Melua/Cassidy
>> duet was, late last year.
>
>If you mean nine days before it was Number One, yes.
Obviously. And even its previous #28 position was undoubtedly due solely
to post BGT Saturday evening sales.
>
>> Mint Royale appear from absolutely *nowhere* (well, #28 last week),
>
>Itself the biggest genuine jump to the top this century (ie, not counting DJ
>Otzi and the Sugababes, whose singles were aided by increased availability).
Do we really want to get back into this again? :)
It's likely that big jumps in the early decades of the charts were far
more due to distribution delays, than sudden dramatic increases in
popularity.
>
>> solely due to their version of 'Singing In The Rain' being used on the
>> final of 'Britain's Got Talent' a week ago.
>
> It's also
>the first Number One since (at least) 2001 to contain the word "rain" in the
>title, though of course Rihanna was at the top this time last year with
>'Umbrella'.
It's only speculation of course, but I suspect that Gene Kelly's version
of 'Singing In The Rain' would surely have been #1, had the charts
existed when it was first released.
Given that his version is sampled in the Mint Royale song, it could even
be argued that this is his first UK hit of any kind. For all we know,
his version may even have charted on downloads this week somewhere low
in the top 200 - I found it on 7 Digital easily enough...
>
>> New Entries/New Peaks
>> ---------------------
>> Top 10 : Ne-Yo #5,
>
>It's probably not the effect he was aiming at, but this reminds me he of
>Thom Yorke's solo single 'Harrowdown Hill'. For that reason alone, it's my
>favourite of his hits.
Still 2 weeks until CD release.
>
>> Sara Bareilles #6,
>
>She's not going to write us a love song, apparently, because she only seems
>to know one note.
I didn't expect this to get as high.
>
>> Gabriella Cilmi #7 :)
>
>With her and Sam Sparro, there are two Aussie expats in the Top 10. What
>have we ever done to them?
The new remixed CD should send it T5 next Sunday.
>
>>Morrissey #24,
>Apparently this was the Number One physical single of the week
A #24 generally sells 6-7k, and since most of his sales *will* be
physical, it says a lot about the sales level of that format now...
>
>>Alex Gaudino ft Shena #25,
>
>Out tomorrow on CDs & 12". Watch out! Lazy record.
What do you mean?
On a side issue, more footy-playing babes in the video - but
unfortunately they don't swap shirts at the end of the match. :)
>
>>Lil Wayne #26,
>
>Climbing a respectable number of places on physical release, but still no
>more than a minor hit here. In the US, meanwhile, it's still keeping
>Coldplay off Number One.
Which could either be a good or bad thing, depending on POV.
>
>> Mystery Jets #28,
>
>Second single from the album, perhaps, but this has charted higher than the
>first to become only their second ever Top 30 hit. Perhaps people appreciate
>the sophisticated eighties sound here.
Grin.
>
>>Maroon 5/Rihanna #29
>
>Presumably planned for physical release at some point in the future
30th June.
>: at
>least one of these acts needs it.
>It's strange to think that there were a couple of weeks last month when
>there were no Rihanna records in the Top 40!
Umbrella was yesterday's 'missing' #75, BTW.
>
>> Top 40 : Scooter #36,
>
>Out on CD tomorrow.
Or today, now.
>
>>Elbow #39
>
>A minor milestone for them: the first time they've scored back-to-back Top
>40 hits from the same album. I think this is a better track than 'Grounds
>For Divorce'.
It wasn't what I expected.
>
>> Re-entries T40 : Radiohead (Creep) #37
>
>Available as a single download (in its uncensored version, of course) for
>the first time, hence its belated reappearance.
I listened to just a few seconds of it on the chart show, and that was
enough...
>Perhaps surprisingly, 'Creep' missed the UK Top 100 when it was first
>released
Not quite correct - it peaked at #78 on 3/10/92.
Also, since it charted for two weeks in 2007, your claim that it hasn't
previously been available to download is dodgy, to say the least. :)
>
>> New Entries outside the top 40 (plus new peaks) : Flo-Rida (Elev) #43,
>
>Also featuring Eurovision winner Timbaland.
I didn't know he was Russian. :)
> I presume the physical must have
>come out this week instead of last week, for all the good its done.
I thought it had been out for several weeks.
>
>> Rihanna (Disturbia) #47,
>
>Another of the new additions to the re-issue of Good Girl Gone Bad, which
>you'd think had sold enough already.
I see the sales of both album versions have been combined.
>
>>One Republic (S-AIN) #51,
>
>A record that starts out sounding like Enya covering 'Super Trooper' and
>still manages to go downhill, drifting into a ballad that would bore
>Westlife.
Hence it bombing.
>
>> Tigerstyle #62,
>
>Supposedly a mash-up of 'Billie Jean' and 'Ice Ice Baby' although I can't
>really hear the Vanilla Ice element. Of course, that means there are three
>singles in the Top 75 based on tunes from Thriller.
Three?
>
>>Shannon/Earle #67,
>
>Just as well they banned cigarette adverts, then.
Your references are very enigmatic, this week!
>
>> Re-entries : Nickelback (Ph) #52,
>
>Out again on CD on the 23rd.
i.e. yet *another* delay in the release date.
>I presume this must be getting airplay somewhere to appear like this
It certainly is - currently #31 on airplay.
>
> >Jordin Sparks &
>> CB (NA) #74
>
>Is that a re-entry?
Yes - strangely enough, that's why I included it on my re-entry list. :)
Was #58 on 26/4.
>
>> NB, #75 was missing from the chart I worked from.
>
>Still AWOL.
See above.
>
>> Albums
>> ------
>> Paul Weller's fanbase propel him to his 3rd #1 album, though a 2nd week
>> there would be extremely unlikely, even *without* Coldplay... :)
>
>Well, presumably not only them, since this is only the third official
>chart-topper out of nine. It may help that for the second time in his
>career, he finds himself accidentally signed to Universal.
How can you *accidentally* sign with a record company??
>
>22 Dreams is an ambitious set, which Weller presumably regards as a double
>album though it's all on one CD - it's certainly his longest record at 68
>minutes and 21 tracks (despite the title!). It's very diverse too, and if
>reviews are to be believed rather better than the single suggests, perhaps
>even as good as Wild Wood.
Not that, knowing his fans, they wouldn't have bought it if it contained
far fewer tracks.
He can usually rely on 1st week sales of 50k-ish, though it is pot-luck
whether that'll be enough for #1 on any given week.
>
>> New Entries/New Peaks
>> ---------------------
>> Top 10 : Radiohead #4,
>
>With the relationship between the group and EMI now definitively severed, it
>was inevitable that the label would choose to exploit the catalogue it owns,
>firstly with last year's albums box set and now this compilation. No
>Surprises, as the surprisingly clever NME headline put it.
Climbed steadily during the week, too - unusual for a rock album.
>
>>Alphabeat #10
>
>The irrepressible Danes unveil their briefly awaited debut LP, including
>both the hits.
>The track 'Touching Me, Touching You' is not the Squeeze song of the same
>title, but manages to be even worse.
Having suffered their two hits, it must be truly dire, then!
>
>> Disturbed #20
>
>When I saw one of their albums in a shop at Pittsburgh Airport last week
>labelled "PA Version" I was wondering whether they'd done all fifty states.
>Then I realised it stood for Parental Advisory.
For language, or simply because it's *that* bad? :)
>
>> New outside the top 20 : Paul Simon #27,
>
>At least the fourth compilation of his solo work to chart, this double CD
>assembles 36 tracks from 1972-2006.
Another late-week climber.
>
>>Hall & Oates #35,
>
>Their first chart album under this billing
Other than their previous thirteen chart albums together?
>
>> Eddie Cochran #40,
>
>30 track collection from the Rock & Roll legend, which covers all the
>obvious hits and other classics. Not a bad job, there.
To *find* 30, you mean?
>
>> Coldplay (Live 2006) #60
>
>Live 2003, actually
Whatever - their songs *feel* like they last 3 years...
>
>> Re-entries : Tom Petty (GH) #38,
>
>Actually credited to Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers, although with all due
>respect to them most people don't seem to notice whether the Heartbreakers
>are there or not. In fact, this is their second release in as many weeks,
>after last week's album as Mudcrutch, which failed to chart.
Not T75 anyway - charted at #167.
>
>> Abba (Gold) #62,
>
>Presumably discounted for the Father's Day market.
All the Fathers Day stuff is from my 'era' - it makes me feel old. :)
>
>>Coldplay (X&Y) #64,
>
>Presumably discounted to promote new material.
Maybe not - the previous two surged just before X&Y was released (and
they are also charting this time, too).
>
>>Linkin Park (MTM) #70,
>
>Wasn't that a re-entry last week?
Oops.
>
>> Celine Dion (DoS) #74
>
>Hasn't she even upgraded to Windows yet? ;-)
I knew that was coming. :)
>
>> Next Week
>> ---------
>> Singles
>> -------
>
>> My personal preference would be Ms Cilmi, of course.
>
>I'd quite like Radiohead to climb 36 places. Your point?
Ah, but did I refer to the *song* when I mentioned 'personal
preference'... :)
Seriously though, it's hardly a secret I love the song.
>
>> Top 5 : Gabriella Cilmi,
>
>That would seem to depend on people buying the CD version.
Or downloading the remixes it contains, instead?
>Which is not
>impossible, I guess, but maybe a bit late.
For a song that's only really started shifting in the last couple of
weeks?
>
>> Top 10 : Chris Brown,
>
>Not hard from where he is now.
I was just surprised he wasn't T10 this week. CD next Monday.
>
>> Top 20 : Scooter,
>
>Seems about the best it could manage at this stage, although it may not peak
>just yet.
Quite possibly, as it's not a natural airplay song.
>
>>Maroon 5/Rihanna
>
>Is this getting airplay yet?
TV play - yes, airplay I don't know.
>
>> Top 40 :
>
>> Sonny J,
>
>If he couldn't go Top 40 with the track that actually got airplay, what
>chance does this have?
He? The singer is female.
>
>> Any other possibilities?
>
>Well, Feeder, We Are Scientists and The Music all used to be popular, but
>between the three of them I've heard one of the new singles once.
Precisely.
>I suppose
>Little Man Tate can't be written off, but I wouldn't rush to write them on
>either.
