h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hmmm...although it might seem like a good thing with all these old tracks in the charts, I'm scared that it might penalise new acts. Although I adore the Beatles and am not so keen on - I dunno, Fergie! - I do worry that people will just stop making music altogether, with the chart possibly being less of a promotional tool.

Remember 'Love Is All Around' only disappeared out of the charts when Wet Wet Wet got sick of it and deleted - horrifying prospect to think that it might still be number one today had that not happened!

I had no idea that's why that annoying song fell out of the charts! I was glad to see the back of it after six months - six minutes might have been better...

I haven't really bought singles since the demise of the 7" anyway. I never got into CDs, and now most of what I download *is* older music. So when 'I'm in the mood for dancing' gets to number one - you know who to blame.

'Blame'? 'Congratulate' more like - it's a classic!

I think Gnarls Barkley may have done the same with 'Crazy' - though it was the first record to go to number one on the strength of downloads alone I think. They didn't want their first single to be an albatross. [Insert Fleetwood Mac joke here].

I never really got into CDs - one of the exciting things about buying a record was the sleeve, and the run-out groove and even the smell of it! Though vinyl wasn't quite so useful for doing your make-up in.

Did you ever have one of those record players that you could stack records up on? I used to have my own chart shows by buying the top ten, stacking it up, and letting them go...

It would be a shame if people stopped making new music because they are now competing against every track every made... Actually that's quite a scary thought! Instead of being up against recent releases you've got to fight Showaddywaddy off as well.

I'd rather have The Nolans at number one than half of what's in the charts at the moment..... seriously, though, do the charts really matter that much any more? There's plenty of great music out there that doesn't make the charts and is well worth investigating.....

I've *still* got a record player that you can stack records up on! It's a Weltron, it looks a bit like a crap UFO. http://www.jonatanplacing.dk/pics/weltron.jpg

I think this thread proves that the Nolans have a fanbase solid enough to sustain a revival! It could happen...

Well the thing is, there is a wider selection of music to download than there is available in most music shops, so in a way that might mean an opening for lots of other music you'd never see in the singles charts.

Nat, love that crap UFO, by the way. I wouldn't mind having one of those!

The one thing I will say for it is that it does mean a return to the charts of old, where you had high climbers and where you didn't necessarily have to enter at number one to score a chart-topper (as it's been in recent years ). So in that way at least the charts are a bit less dull.....

Ah I remember when that happened - when records hung around for ages before jumping out and attacking - the Jennifer Rush effect!

Oh yes, I remember that. And the time Captain Sensible went from number 33 up to No 1 with Happy Talk.....

I guess that there's sometimes a snowball effect. A single gets airtime, gets sufficient sales to enter the charts, gets more airtime, more sales etc. There must be something of mass appeal about these songs that get to stay at no 1 for weeks - even if they're not usually my taste!

The same may happen with downloading tracks, once they get into the charts. It'll still be the ones that have some popular appeal that will do well.

What I think will happen is that some artists will be able to achieve fame quickly who would otherwise have spent years trying to get a record deal. It really will be judgement by the public rather than what the record companies choose to promote.

That's true - you can already see signs of it already. Though I suppose that up to now downloads/Internet sites have been a vehicle by which bands have managed to get record companies to take up their music 'properly.' As was the case with Sandi Thom.

I understand there's an unsigned band that look set to go into the chart next week - they're called Koopa or something I think.

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/11/002201

The link in the article takes you straight back to the BBC but some of the discussion underneath the article summary is interesting . Anyway, to get to the points mentioned on the front page:

"Do you welcome the changes in the way the chart is compiled? What impact do you think it will have on the chart and the music industry as a whole?"

You may well be going up against Showaddywaddy (who? </yoof&gt but at least now you're in with a chance. I hope it'll really diversify the charts; at worst, we'll be deluged with generic by-the-numbers pop which is pretty much what we've got already.

***

"If a mediocre record gets to Number One simply because the rest of the singles at that time are rubbish and nobody buys them, does the Number One spot retain the same prestige?"

It seems kind of a funny question to ask to me, and I'm not quite sure how to respond. I think can only really think to say "sh*t happens" ('scuse my French) and move on.

***

"Are we only listening to the music that DJs feel like playing on the radio, or that download sites feel like listing on their site?"

I pretty much stopped listening to the radio when S Club first came out (I was 13) and started listening to Led Zep instead. More and more people I know are stopping listening to the radio because it doesn't play anything they like any more -- or if it does, it does so in the middle of a load of stuff they don't like. Of course, anecdote is the singular of data so I speak only for myself and this could simply be a result of my peers and I getting older.

***

"Why do we need to know what tracks other people are buying anyway?"

Because it might be good, presumably. Loads of people liking something doesn't automatically make it brilliant (Crazy Frog) but equally annoying is a kneejerk negative reaction to popularity -- "When a band sells more than 10,000 singles, I stop listening to them" once quoth a friend of mine.

***

"Should all the sales of singles be considered in the charts, rather than those from a select number of shops and sites?"

I suppose the problems here are pragmatism and ensuring fair play.

***

"With the demise of Top of the Pops, do people still care about these things?"

D'no.

***

That was a long one.

There are still chart shows on radio & I presume they get a fair sized audience. If the number of listeners starts dropping, I guess that would mean either they don't like what's in the charts or aren't interested.

I'm not interested in the singles charts - slight interest in album charts. Somehow I feel a bit disappointed if something I like becomes a hit - didn't think my tastes were that mainstream!