>
>Incidentally, Coldplay's 'Viva La Vida' will presumably become eligible to
>chart this week
Why?
>, but sales are likely to drop off once the album arrives.
But individual tracks are likely to chart separately.
>
>> Albums
>> ------
>> It doesn't take a genius to predict that Coldplay, despite not releasing
>> until Thursday, will annihilate all opposition!
>>
>> They'll probably outsell the rest of the T10 combined.
>
>Quite possibly, although the short release will be a good excuse if they
>don't.
Even one days sales would surely see them top, though.
>
>> Top 10 NE : Fratellis (#2)
>
>As it is, I think they may be less likely to manage even the runner-up spot
>than I thought this time last month
They won't have to sell too many for #2.
>, but we'll have to see. They've got a
>good chance of topping the mids anyway.
All except the Friday ones, anyway. :)
>
>> Ashanti,
>
>I presume this is a soft launch?
An eiderdown launch, even. :)
>
>>Dolly Parton,
>
>Obviously a re-release, but with promo this time.
By one R2 DJ, at least...
Chris Brown
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 at 21:55:04, Chris Brown <extreme...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in uk.music.charts :
>
>>> Singles
>>> -------
>>> This week's #1 was just as unimaginable 9 days ago, as the Melua/Cassidy
>>> duet was, late last year.
>>
>>If you mean nine days before it was Number One, yes.
>
> Obviously. And even its previous #28 position was undoubtedly due solely
> to post BGT Saturday evening sales.
I think I read somewhere that he'd also performed this in an episode earlier
in the week. But I guess that amounts to much the same thing.
>>> Mint Royale appear from absolutely *nowhere* (well, #28 last week),
>>
>>Itself the biggest genuine jump to the top this century (ie, not counting
>>DJ
>>Otzi and the Sugababes, whose singles were aided by increased
>>availability).
>
> Do we really want to get back into this again? :)
Apparently.
> It's likely that big jumps in the early decades of the charts were far
> more due to distribution delays, than sudden dramatic increases in
> popularity.
Which is one reason why I called it the biggest jump *this century*.
Obviously it's not as big as Captain Sensible, for a start.
>>> solely due to their version of 'Singing In The Rain' being used on the
>>> final of 'Britain's Got Talent' a week ago.
>>
>> It's also
>>the first Number One since (at least) 2001 to contain the word "rain" in
>>the
>>title, though of course Rihanna was at the top this time last year with
>>'Umbrella'.
>
> It's only speculation of course, but I suspect that Gene Kelly's version
> of 'Singing In The Rain' would surely have been #1, had the charts existed
> when it was first released.
That's quite possible, although of course you can never know.
> Given that his version is sampled in the Mint Royale song, it could even
> be argued that this is his first UK hit of any kind.
It certainly could (I presume he's had no other hits) but that was obviously
the case three years ago too.
>For all we know, his version may even have charted on downloads this week
>somewhere low > in the top 200 - I found it on 7 Digital easily enough...
Yes, and it's even on a major so presumably it has been registered with the
OCC. But I do wonder how many of the people who were inspired to go
downloading last week would have heard of him.
>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>> ---------------------
>>
>>> Sara Bareilles #6,
>>
>>She's not going to write us a love song, apparently, because she only
>>seems
>>to know one note.
>
> I didn't expect this to get as high.
It did climb a bit more than I expected this week just gone.
A few years ago, you'd expect this to be an easy Top 10 the week the CD came
out through pent-up demand.
>>>Morrissey #24,
>
>>Apparently this was the Number One physical single of the week
>
> A #24 generally sells 6-7k, and since most of his sales *will* be
> physical, it says a lot about the sales level of that format now...
It's only a couple of weeks ago that the Ting Tings topped the physical
chart on less than 5k.
>>>Alex Gaudino ft Shena #25,
>>
>>Out tomorrow on CDs & 12". Watch out! Lazy record.
>
> What do you mean?
I mean that he doesn't seem to have put a lot of effort into it, just
cobbled together something that sounded a bit like the previous one.
> On a side issue, more footy-playing babes in the video - but unfortunately
> they don't swap shirts at the end of the match. :)
More than what?
>>>Lil Wayne #26,
>>
>>Climbing a respectable number of places on physical release, but still no
>>more than a minor hit here. In the US, meanwhile, it's still keeping
>>Coldplay off Number One.
>
> Which could either be a good or bad thing, depending on POV.
A slight correction - Coldplay are actually Number 3 there anyway.
>>> Mystery Jets #28,
>>
>>Second single from the album, perhaps, but this has charted higher than
>>the
>>first to become only their second ever Top 30 hit. Perhaps people
>>appreciate
>>the sophisticated eighties sound here.
>
> Grin.
That's not entirely a joke.
>>>Maroon 5/Rihanna #29
>>
>>Presumably planned for physical release at some point in the future
>
> 30th June.
OK.
>>: at
>>least one of these acts needs it.
>
>>It's strange to think that there were a couple of weeks last month when
>>there were no Rihanna records in the Top 40!
>
> Umbrella was yesterday's 'missing' #75, BTW.
I know - I found out just after posting this.
As I said elsewhere in the thread, we get rainy songs at both ends of the
chart.
>>>Elbow #39
>>
>>A minor milestone for them: the first time they've scored back-to-back Top
>>40 hits from the same album. I think this is a better track than 'Grounds
>>For Divorce'.
>
> It wasn't what I expected.
Did you think they were going to go thrash-metal?
This is almost to a fault what I'd expect an Elbow single to sound like.
>>> Re-entries T40 : Radiohead (Creep) #37
>>
>>Available as a single download (in its uncensored version, of course) for
>>the first time, hence its belated reappearance.
>
> I listened to just a few seconds of it on the chart show, and that was
> enough...
Soon as you heard the piano, that was it?
>>Perhaps surprisingly, 'Creep' missed the UK Top 100 when it was first
>>released
>
> Not quite correct - it peaked at #78 on 3/10/92.
Ah - I'd read it was 108. But I think that was in Q magazine.
Still, even missing the Top 75 is remarkable considering the hit it went on
to become.
> Also, since it charted for two weeks in 2007, your claim that it hasn't
> previously been available to download is dodgy, to say the least. :)
Hmm... actually now I come to think of it, one of the former incarnations of
the Woolworths download site did apparently have an unbundled version of
Pablo Honey for a while, so that must be how it slipped out.
Either way, though, it certainly wasn't on iTunes before now, which
effectively kept it from the Top 40.
>>> New Entries outside the top 40 (plus new peaks) : Flo-Rida (Elev) #43,
>>
>>Also featuring Eurovision winner Timbaland.
>
> I didn't know he was Russian. :)
I believe he wrote and produced the winning song.
>> I presume the physical must have
>>come out this week instead of last week, for all the good its done.
>
> I thought it had been out for several weeks.
I sort of thought it was scheduled for the last week of May.
Oddly enough, I actually heard it on the radio this morning for the first
time, even though it seems to have been in the Top 75 since God was a boy.
>>> Rihanna (Disturbia) #47,
>>
>>Another of the new additions to the re-issue of Good Girl Gone Bad, which
>>you'd think had sold enough already.
>
> I see the sales of both album versions have been combined.
I saw that too. Presumably the crossover is sufficient then.
>>>One Republic (S-AIN) #51,
>>
>>A record that starts out sounding like Enya covering 'Super Trooper' and
>>still manages to go downhill, drifting into a ballad that would bore
>>Westlife.
>
> Hence it bombing.
It would make sense, but then their last single wasn't very interesting
either.
>>> Tigerstyle #62,
>>
>>Supposedly a mash-up of 'Billie Jean' and 'Ice Ice Baby' although I can't
>>really hear the Vanilla Ice element. Of course, that means there are three
>>singles in the Top 75 based on tunes from Thriller.
>
> Three?
Yes: this, 'Beat It' (obviously) and 'Don't Stop The Music'.
>>>Shannon/Earle #67,
>>
>>Just as well they banned cigarette adverts, then.
>
> Your references are very enigmatic, this week!
When the seagulls follow the trawler...
I mean that people clearly buy any old tripe if it's in an ad.
>>> Re-entries : Nickelback (Ph) #52,
>>
>>Out again on CD on the 23rd.
>
> i.e. yet *another* delay in the release date.
It's like they don't want people to buy it or something.
>>I presume this must be getting airplay somewhere to appear like this
>
> It certainly is - currently #31 on airplay.
Has that grown much recently then?
>> >Jordin Sparks &
>>> CB (NA) #74
>>
>>Is that a re-entry?
>
> Yes - strangely enough, that's why I included it on my re-entry list. :)
> Was #58 on 26/4.
I wonder what's woken it up now then?
>>> Albums
>>> ------
>>> Paul Weller's fanbase propel him to his 3rd #1 album, though a 2nd week
>>> there would be extremely unlikely, even *without* Coldplay... :)
>>
>>Well, presumably not only them, since this is only the third official
>>chart-topper out of nine. It may help that for the second time in his
>>career, he finds himself accidentally signed to Universal.
>
> How can you *accidentally* sign with a record company??
In this case, because he had been signed to V2, which was bought by
Universal last year. Back in 1996, he found himself in a similar situation
when the owner of Go!Discs sold it off to what was then Polygram, and
managed to negotiate an unusual deal which gradually transferred him to
Independiente. Who dropped him in 2002, hence the move to V2.
>>22 Dreams is an ambitious set, which Weller presumably regards as a double
>>album though it's all on one CD - it's certainly his longest record at 68
>>minutes and 21 tracks (despite the title!). It's very diverse too, and if
>>reviews are to be believed rather better than the single suggests, perhaps
>>even as good as Wild Wood.
>
> Not that, knowing his fans, they wouldn't have bought it if it contained
> far fewer tracks.
Obviously not, although it's amusing to image some guy in a parka in HMV
counting down "11, 12, 13... that all? Well I'm leaving!".
Apparently, his biggest seller of all time is Stanley Road, which has only
12 tracks.
>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>> ---------------------
>>> Top 10 : Radiohead #4,
>>
>>With the relationship between the group and EMI now definitively severed,
>>it
>>was inevitable that the label would choose to exploit the catalogue it
>>owns,
>>firstly with last year's albums box set and now this compilation. No
>>Surprises, as the surprisingly clever NME headline put it.
>
> Climbed steadily during the week, too - unusual for a rock album.
But a logical result of the fact that the fans were almost the last people
who'd want this.
>>>Alphabeat #10
>>
>>The irrepressible Danes unveil their briefly awaited debut LP, including
>>both the hits.
>>The track 'Touching Me, Touching You' is not the Squeeze song of the same
>>title, but manages to be even worse.
>
> Having suffered their two hits, it must be truly dire, then!
Well, it's worse than the Squeeze song - I didn't say it was worse than '10k
Nights'.
>>> Disturbed #20
>>
>>When I saw one of their albums in a shop at Pittsburgh Airport last week
>>labelled "PA Version" I was wondering whether they'd done all fifty
>>states.
>>Then I realised it stood for Parental Advisory.
>
> For language, or simply because it's *that* bad? :)
Probably the former, but who am I to judge?
>>> New outside the top 20 : Paul Simon #27,
>>
>>At least the fourth compilation of his solo work to chart, this double CD
>>assembles 36 tracks from 1972-2006.
>
> Another late-week climber.
Presumably because the fans have already got all this.
>>>Hall & Oates #35,
>>
>>Their first chart album under this billing
>
> Other than their previous thirteen chart albums together?
All credited to Daryl Hall And John Oates. Which may be worth remembering in
case it ever crops up in a pub quiz.
>>> Eddie Cochran #40,
>>
>>30 track collection from the Rock & Roll legend, which covers all the
>>obvious hits and other classics. Not a bad job, there.
>
> To *find* 30, you mean?
Well, he certainly didn't have 30 hits, but then in the time he had that was
hardly surprising. EMI seem to have done a good job of picking what to put
on there.
>>> Re-entries : Tom Petty (GH) #38,
>>
>>Actually credited to Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers, although with all due
>>respect to them most people don't seem to notice whether the Heartbreakers
>>are there or not. In fact, this is their second release in as many weeks,
>>after last week's album as Mudcrutch, which failed to chart.
>
> Not T75 anyway - charted at #167.
Which is quite good considering the name!
Petty of course, is also on both the Traveling Wilburys albums that were
rereleased this week just gone.
>>> Abba (Gold) #62,
>>
>>Presumably discounted for the Father's Day market.
>
> All the Fathers Day stuff is from my 'era' - it makes me feel old. :)
I can't really remember any of the Abba records coming out. But I can
certainly remember GnR.
>>>Coldplay (X&Y) #64,
>>
>>Presumably discounted to promote new material.
>
> Maybe not - the previous two surged just before X&Y was released (and they
> are also charting this time, too).
For the same reason.
>>> Next Week
>>> ---------
>>> Singles
>>> -------
>>
>>> My personal preference would be Ms Cilmi, of course.
>>
>>I'd quite like Radiohead to climb 36 places. Your point?
>
> Ah, but did I refer to the *song* when I mentioned 'personal
> preference'... :)
Fair point. Mind you, that Colin Greenwood...
> Seriously though, it's hardly a secret I love the song.
Er, no.
>>> Top 5 : Gabriella Cilmi,
>>
>>That would seem to depend on people buying the CD version.
>
> Or downloading the remixes it contains, instead?
Well, quite. If anything that seems less likely.
>>Which is not
>>impossible, I guess, but maybe a bit late.
>
> For a song that's only really started shifting in the last couple of
> weeks?
Well, it *started* shifting a few weeks ago.
>>> Top 10 : Chris Brown,
>>
>>Not hard from where he is now.
>
> I was just surprised he wasn't T10 this week. CD next Monday.
For all I know, he might only have been two sales away.
>>> Top 40 :
>>
>>> Sonny J,
>>
>>If he couldn't go Top 40 with the track that actually got airplay, what
>>chance does this have?
>
> He? The singer is female.
But that's presumably a sessioner or sample. AFAIK Alex Gaudino is a bloke
too.
>>> Any other possibilities?
>>
>>Well, Feeder, We Are Scientists and The Music all used to be popular, but
>>between the three of them I've heard one of the new singles once.
>
> Precisely.
Actually I have now heard the Music song as well. It's not very good, of
course.
>>Incidentally, Coldplay's 'Viva La Vida' will presumably become eligible to
>>chart this week
>
> Why?
It's been ruled out for the last couple of weeks because it was treated as a
downpayment on the album. But one that's out that wouldn't apply.
>>, but sales are likely to drop off once the album arrives.
>
> But individual tracks are likely to chart separately.
Oh yes - but there'll be slightly less incentive to buy that particular one
once you can hear it elsewhere.
>>> Albums
>>> ------
>>> It doesn't take a genius to predict that Coldplay, despite not releasing
>>> until Thursday, will annihilate all opposition!
>>>
>>> They'll probably outsell the rest of the T10 combined.
>>
>>Quite possibly, although the short release will be a good excuse if they
>>don't.
>
> Even one days sales would surely see them top, though.
Of course.
>>> Top 10 NE : Fratellis (#2)
>>
>>As it is, I think they may be less likely to manage even the runner-up
>>spot
>>than I thought this time last month
>
> They won't have to sell too many for #2.
Personally, I think they will sell too many though. ;-)
>>>Dolly Parton,
>>
>>Obviously a re-release, but with promo this time.
>
> By one R2 DJ, at least...
Whom are you accusing? And what of?
BTW, it looks like that Weezer album isn't out until next week.
Chris
Paul Hyett
>>
>>>> Singles
>>>> -------
>>>> This week's #1 was just as unimaginable 9 days ago, as the Melua/Cassidy
>>>> duet was, late last year.
>>>
>>>If you mean nine days before it was Number One, yes.
>>
>> Obviously. And even its previous #28 position was undoubtedly due solely
>> to post BGT Saturday evening sales.
>
>I think I read somewhere that he'd also performed this in an episode earlier
>in the week.
He, who?
>
>> It's likely that big jumps in the early decades of the charts were far
>> more due to distribution delays, than sudden dramatic increases in
>> popularity.
>
>Which is one reason why I called it the biggest jump *this century*.
Fair enough - I only just noticed that.
>
>> Given that his version is sampled in the Mint Royale song, it could even
>> be argued that this is his first UK hit of any kind.
>
>It certainly could (I presume he's had no other hits) but that was obviously
>the case three years ago too.
Good point.
It does seem a little odd that he had no hits back in the 50's, though.
>
>>For all we know, his version may even have charted on downloads this week
>>somewhere low > in the top 200 - I found it on 7 Digital easily enough...
>
>Yes, and it's even on a major so presumably it has been registered with the
>OCC. But I do wonder how many of the people who were inspired to go
>downloading last week would have heard of him.
Given the size of the audience, at least *some* of them would have been
old enough to remember him - and only 700 or so downloads would take him
T200...
>
>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>> ---------------------
>>>>Alex Gaudino ft Shena #25,
>>>
>>>Out tomorrow on CDs & 12". Watch out! Lazy record.
>>
>> What do you mean?
>
>I mean that he doesn't seem to have put a lot of effort into it, just
>cobbled together something that sounded a bit like the previous one.
Good point.
>
>> On a side issue, more footy-playing babes in the video - but unfortunately
>> they don't swap shirts at the end of the match. :)
>
>More than what?
In terms of ' yet another video with footy-playing babes in skimpy
clothes'. :)
>
>>>>Elbow #39
>>
>> It wasn't what I expected.
>
>Did you think they were going to go thrash-metal?
>This is almost to a fault what I'd expect an Elbow single to sound like.
Then perhaps I mistook them for someone else.
>
>Either way, though, it certainly wasn't on iTunes before now, which
>effectively kept it from the Top 40.
Is that really true though? If a song wasn't on iTunes, but *was* on
other popular download sites, there's no reason people wouldn't download
it.
While you can't play iTunes songs on other MP3 players, I didn't think
the converse was true?
>
>>>> Tigerstyle #62,
>>>
>>>Supposedly a mash-up of 'Billie Jean' and 'Ice Ice Baby' although I can't
>>>really hear the Vanilla Ice element. Of course, that means there are three
>>>singles in the Top 75 based on tunes from Thriller.
>>
>> Three?
>
>Yes: this, 'Beat It' (obviously) and 'Don't Stop The Music'.
Oh right - I assumed you meant Thriller the single, rather than the
album.
>>
>> Your references are very enigmatic, this week!
>
>When the seagulls follow the trawler...
>I mean that people clearly buy any old tripe if it's in an ad.
Ah, OK.
>
>>>I presume this must be getting airplay somewhere to appear like this
>>
>> It certainly is - currently #31 on airplay.
>
>Has that grown much recently then?
In the last 3 weeks : 92-50-31, so that would be a yes.
>
>>> >Jordin Sparks &
>>>> CB (NA) #74
>>>
>>>Is that a re-entry?
>>
>> Yes - strangely enough, that's why I included it on my re-entry list. :)
>> Was #58 on 26/4.
>
>I wonder what's woken it up now then?
Early airplay for its 14th July physical release? Somehow I think it's
the latter name that's selling it, though.
>
>>>> Albums
>>>> ------
>>>> Paul Weller
>>> It may help that for the second time in his
>>>career, he finds himself accidentally signed to Universal.
>>
>> How can you *accidentally* sign with a record company??
>
>In this case, because he had been signed to V2, which was bought by
>Universal last year. Back in 1996, he found himself in a similar situation
>when the owner of Go!Discs sold it off to what was then Polygram, and
>managed to negotiate an unusual deal which gradually transferred him to
>Independiente. Who dropped him in 2002, hence the move to V2.
What does an artist do if they find themselves unwillingly signed to a
record company by this means?
I mean, if you work for a company which gets taken over, and the new
owners try to impose an unpopular employment contract on you, you can
always walk away...
>
>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>> ---------------------
>>>> Top 10 : Radiohead #4,
>>>
>> Climbed steadily during the week, too - unusual for a rock album.
>
>But a logical result of the fact that the fans were almost the last people
>who'd want this.
Assuming they'd care about the back-story behind it?
>
>>>> New outside the top 20 : Paul Simon #27,
>>>
>>>At least the fourth compilation of his solo work to chart, this double CD
>>>assembles 36 tracks from 1972-2006.
>>
>> Another late-week climber.
>
>Presumably because the fans have already got all this.
That's surely a reason for it *not* to sell, then?
>
>>>>Hall & Oates #35,
>>>
>>>Their first chart album under this billing
>>
>> Other than their previous thirteen chart albums together?
>
>All credited to Daryl Hall And John Oates.
Err... they are the *same* people, you know... :)
That's as meaningless a distinction as pointing out that some of Kylie
Minogue's hits just list her as 'Kylie'.
Of course, she long ago earned the distinction of being instantly
recognisable by just one name, just as Britney has (or Cliff).
>
>>>>Coldplay (X&Y) #64,
>>>
>>>Presumably discounted to promote new material.
>>
>> Maybe not - the previous two surged just before X&Y was released (and they
>> are also charting this time, too).
>
>For the same reason.
Yes, airplay for the new album draws attention to their
back-catalogue...
>
>>>> Next Week
>>>> ---------
>>>> Singles
>>>> -------
>>>> Top 5 : Gabriella Cilmi,
>>>
>>>That would seem to depend on people buying the CD version.
>>
>> Or downloading the remixes it contains, instead?
>
>Well, quite. If anything that seems less likely.
Well, I just did it.
>
>>>> Top 40 :
>>>
>>>> Sonny J,
>>>
>>>If he couldn't go Top 40 with the track that actually got airplay, what
>>>chance does this have?
>>
>> He? The singer is female.
>
>But that's presumably a sessioner or sample.
She's in the video, too...
>
>>>Incidentally, Coldplay's 'Viva La Vida' will presumably become eligible to
>>>chart this week
>>
>> Why?
>
>It's been ruled out for the last couple of weeks because it was treated as a
>downpayment on the album. But one that's out that wouldn't apply.
But would be selling enough now, anyway?
>
>>>, but sales are likely to drop off once the album arrives.
>>
>> But individual tracks are likely to chart separately.
>
>Oh yes - but there'll be slightly less incentive to buy that particular one
>once you can hear it elsewhere.
BTW, I wouldn't be surprised to see *every* track off that album in the
T200 next week.
>
>>>> Albums
>>>> ------
>>>> It doesn't take a genius to predict that Coldplay, despite not releasing
>>>> until Thursday, will annihilate all opposition!
>>>
>>>Quite possibly, although the short release will be a good excuse if they
>>>don't.
>>
>> Even one days sales would surely see them top, though.
>
>Of course.
I see record shops are teasing/irritating CP fans by putting the empty
boxes on the shelves already.
>
>>>>Dolly Parton,
>>>
>>>Obviously a re-release, but with promo this time.
>>
>> By one R2 DJ, at least...
>
>Whom are you accusing? And what of?
I don't listen to R2, so I don't know which of them is playing it.
>
>BTW, it looks like that Weezer album isn't out until next week.
Damn - I thought I'd checked the release schedule carefully enough!
Chris Brown
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 at 22:28:05, Chris Brown <extreme...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in uk.music.charts :
>>>
>>>>> Singles
>>>>> -------
>>>>> This week's #1 was just as unimaginable 9 days ago, as the
>>>>> Melua/Cassidy
>>>>> duet was, late last year.
>>>>
>>>>If you mean nine days before it was Number One, yes.
>>>
>>> Obviously. And even its previous #28 position was undoubtedly due solely
>>> to post BGT Saturday evening sales.
>>
>>I think I read somewhere that he'd also performed this in an episode
>>earlier
>>in the week.
>
> He, who?
George Sampson (I think that's his name) the BGT winning bloke.
>>> It's likely that big jumps in the early decades of the charts were far
>>> more due to distribution delays, than sudden dramatic increases in
>>> popularity.
>>
>>Which is one reason why I called it the biggest jump *this century*.
>
> Fair enough - I only just noticed that.
It transpires that the OCC are officially counting it as a new entry rather
than a climber anyway. But let's not worry too much about that now.
>>> Given that his version is sampled in the Mint Royale song, it could even
>>> be argued that this is his first UK hit of any kind.
>>
>>It certainly could (I presume he's had no other hits) but that was
>>obviously
>>the case three years ago too.
>
> Good point.
>
> It does seem a little odd that he had no hits back in the 50's, though.
Well, I suppose it was only a Top 12 then. And I don't know a huge amount
about his career, so I don't know how much he did to make records for
release.
>>>For all we know, his version may even have charted on downloads this week
>>>somewhere low > in the top 200 - I found it on 7 Digital easily enough...
>>
>>Yes, and it's even on a major so presumably it has been registered with
>>the
>>OCC. But I do wonder how many of the people who were inspired to go
>>downloading last week would have heard of him.
>
> Given the size of the audience, at least *some* of them would have been
> old enough to remember him - and only 700 or so downloads would take him
> T200...
Presumably you'll know by now.
>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>>Alex Gaudino ft Shena #25,
>>> On a side issue, more footy-playing babes in the video - but
>>> unfortunately
>>> they don't swap shirts at the end of the match. :)
>>
>>More than what?
>
> In terms of ' yet another video with footy-playing babes in skimpy
> clothes'. :)
Ah, well I hadn't noticed any of the earlier ones.
>>>>>Elbow #39
>>>
>>> It wasn't what I expected.
>>
>>Did you think they were going to go thrash-metal?
>>This is almost to a fault what I'd expect an Elbow single to sound like.
>
> Then perhaps I mistook them for someone else.
Doves?
>>Either way, though, it certainly wasn't on iTunes before now, which
>>effectively kept it from the Top 40.
>
> Is that really true though? If a song wasn't on iTunes, but *was* on other
> popular download sites, there's no reason people wouldn't download it.
There's no reason they couldn't, but in practice a lot of people only use
iTunes and wouldn't think to look elsewhere, especially for something
unpublicised.
> While you can't play iTunes songs on other MP3 players, I didn't think the
> converse was true?
iTunes and iPods don't support DRM-encumbered .wma files, which is what
these were. In fact, iPods don't play any .wma files, but if they're non-DRM
they can be converted.
Incidentally, a few other Radiohead tracks were available individually on
other sites via compilations, and several singles were online as digital
bundles (again, not on iTunes) but presumably none of them charted.
>>>>> Tigerstyle #62,
>>>>
>>>>Supposedly a mash-up of 'Billie Jean' and 'Ice Ice Baby' although I
>>>>can't
>>>>really hear the Vanilla Ice element. Of course, that means there are
>>>>three
>>>>singles in the Top 75 based on tunes from Thriller.
>>>
>>> Three?
>>
>>Yes: this, 'Beat It' (obviously) and 'Don't Stop The Music'.
>
> Oh right - I assumed you meant Thriller the single, rather than the album.
None of those, AFAICT.
>>
>>>>I presume this must be getting airplay somewhere to appear like this
>>>
>>> It certainly is - currently #31 on airplay.
>>
>>Has that grown much recently then?
>
> In the last 3 weeks : 92-50-31, so that would be a yes.
Makes sense. Well, it doesn't, but it explains the boost to the record.
>>>> >Jordin Sparks &
>>>>> CB (NA) #74
>>>>
>>>>Is that a re-entry?
>>>
>>> Yes - strangely enough, that's why I included it on my re-entry list. :)
>>> Was #58 on 26/4.
>>
>>I wonder what's woken it up now then?
>
> Early airplay for its 14th July physical release? Somehow I think it's the
> latter name that's selling it, though.
And why shouldn't it? ;-)
>>>>> Albums
>>>>> ------
>>>>> Paul Weller
>
>>>> It may help that for the second time in his
>>>>career, he finds himself accidentally signed to Universal.
>>>
>>> How can you *accidentally* sign with a record company??
>>
>>In this case, because he had been signed to V2, which was bought by
>>Universal last year. Back in 1996, he found himself in a similar situation
>>when the owner of Go!Discs sold it off to what was then Polygram, and
>>managed to negotiate an unusual deal which gradually transferred him to
>>Independiente. Who dropped him in 2002, hence the move to V2.
>
> What does an artist do if they find themselves unwillingly signed to a
> record company by this means?
90% of the time, nothing. A few very powerful acts can demand clauses in
their contracts that allow them to leave if the company changes hands or
particular members of staff leave, but most don't have that.
> I mean, if you work for a company which gets taken over, and the new
> owners try to impose an unpopular employment contract on you, you can
> always walk away...
Indeed so, but at least most record contracts have a fixed duration. Also,
the label can't force the act to record, so sometimes they can force a
severance deal of some sort.
>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>> Top 10 : Radiohead #4,
>>>>
>>> Climbed steadily during the week, too - unusual for a rock album.
>>
>>But a logical result of the fact that the fans were almost the last people
>>who'd want this.
>
> Assuming they'd care about the back-story behind it?
Even if they didn't, they'd have little reason to shell out for a load of
tracks they'd already got.
>>>>> New outside the top 20 : Paul Simon #27,
>>>>
>>>>At least the fourth compilation of his solo work to chart, this double
>>>>CD
>>>>assembles 36 tracks from 1972-2006.
>>>
>>> Another late-week climber.
>>
>>Presumably because the fans have already got all this.
>
> That's surely a reason for it *not* to sell, then?
Yes - but in particular it means that loyal fans have little incentive to
rush out and get it, so the people who will have bought it are probably more
casual shoppers.
>>>>>Hall & Oates #35,
>>>>
>>>>Their first chart album under this billing
>>>
>>> Other than their previous thirteen chart albums together?
>>
>>All credited to Daryl Hall And John Oates.
>
> Err... they are the *same* people, you know... :)
So were Doves and Sub Sub - that doesn't mean there wasn't a distinction to
be made.
> That's as meaningless a distinction as pointing out that some of Kylie
> Minogue's hits just list her as 'Kylie'.
I just find it interesting that even though everybody calls them Hall &
Oates, very few of their records have ever been listed that way. And it's
hard to find anything more interesting to say about their sixth greatest
hits compilation.
> Of course, she long ago earned the distinction of being instantly
> recognisable by just one name, just as Britney has (or Cliff).
Of course it helps to have an unusual forename to start with. It was never
going to happen for John Lennon.
>>>>>Coldplay (X&Y) #64,
>>>>
>>>>Presumably discounted to promote new material.
>>>
>>> Maybe not - the previous two surged just before X&Y was released (and
>>> they
>>> are also charting this time, too).
>>
>>For the same reason.
>
> Yes, airplay for the new album draws attention to their back-catalogue...
...Which is usually discounted to ensure maximum advantage. I don't entirely
understand the economics behind this, but it's standard practice now.
>>>>> Next Week
>>>>> ---------
>>>>> Singles
>>>>> -------
>>>>> Top 5 : Gabriella Cilmi,
>>>>
>>>>That would seem to depend on people buying the CD version.
>>>
>>> Or downloading the remixes it contains, instead?
>>
>>Well, quite. If anything that seems less likely.
>
> Well, I just did it.
Yeah, but then I buy records sometimes too and look where it gets most of
them!
>>>>> Top 40 :
>>>>
>>>>> Sonny J,
>>>>
>>>>If he couldn't go Top 40 with the track that actually got airplay, what
>>>>chance does this have?
>>>
>>> He? The singer is female.
>>
>>But that's presumably a sessioner or sample.
>
> She's in the video, too...
I wonder if it's the same one?
>>>>Incidentally, Coldplay's 'Viva La Vida' will presumably become eligible
>>>>to
>>>>chart this week
>>>
>>> Why?
>>
>>It's been ruled out for the last couple of weeks because it was treated as
>>a
>>downpayment on the album. But one that's out that wouldn't apply.
>
> But would be selling enough now, anyway?
Only one way to find out, I think!
Presumably it'll sell less once this offer ceases, but apparently it's been
used in an ad so it'll likely still have an advantage over most of the other
tracks.
>>>>, but sales are likely to drop off once the album arrives.
>>>
>>> But individual tracks are likely to chart separately.
>>
>>Oh yes - but there'll be slightly less incentive to buy that particular
>>one
>>once you can hear it elsewhere.
>
> BTW, I wouldn't be surprised to see *every* track off that album in the
> T200 next week.
Me neither. At least there are only ten.
>>>>> Albums
>>>>> ------
>>>>> It doesn't take a genius to predict that Coldplay, despite not
>>>>> releasing
>>>>> until Thursday, will annihilate all opposition!
>>>>
>>>>Quite possibly, although the short release will be a good excuse if they
>>>>don't.
>>>
>>> Even one days sales would surely see them top, though.
>>
>>Of course.
>
> I see record shops are teasing/irritating CP fans by putting the empty
> boxes on the shelves already.
I suppose it'd look too strange otherwise. Presumably if you took one of
hose to the corner you could pre-order a copy, but it wouldn't really be
worthwhile.
>>>>>Dolly Parton,
>>>>
>>>>Obviously a re-release, but with promo this time.
>>>
>>> By one R2 DJ, at least...
>>
>>Whom are you accusing? And what of?
>
> I don't listen to R2, so I don't know which of them is playing it.
If it's getting more than five plays a week, it's not going to be only one
of them. AFAICT it's on pretty heavy rotation in daytime.
>>BTW, it looks like that Weezer album isn't out until next week.
>
> Damn - I thought I'd checked the release schedule carefully enough!
I think it was a fairly last-minute postponement: it has apparently come out
in the US as planned.
Chris
Paul Hyett
wrote in uk.music.charts :
Re : Mint Royale - Singing In The Rain
>
>It transpires that the OCC are officially counting it as a new entry rather
>than a climber anyway. But let's not worry too much about that now.
C+ are sensibly calling it a climber, though.
Gene Kelly :
>>
>> It does seem a little odd that he had no hits back in the 50's, though.
>
>Well, I suppose it was only a Top 12 then.
But OTOH, far less competition than nowadays.
>And I don't know a huge amount
>about his career, so I don't know how much he did to make records for
>release.
There are certainly albums of his music out there. It's remarkable
no-one has released a 'Gene Kelly - Greatest Hits' album though,
especially as most of his work will presumably be out of copyright by
now.
>
>>>>For all we know, his version may even have charted on downloads this week
>>>>somewhere low > in the top 200 - I found it on 7 Digital easily enough...
>>>
>>>Yes, and it's even on a major so presumably it has been registered with
>>>the
>>>OCC. But I do wonder how many of the people who were inspired to go
>>>downloading last week would have heard of him.
>>
>> Given the size of the audience, at least *some* of them would have been
>> old enough to remember him - and only 700 or so downloads would take him
>> T200...
>
>Presumably you'll know by now.
It hasn't charted, though I dare say its sales increased by several
hundred percent nonetheless.
>
>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>> ---------------------
>
>> While you can't play iTunes songs on other MP3 players, I didn't think the
>> converse was true?
>
>iTunes and iPods don't support DRM-encumbered .wma files, which is what
>these were. In fact, iPods don't play any .wma files
I didn't realise that.
>, but if they're non-DRM
>they can be converted.
Or you could burn them to CD & rip them back into a format iPods would
play...
>
>Incidentally, a few other Radiohead tracks were available individually on
>other sites via compilations
That could explain it then.
>
>>>>> >Jordin Sparks &
>>>>>> CB (NA) #74
>>>
>>>I wonder what's woken it up now then?
>>
>> Early airplay for its 14th July physical release? Somehow I think it's the
>> latter name that's selling it, though.
>
>And why shouldn't it? ;-)
You *have* heard your namesake's music, right? :)
>
>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>> ------
>>
>> What does an artist do if they find themselves unwillingly signed to a
>> record company by this means?
>
>90% of the time, nothing. A few very powerful acts can demand clauses in
>their contracts that allow them to leave if the company changes hands or
>particular members of staff leave, but most don't have that.
I'd have thought Paul Weller would have sufficient status for such a
clause, though.
>
>> I mean, if you work for a company which gets taken over, and the new
>> owners try to impose an unpopular employment contract on you, you can
>> always walk away...
>
>Indeed so, but at least most record contracts have a fixed duration. Also,
>the label can't force the act to record, so sometimes they can force a
>severance deal of some sort.
I wonder if Robbie's lawyers are looking into that - IIRC he's on
'strike' ATM - or at least that's his excuse... :)
>
>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>>> Top 10 : Radiohead #4,
>>>>>
>>>> Climbed steadily during the week, too - unusual for a rock album.
>>>
>>>But a logical result of the fact that the fans were almost the last people
>>>who'd want this.
>>
>> Assuming they'd care about the back-story behind it?
>
>Even if they didn't, they'd have little reason to shell out for a load of
>tracks they'd already got.
You'd think - but this *was* their first 'best of' - and many acts have
fans who'll buy GH compilations over & over again.
>
>>>>>>Hall & Oates #35,
>>>>>
>>>>>Their first chart album under this billing
>>>>
>>>> Other than their previous thirteen chart albums together?
>>>
>>>All credited to Daryl Hall And John Oates.
>>
>> Err... they are the *same* people, you know... :)
>
>So were Doves and Sub Sub - that doesn't mean there wasn't a distinction to
>be made.
I think it would be far more obvious that both acts were the same than
in your example, though. :)
>
>>>>>>Coldplay (X&Y) #64,
>>>>>
>>>>>Presumably discounted to promote new material.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe not - the previous two surged just before X&Y was released (and
>>>> they
>>>> are also charting this time, too).
>>>
>>>For the same reason.
>>
>> Yes, airplay for the new album draws attention to their back-catalogue...
>
>...Which is usually discounted to ensure maximum advantage. I don't entirely
>understand the economics behind this, but it's standard practice now.
I see there is an on-line price-war already over Coldplay's new album -
apparently just £5.49 at Woolies, though I wouldn't personally be
tempted even at 5.49p. :)
>
>>>>>> Next Week
>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>> -------
>
>>>>>> Top 40 :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sonny J,
>>>>>
>>>>The singer is female.
>>>
>>>But that's presumably a sessioner or sample.
>>
>> She's in the video, too...
>
>I wonder if it's the same one?
Same video, or same singer?
>
>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>> ------
>>>>>> It doesn't take a genius to predict that Coldplay, despite not
>>>>>> releasing
>>>>>> until Thursday, will annihilate all opposition!
>>>>>
>>>>>Quite possibly, although the short release will be a good excuse if they
>>>>>don't.
>>>>
>>>> Even one days sales would surely see them top, though.
>>>
>>>Of course.
>>
>> I see record shops are teasing/irritating CP fans by putting the empty
>> boxes on the shelves already.
>
>I suppose it'd look too strange otherwise. Presumably if you took one of
>hose
^^^^
To control a mob of impatient CP fans, presumably? :)
> to the corner you could pre-order a copy, but it wouldn't really be
>worthwhile.
I dare say there were some pre-Thursday sales leaks anyway.
>
>>>>>>Dolly Parton,
>>>>>
>>>>>Obviously a re-release, but with promo this time.
>>>>
>>>> By one R2 DJ, at least...
>>>
>>>Whom are you accusing? And what of?
>>
>> I don't listen to R2, so I don't know which of them is playing it.
>
>If it's getting more than five plays a week, it's not going to be only one
>of them.
Aren't their DJ's allowed to play a song more than 5 times a week, then?
>AFAICT it's on pretty heavy rotation in daytime.
18 plays for #35 to 17.295m listeners, last week.
Chris Brown
>>>
>>> It does seem a little odd that he had no hits back in the 50's, though.
>>
>>Well, I suppose it was only a Top 12 then.
>
> But OTOH, far less competition than nowadays.
>
>>And I don't know a huge amount
>>about his career, so I don't know how much he did to make records for
>>release.
>
> There are certainly albums of his music out there.
Well yes, obviously he had to record the music for his movies and so on. But
I don't know whether he had a big recording career beyond that.
> It's remarkable
> no-one has released a 'Gene Kelly - Greatest Hits' album though,
> especially as most of his work will presumably be out of copyright by
> now.
Can you be sure that they haven't?
>>>>>For all we know, his version may even have charted on downloads this
>>>>>week
>>>>>somewhere low > in the top 200 - I found it on 7 Digital easily
>>>>>enough...
>>>>
>>>>Yes, and it's even on a major so presumably it has been registered with
>>>>the
>>>>OCC. But I do wonder how many of the people who were inspired to go
>>>>downloading last week would have heard of him.
>>>
>>> Given the size of the audience, at least *some* of them would have been
>>> old enough to remember him - and only 700 or so downloads would take him
>>> T200...
>>
>>Presumably you'll know by now.
>
> It hasn't charted, though I dare say its sales increased by several
> hundred percent nonetheless.
I suppose, given that this particular recording is undoubtedly out of
copyright, there may be several versions online not being combined.
>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>
>>> While you can't play iTunes songs on other MP3 players, I didn't think
>>> the
>>> converse was true?
>>
>>iTunes and iPods don't support DRM-encumbered .wma files, which is what
>>these were. In fact, iPods don't play any .wma files
>
> I didn't realise that.
No reason they couldn't, of course but that was Apple's choice.
>>, but if they're non-DRM
>>they can be converted.
>
> Or you could burn them to CD & rip them back into a format iPods would
> play...
You could, but that's a rigmarole I doubt many people would bother with.
If you happen to have non-DRM .wma files, iTunes will convert them to .aac -
but apparently it doesn't like you switching them back.
>>Incidentally, a few other Radiohead tracks were available individually on
>>other sites via compilations
>
> That could explain it then.
Explain what?
I've never seen 'Creep' on any of those, although it does appear on some
physical compilations (I even used to have it on one).
>>>>>> >Jordin Sparks &
>>>>>>> CB (NA) #74
>>>>
>>>>I wonder what's woken it up now then?
>>>
>>> Early airplay for its 14th July physical release? Somehow I think it's
>>> the
>>> latter name that's selling it, though.
>>
>>And why shouldn't it? ;-)
>
> You *have* heard your namesake's music, right? :)
Good name though.
>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>> ------
>>>
>>> What does an artist do if they find themselves unwillingly signed to a
>>> record company by this means?
>>
>>90% of the time, nothing. A few very powerful acts can demand clauses in
>>their contracts that allow them to leave if the company changes hands or
>>particular members of staff leave, but most don't have that.
>
> I'd have thought Paul Weller would have sufficient status for such a
> clause, though.
He probably could have it now, if he wanted it, and for all I know perhaps
he has. He might not have used it anyway, because he seems to have a decent
working relationship with Universal, having collaborated with them on
various reissues and things in the last few years (they also own all the Jam
and Style Council catalogue of course).
In 1996 he wouldn't have had that, as he was pretty much on his uppers when
he signed to Go!, but he happened to be at the peak of his success (and
grumpiness) so there was an incentive to keep him onside. And he had an
album in the can which Polygram would have owned the rights to anyway.
>>> I mean, if you work for a company which gets taken over, and the new
>>> owners try to impose an unpopular employment contract on you, you can
>>> always walk away...
>>
>>Indeed so, but at least most record contracts have a fixed duration. Also,
>>the label can't force the act to record, so sometimes they can force a
>>severance deal of some sort.
>
> I wonder if Robbie's lawyers are looking into that - IIRC he's on
> 'strike' ATM - or at least that's his excuse... :)
Against what exactly?
He must have one of the most generous deals in the world, having signed it
in 2002.
>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>>>> Top 10 : Radiohead #4,
>>>>>>
>>>>> Climbed steadily during the week, too - unusual for a rock album.
>>>>
>>>>But a logical result of the fact that the fans were almost the last
>>>>people
>>>>who'd want this.
>>>
>>> Assuming they'd care about the back-story behind it?
>>
>>Even if they didn't, they'd have little reason to shell out for a load of
>>tracks they'd already got.
>
> You'd think - but this *was* their first 'best of' - and many acts have
> fans who'll buy GH compilations over & over again.
True, but that seems to happen most often when labels include new or rare
material. I suspect the fact that they haven't done so in this case suggests
that they're planning a seperate release somewhere.
>>>>>>>Hall & Oates #35,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Their first chart album under this billing
>>>>>
>>>>> Other than their previous thirteen chart albums together?
>>>>
>>>>All credited to Daryl Hall And John Oates.
>>>
>>> Err... they are the *same* people, you know... :)
>>
>>So were Doves and Sub Sub - that doesn't mean there wasn't a distinction
>>to
>>be made.
>
> I think it would be far more obvious that both acts were the same than
> in your example, though. :)
Er, yes, that was the point of the example.
>>>>>>>Coldplay (X&Y) #64,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Presumably discounted to promote new material.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe not - the previous two surged just before X&Y was released (and
>>>>> they
>>>>> are also charting this time, too).
>>>>
>>>>For the same reason.
>>>
>>> Yes, airplay for the new album draws attention to their
>>> back-catalogue...
>>
>>...Which is usually discounted to ensure maximum advantage. I don't
>>entirely
>>understand the economics behind this, but it's standard practice now.
>
> I see there is an on-line price-war already over Coldplay's new album -
> apparently just £5.49 at Woolies, though I wouldn't personally be
> tempted even at 5.49p. :)
Of course, with the new album it's shops competing with each other for the
guaranteed customers, rather than any need to shift the record itself. The
digital album is quite widely discounted too.
>>>>>>> Next Week
>>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>> -------
>>
>>>>>>> Top 40 :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sonny J,
>>>>>>
>>>>>The singer is female.
>>>>
>>>>But that's presumably a sessioner or sample.
>>>
>>> She's in the video, too...
>>
>>I wonder if it's the same one?
>
> Same video, or same singer?
Same singer.
>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>> ------
>>>>>>> It doesn't take a genius to predict that Coldplay, despite not
>>>>>>> releasing
>>>>>>> until Thursday, will annihilate all opposition!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Quite possibly, although the short release will be a good excuse if
>>>>>>they
>>>>>>don't.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even one days sales would surely see them top, though.
>>>>
>>>>Of course.
>>>
>>> I see record shops are teasing/irritating CP fans by putting the empty
>>> boxes on the shelves already.
>>
>>I suppose it'd look too strange otherwise. Presumably if you took one of
>>hose
> ^^^^
> To control a mob of impatient CP fans, presumably? :)
Er, something like that.
>> to the corner you could pre-order a copy, but it wouldn't really be
>>worthwhile.
>
> I dare say there were some pre-Thursday sales leaks anyway.
If they were in the shops on time, of course.
>>>>>>>Dolly Parton,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Obviously a re-release, but with promo this time.
>>>>>
>>>>> By one R2 DJ, at least...
>>>>
>>>>Whom are you accusing? And what of?
>>>
>>> I don't listen to R2, so I don't know which of them is playing it.
>>
>>If it's getting more than five plays a week, it's not going to be only one
>>of them.
>
> Aren't their DJ's allowed to play a song more than 5 times a week, then?
There's no specific rule about that - but most of them only have five (or
fewer) shows per week.
>>AFAICT it's on pretty heavy rotation in daytime.
>
> 18 plays for #35 to 17.295m listeners, last week.
Well that'd be more than two per day. Even Steve Wright doesn't do that!
Chris
Paul Hyett
wrote in uk.music.charts :
>
>> It's remarkable
>> no-one has released a 'Gene Kelly - Greatest Hits' album though,
>> especially as most of his work will presumably be out of copyright by
>> now.
>
>Can you be sure that they haven't?
Only by inference - that such an album has never charted in Britain or
America, when you'd certainly expect one to if it existed.
>>
Re : Gene Kelly - Singing In The Rain
>> It hasn't charted, though I dare say its sales increased by several
>> hundred percent nonetheless.
>
>I suppose, given that this particular recording is undoubtedly out of
>copyright, there may be several versions online not being combined.
Being out of copyright might well be another reason Mint Royale chose to
sample it, of course.
>
>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>
>>>> While you can't play iTunes songs on other MP3 players, I didn't think
>>>> the
>>>> converse was true?
>>>
>>>iTunes and iPods don't support DRM-encumbered .wma files, which is what
>>>these were. In fact, iPods don't play any .wma files
>>
>> I didn't realise that.
>
>No reason they couldn't, of course but that was Apple's choice.
Has no-one written a hack so iPods *can* play them?
>
>>>>>>> >Jordin Sparks &
>>>>>>>> CB (NA) #74
>>
>> You *have* heard your namesake's music, right? :)
>
>Good name though.
Well, I guess she spelt it that way to avoid the association with a
certain busty brainless model... :)
>
>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>> ------
>>>
>>>Indeed so, but at least most record contracts have a fixed duration. Also,
>>>the label can't force the act to record, so sometimes they can force a
>>>severance deal of some sort.
>>
>> I wonder if Robbie's lawyers are looking into that - IIRC he's on
>> 'strike' ATM - or at least that's his excuse... :)
>
>Against what exactly?
Changes caused by a recent take-over
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7183089.stm
That's why Radiohead left EMI too, AIUI.
>
>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>
>> I see there is an on-line price-war already over Coldplay's new album -
>> apparently just £5.49 at Woolies, though I wouldn't personally be
>> tempted even at 5.49p. :)
>
>Of course, with the new album it's shops competing with each other for the
>guaranteed customers, rather than any need to shift the record itself. The
>digital album is quite widely discounted too.
That £5.49 I quoted *was* for the digital album.
>
>>>>>>>> Next Week
>>>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>>> -------
>>>>
>>>> She's in the video, too...
>>>
>>>I wonder if it's the same one?
>>
>> Same video, or same singer?
>
>Same singer.
There can be lip-synching issues if it wasn't.
>
>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>> ------
>>
>> I dare say there were some pre-Thursday sales leaks anyway.
>
>If they were in the shops on time, of course.
Surely some shops would be tempted to steal a march, given the expected
sales levels.
>>
>> Aren't their DJ's allowed to play a song more than 5 times a week, then?
>
>There's no specific rule about that - but most of them only have five (or
>fewer) shows per week.
So definitely not more than once a show, then?
But even that falls down - on the R1 chart show, if last week's #1 is
the same as this week's, it be played twice - at the start & end of the
show.
>
>>>AFAICT it's on pretty heavy rotation in daytime.
>>
>> 18 plays for #35 to 17.295m listeners, last week.
>
>Well that'd be more than two per day. Even Steve Wright doesn't do that!
Of course, we are assuming that *only* R2 is playing it - surely at
least a couple of those spins will be elsewhere?
Chris Brown
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 at 22:28:08, Chris Brown <extreme...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in uk.music.charts :
>>
>>> It's remarkable
>>> no-one has released a 'Gene Kelly - Greatest Hits' album though,
>>> especially as most of his work will presumably be out of copyright by
>>> now.
>>
>>Can you be sure that they haven't?
>
> Only by inference - that such an album has never charted in Britain or
> America, when you'd certainly expect one to if it existed.
Well, people might boycott it for lack of hits!
Also, releases on budget labels and so on tend not to chart.
> Re : Gene Kelly - Singing In The Rain
>
>>> It hasn't charted, though I dare say its sales increased by several
>>> hundred percent nonetheless.
>>
>>I suppose, given that this particular recording is undoubtedly out of
>>copyright, there may be several versions online not being combined.
>
> Being out of copyright might well be another reason Mint Royale chose to
> sample it, of course.
AFAIK, they were commissioned to do it for the advert, so they didn't really
have any choice (well, apart from saying "no"). But presumably it was
helpful for the advertisers. Mind you, I presume the song itself is still
copyright.
>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>
>>>>> While you can't play iTunes songs on other MP3 players, I didn't think
>>>>> the
>>>>> converse was true?
>>>>
>>>>iTunes and iPods don't support DRM-encumbered .wma files, which is what
>>>>these were. In fact, iPods don't play any .wma files
>>>
>>> I didn't realise that.
>>
>>No reason they couldn't, of course but that was Apple's choice.
>
> Has no-one written a hack so iPods *can* play them?
Apparently not. I don't know if that's actually possible.
>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>
>>>>Indeed so, but at least most record contracts have a fixed duration.
>>>>Also,
>>>>the label can't force the act to record, so sometimes they can force a
>>>>severance deal of some sort.
>>>
>>> I wonder if Robbie's lawyers are looking into that - IIRC he's on
>>> 'strike' ATM - or at least that's his excuse... :)
>>
>>Against what exactly?
>
> Changes caused by a recent take-over
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7183089.stm
Hmm... There are probably things that worry the label more than this. If
they did care, I doubt he has a leg to stand on legally.
People certainly have gone on strike from record companies though.
> That's why Radiohead left EMI too, AIUI.
Well, strictly speaking Radiohead left five years ago, when their previous
contract ran out. But they did keep negotiating with EMI until last year,
apparently. It's agreed that they weren't offered the deal they wanted
(though not exactly what) but whether they'd have got it from the previous
owners I don't know.
>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>
>>> I see there is an on-line price-war already over Coldplay's new album -
>>> apparently just £5.49 at Woolies, though I wouldn't personally be
>>> tempted even at 5.49p. :)
>>
>>Of course, with the new album it's shops competing with each other for the
>>guaranteed customers, rather than any need to shift the record itself. The
>>digital album is quite widely discounted too.
>
> That £5.49 I quoted *was* for the digital album.
Oh right. It says £4:97 on the website.
Apparently the CD is available in some places for as little as £6:99.
>>>>>>>>> Next Week
>>>>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>>>> -------
>>>>>
>>>>> She's in the video, too...
>>>>
>>>>I wonder if it's the same one?
>>>
>>> Same video, or same singer?
>>
>>Same singer.
>
> There can be lip-synching issues if it wasn't.
Or even if it was.
>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>
>>> I dare say there were some pre-Thursday sales leaks anyway.
>>
>>If they were in the shops on time, of course.
>
> Surely some shops would be tempted to steal a march, given the expected
> sales levels.
Which would be a good reason for the record company to deliver them as late
as possible. In any case, they could hardly advertise that they were doing
it.
>>> Aren't their DJ's allowed to play a song more than 5 times a week, then?
>>
>>There's no specific rule about that - but most of them only have five (or
>>fewer) shows per week.
>
> So definitely not more than once a show, then?
It's not illegal, and it has been known to happen (by mistake, or with
things like 'The Ladies Bras' ) but it wouldn't be scheduled that way and if
one show featured the same track 18 times in a week it'd raise an awful lot
of suspicion.
> But even that falls down - on the R1 chart show, if last week's #1 is the
> same as this week's, it be played twice - at the start & end of the show.
Even if the previous Number One is still in the Top 20, indeed.
>>>>AFAICT it's on pretty heavy rotation in daytime.
>>>
>>> 18 plays for #35 to 17.295m listeners, last week.
>>
>>Well that'd be more than two per day. Even Steve Wright doesn't do that!
>
> Of course, we are assuming that *only* R2 is playing it - surely at least
> a couple of those spins will be elsewhere?
Possibly, but I suspect not very many. You can look up R2's plays if you get
bored enough.
Chris
Paul Hyett
>>>
>>>> It's remarkable
>>>> no-one has released a 'Gene Kelly - Greatest Hits' album though,
>>>> especially as most of his work will presumably be out of copyright by
>>>> now.
>>>
>>>Can you be sure that they haven't?
>>
>> Only by inference - that such an album has never charted in Britain or
>> America, when you'd certainly expect one to if it existed.
>
>Well, people might boycott it for lack of hits!
Grin.
>Also, releases on budget labels and so on tend not to chart.
That's a good point.
>
>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>iTunes and iPods don't support DRM-encumbered .wma files, which is what
>>>>>these were. In fact, iPods don't play any .wma files
>>
>> Has no-one written a hack so iPods *can* play them?
>
>Apparently not. I don't know if that's actually possible.
Hackers tend to find ways of doing 'impossible' things, though.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>
>>>> I see there is an on-line price-war already over Coldplay's new album -
>>>> apparently just £5.49 at Woolies, though I wouldn't personally be
>>>> tempted even at 5.49p. :)
>>>
>>>Of course, with the new album it's shops competing with each other for the
>>>guaranteed customers, rather than any need to shift the record itself. The
>>>digital album is quite widely discounted too.
>>
>> That £5.49 I quoted *was* for the digital album.
>
>Oh right. It says £4:97 on the website.
No wonder it sold 125k just on Thursday then - wonder how many of those
were virtual sales?
Also, it'll be interesting to see if this week's download element of
their album sales will be more than the combined sales of the #2 - which
would certainly be a first...
>
>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>
>>>> I dare say there were some pre-Thursday sales leaks anyway.
>>>
>>>If they were in the shops on time, of course.
>>
>> Surely some shops would be tempted to steal a march, given the expected
>> sales levels.
>
>Which would be a good reason for the record company to deliver them as late
>as possible.
Except that the empty boxes were already on the shelves - and to deliver
the CD's separately would risk damaging them...
> if
>one show featured the same track 18 times in a week it'd raise an awful lot
>of suspicion.
Of record company bribery, you mean?
Well, in my case I couldn't be more suspicious of that than I already
am... :)
>
>> But even that falls down - on the R1 chart show, if last week's #1 is the
>> same as this week's, it be played twice - at the start & end of the show.
>
>Even if the previous Number One is still in the Top 20, indeed.
Generally the case though, unless that happened to be McFly. :)
Seriously though, their new single will have a good chance of #1, but a
lesser chance of still being T10 the following week...
>
>Possibly, but I suspect not very many. You can look up R2's plays if you get
>bored enough.
URL?
Chris Brown
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 at 00:33:05, Chris Brown <extreme...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in uk.music.charts :
>>>>
>>>>> It's remarkable
>>>>> no-one has released a 'Gene Kelly - Greatest Hits' album though,
>>>>> especially as most of his work will presumably be out of copyright by
>>>>> now.
>>>>
>>>>Can you be sure that they haven't?
>>>
>>> Only by inference - that such an album has never charted in Britain or
>>> America, when you'd certainly expect one to if it existed.
>>
>>Well, people might boycott it for lack of hits!
>
> Grin.
>
>>Also, releases on budget labels and so on tend not to chart.
>
> That's a good point.
A lot of them can't of course. But even if they were permitted they probably
don't get all their sales counted.
>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>iTunes and iPods don't support DRM-encumbered .wma files, which is
>>>>>>what
>>>>>>these were. In fact, iPods don't play any .wma files
>>>
>>> Has no-one written a hack so iPods *can* play them?
>>
>>Apparently not. I don't know if that's actually possible.
>
> Hackers tend to find ways of doing 'impossible' things, though.
So it seems, but I don't really understand whether or not there's any way to
force software to recognise files it otherwise wouldn't. Either way, there's
not a lot of demand - since iPods play MP3 files anyway it'd be simpler to
use those.
>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> I see there is an on-line price-war already over Coldplay's new
>>>>> album -
>>>>> apparently just £5.49 at Woolies, though I wouldn't personally be
>>>>> tempted even at 5.49p. :)
>>>>
>>>>Of course, with the new album it's shops competing with each other for
>>>>the
>>>>guaranteed customers, rather than any need to shift the record itself.
>>>>The
>>>>digital album is quite widely discounted too.
>>>
>>> That £5.49 I quoted *was* for the digital album.
>>
>>Oh right. It says £4:97 on the website.
>
> No wonder it sold 125k just on Thursday then - wonder how many of those
> were virtual sales?
Probably more than average, with all those iTunes pre-orders.
> Also, it'll be interesting to see if this week's download element of their
> album sales will be more than the combined sales of the #2 - which would
> certainly be a first...
Yes. Although we don't know whether we'll be told.
>>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>>
>>>>> I dare say there were some pre-Thursday sales leaks anyway.
>>>>
>>>>If they were in the shops on time, of course.
>>>
>>> Surely some shops would be tempted to steal a march, given the expected
>>> sales levels.
>>
>>Which would be a good reason for the record company to deliver them as
>>late
>>as possible.
>
> Except that the empty boxes were already on the shelves - and to deliver
> the CD's separately would risk damaging them...
Actually they weren't, at least in the place I looked - just those little
plastic replacement ones they often use. The actual CD is in a card sleeve.
>> if
>>one show featured the same track 18 times in a week it'd raise an awful
>>lot
>>of suspicion.
>
> Of record company bribery, you mean?
Or something along those lines.
> Well, in my case I couldn't be more suspicious of that than I already
> am... :)
Of course this is the reason why DJs are usually kept at arm's length from
such things.
>>> But even that falls down - on the R1 chart show, if last week's #1 is
>>> the
>>> same as this week's, it be played twice - at the start & end of the
>>> show.
>>
>>Even if the previous Number One is still in the Top 20, indeed.
>
> Generally the case though, unless that happened to be McFly. :)
Heh. Even they haven't quite managed that yet.
> Seriously though, their new single will have a good chance of #1, but a
> lesser chance of still being T10 the following week...
Still haven't heard it.
>>Possibly, but I suspect not very many. You can look up R2's plays if you
>>get
>>bored enough.
>
> URL?
It's not quite that simple, but each show publishes a log of what they
played, so for example this is what Ken Bruce played on Thursday (the only
day in the past week when he spun this particular track):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/shows/bruce/playlist_thursday.shtml
Chris
Paul Hyett
wrote in uk.music.charts :
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>
>> Hackers tend to find ways of doing 'impossible' things, though.
>
>So it seems, but I don't really understand whether or not there's any way to
>force software to recognise files it otherwise wouldn't. Either way, there's
>not a lot of demand - since iPods play MP3 files anyway it'd be simpler to
>use those.
Except that on the download sites I've registered with, WMA's are the
norm, with MP3's being a rarity.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>
>> Also, it'll be interesting to see if this week's download element of their
>> album sales will be more than the combined sales of the #2 - which would
>> certainly be a first...
>
>Yes. Although we don't know whether we'll be told.
Though it would surely be the sort of thing MW would mention.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>
>> Except that the empty boxes were already on the shelves - and to deliver
>> the CD's separately would risk damaging them...
>
>Actually they weren't, at least in the place I looked - just those little
>plastic replacement ones they often use. The actual CD is in a card sleeve.
I hate it when they do that - it increases the cost because I have to
buy proper CD cases myself, not to mention making me more inclined to
download, thus helping to further undermine the physical market. :(
>
>> Well, in my case I couldn't be more suspicious of that than I already
>> am... :)
>
>Of course this is the reason why DJs are usually kept at arm's length from
>such things.
Except that it is probably their superiors who receive the
record-company brown envelopes...
>
>> Seriously though, their new single will have a good chance of #1, but a
>> lesser chance of still being T10 the following week...
>
>Still haven't heard it.
There are radio rips of it on Youtube of course, but like me, I doubt
you want to hear it any more than you have to. :)
>
>>>Possibly, but I suspect not very many. You can look up R2's plays if you
>>>get
>>>bored enough.
>each show publishes a log of what they
>played, so for example this is what Ken Bruce played on Thursday (the only
>day in the past week when he spun this particular track):
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/shows/bruce/playlist_thursday.shtml
Thanks.
It seems like the only way of finding out total weekly plays would be to
laboriously total them, though.
Chris Brown
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 at 18:25:49, Chris Brown <extreme...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in uk.music.charts :
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>
>>> Hackers tend to find ways of doing 'impossible' things, though.
>>
>>So it seems, but I don't really understand whether or not there's any way
>>to
>>force software to recognise files it otherwise wouldn't. Either way,
>>there's
>>not a lot of demand - since iPods play MP3 files anyway it'd be simpler to
>>use those.
>
> Except that on the download sites I've registered with, WMA's are the
> norm, with MP3's being a rarity.
In most cases that's true - 7Digital claims to have 50% of its catalogue in
MP3, but it's not necessarily the most popular 50%, and all-MP3 sites like
Bleep and Emusic eschew the major labels. However, most of what's on the
sites we use is also on iTunes in aac, so if you wanted to play them on an
iPod you could just buy them that way.
In practice I should imagine that people who are prepared to hack an
expensive piece of electronic equipment would have no qualms about the
simpler job of hacking the files themselves, or just downloading the music
illegally in the first place.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>
>>> Also, it'll be interesting to see if this week's download element of
>>> their
>>> album sales will be more than the combined sales of the #2 - which would
>>> certainly be a first...
>>
>>Yes. Although we don't know whether we'll be told.
>
> Though it would surely be the sort of thing MW would mention.
You'd think so, but I was expecting to be told how many (or rather, how few)
physicals Mint Royale had sold last week.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>
>>> Except that the empty boxes were already on the shelves - and to deliver
>>> the CD's separately would risk damaging them...
>>
>>Actually they weren't, at least in the place I looked - just those little
>>plastic replacement ones they often use. The actual CD is in a card
>>sleeve.
>
> I hate it when they do that - it increases the cost because I have to buy
> proper CD cases myself, not to mention making me more inclined to
> download, thus helping to further undermine the physical market. :(
But that's not necessarily bad news for the record company.
To clarify, Viva La Vida isn't in a plain card sleeve (I've never seen one
of those on a commercial CD album) but a sort of gatefold thing.
>>> Well, in my case I couldn't be more suspicious of that than I already
>>> am... :)
>>
>>Of course this is the reason why DJs are usually kept at arm's length from
>>such things.
>
> Except that it is probably their superiors who receive the record-company
> brown envelopes...
Hence the need to involve multiple people.
>>> Seriously though, their new single will have a good chance of #1, but a
>>> lesser chance of still being T10 the following week...
>>
>>Still haven't heard it.
>
> There are radio rips of it on Youtube of course, but like me, I doubt you
> want to hear it any more than you have to. :)
Well, I don't mind them.
>>>>Possibly, but I suspect not very many. You can look up R2's plays if you
>>>>get
>>>>bored enough.
>
>>each show publishes a log of what they
>>played, so for example this is what Ken Bruce played on Thursday (the only
>>day in the past week when he spun this particular track):
>
>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/shows/bruce/playlist_thursday.shtml
>
> Thanks.
>
> It seems like the only way of finding out total weekly plays would be to
> laboriously total them, though.
For us, it seems that way. I did say you'd have to be bored!
Chris
Paul Hyett
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>
>>>use those.
>>
>> Except that on the download sites I've registered with, WMA's are the
>> norm, with MP3's being a rarity.
>
>In most cases that's true - 7Digital claims to have 50% of its catalogue in
>MP3, but it's not necessarily the most popular 50%
To say the least. :(
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>
>You'd think so, but I was expecting to be told how many (or rather, how few)
>physicals Mint Royale had sold last week.
I suspect you could count them on one hand.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>
>>>Actually they weren't, at least in the place I looked - just those little
>>>plastic replacement ones they often use. The actual CD is in a card
>>>sleeve.
>>
>> I hate it when they do that - it increases the cost because I have to buy
>> proper CD cases myself, not to mention making me more inclined to
>> download, thus helping to further undermine the physical market. :(
>
>But that's not necessarily bad news for the record company.
But it would be for record shops - they already have to deal with gaps
in the singles shelves (those that still bother with them) - and if
albums start 'disappearing' too...
>To clarify, Viva La Vida isn't in a plain card sleeve (I've never seen one
>of those on a commercial CD album)
I assume you mean the sort of cardboard thing that free newspaper CD's
come in?
> but a sort of gatefold thing.
Like Norah Jones 'Feels Like Home' & Colbie Caillat 'Coco'?
Though come to think of it, they're not albums I'd expect you to know
about the covers for... :)
Chris Brown
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 at 22:13:58, Chris Brown <extreme...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in uk.music.charts :
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>>
>>>>since iPods play MP3 files anyway it'd be simpler to
>>>>use those.
>>>
>>> Except that on the download sites I've registered with, WMA's are the
>>> norm, with MP3's being a rarity.
>>
>>In most cases that's true - 7Digital claims to have 50% of its catalogue
>>in
>>MP3, but it's not necessarily the most popular 50%
>
> To say the least. :(
I think they probably have more than most non-specialist sites - certainly
they beat iTunes and Woolworths by having Warner Music recordings without
DRM.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/New Peaks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------
>>
>>You'd think so, but I was expecting to be told how many (or rather, how
>>few)
>>physicals Mint Royale had sold last week.
>
> I suspect you could count them on one hand.
So do I, but it'd be nice to know!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>
>>>>Actually they weren't, at least in the place I looked - just those
>>>>little
>>>>plastic replacement ones they often use. The actual CD is in a card
>>>>sleeve.
>>>
>>> I hate it when they do that - it increases the cost because I have to
>>> buy
>>> proper CD cases myself, not to mention making me more inclined to
>>> download, thus helping to further undermine the physical market. :(
>>
>>But that's not necessarily bad news for the record company.
>
> But it would be for record shops - they already have to deal with gaps in
> the singles shelves (those that still bother with them) - and if albums
> start 'disappearing' too...
Right, but the shops don't get to choose how albums are packaged, generally
speaking.
>>To clarify, Viva La Vida isn't in a plain card sleeve (I've never seen one
>>of those on a commercial CD album)
>
> I assume you mean the sort of cardboard thing that free newspaper CD's
> come in?
Yes, and promo CDs and sometimes even CD singles.
In fact, today I did see a CD album in one after all - the Foxboro Hottubs
one, presumably as an intentional gag.
>> but a sort of gatefold thing.
>
> Like Norah Jones 'Feels Like Home' & Colbie Caillat 'Coco'?
>
> Though come to think of it, they're not albums I'd expect you to know
> about the covers for... :)
I think all the Norah Jones CDs I've seen were in jewel cases actually.
Chris
Paul Hyett
wrote in uk.music.charts :
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------
>
>>>To clarify, Viva La Vida isn't in a plain card sleeve (I've never seen one
>>>of those on a commercial CD album)
>>
>> I assume you mean the sort of cardboard thing that free newspaper CD's
>> come in?
>
>Yes, and promo CDs and sometimes even CD singles.
>In fact, today I did see a CD album in one after all - the Foxboro Hottubs
>one, presumably as an intentional gag.
Presumably as a 'green' statement - but since it's likely to sat on fans
dusty shelves for years, rather than a landfill, whether it is more
biodegradable will be something of a moot point.
>
>>> but a sort of gatefold thing.
>>
>> Like Norah Jones 'Feels Like Home' & Colbie Caillat 'Coco'?
>>
>> Though come to think of it, they're not albums I'd expect you to know
>> about the covers for... :)
>
>I think all the Norah Jones CDs I've seen were in jewel cases actually.
Not the last one - the special edition, anyway.
Chris Brown
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 at 21:41:56, Chris Brown <extreme...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in uk.music.charts :
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>
>>>>To clarify, Viva La Vida isn't in a plain card sleeve (I've never seen
>>>>one
>>>>of those on a commercial CD album)
>>>
>>> I assume you mean the sort of cardboard thing that free newspaper CD's
>>> come in?
>>
>>Yes, and promo CDs and sometimes even CD singles.
>>In fact, today I did see a CD album in one after all - the Foxboro Hottubs
>>one, presumably as an intentional gag.
>
> Presumably as a 'green' statement - but since it's likely to sat on fans
> dusty shelves for years, rather than a landfill, whether it is more
> biodegradable will be something of a moot point.
Especially since the disc itself is not biodegradeable.
But I think the Foxboro album is supposed to be a retro thing - there's also
the little message telling you that stereo is also playable mono, etc.
Chris