Top 40 Music on CD Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Top 40 Music On Compact Disc > Chat Board
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Questions for Paul Haney...
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Questions for Paul Haney...
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 12>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
80smusicfreak View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan


Joined: 14 October 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 0 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 80smusicfreak Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 June 2011 at 2:10pm
Originally posted by 80smusicfreak 80smusicfreak wrote:

2) The "Pop Annual" is definitely the RR book that I open up most often, after "Top Pop Singles". I've always been a huge fan of soul/r&b as well (the '70s and '80s, in particular), so naturally I've always kept up w/ the "Top R&B/Hip-Hop Singles" books - yet to date there's never been an "R&B/Hip-Hop Annual" to go along w/ it. So when RR introduced the "Country Annual" back in the late '90s, that of course gave me hope. :-) But alas, some seven years later, the wait goes on. :-( Has Whitburn ever considered publishing an "R&B/Hip-Hop Annual"??? If so, when can we expect it??? If not, what would it take to convince him?!? :-)


Originally posted by Paul Haney Paul Haney wrote:

Now to answer your question:

2) I really don't see an R&B Annual in the near future. The problem is that the Country Annual didn't do near as well as we'd hoped. But if enough people ask for one, it could happen someday. I'll put you down for a "yes" vote.


Bumping this up for both NightAire and Paul Haney...

Paul: Could you please add NightAire's name to the list, too??? :-) Any further discussion w/ Whitburn in the last five-and-a-half years??? (Apparently so, since you guys are sort of taking a small step w/ the new "Top 10 R&B Hits" book.) I really feel you should publish at least ONE detailed edition of the "R&B/Hip-Hop Annual" for all the valuable info it would contain - like RR did w/ the "Country Annual" in 1998 - even if sales may not be spectacular. (And I'd be willing to contribute, as I have w/ other RR books in the past. Heck, I'd even be willing to offer Whitburn some rare pressings of chart records that he apparently isn't aware of, or own in his private collection!)

Edited by 80smusicfreak
Back to Top
aaronk View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 172 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aaronk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 June 2011 at 3:59pm
I'd buy a copy.
Aaron Kannowski
Uptown Sound
91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop
Back to Top
Paul Haney View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan
Avatar

Joined: 01 April 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 40 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paul Haney Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 June 2011 at 4:08am
I really appreciate all of the support for the Record Research books by everyone here at Pat's board.

The annual section in our new "R&B Top 10" book is the first time we've ever attempted to show the R&B hits in an annual format. It would be nice if we could do a full-blown "R&B Annual" book, but it just isn't in the cards at this time. We have our hands full with our "Big 4" books: Top Pop Singles, Country Songs, R&B Songs and Top Pop Albums. As I stated before, the Country Annual we published years ago didn't do as well as we had hoped (it took us a few years just to break even on the costs). All of that said, I've learned to "never say never" when it comes to what we will eventually publish. I assure you that we would love to do an R&B Annual someday, but right now the economics just won't allow it.

We ARE currently working on an update to our "Pop Annual" book (the last one went through 2005). If we can sell enough copies of that book, it just might spur us on to finally do that "R&B Annual".
Back to Top
Hykker View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan


Joined: 30 October 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 21 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hykker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 June 2011 at 4:18pm
Originally posted by JMD1961 JMD1961 wrote:


I really have no problem with how Joel comes by his yearly rankings, with one notable exception, that being how he determines year placement of some songs. Particularly, I'm referring to songs that peak at the end of one year and remain there through the start of the following year. Using peak date alone, to me, doesn't really accurately place a song in the proper year.


One thing I've noticed with Billboard's year-end charts over the past 8 years or so is that several songs make the year end chart in multiple years (more noticeable on the country charts, but pop charts too), no doubt owing to the time of year they debuted and the increased chart longevity songs have these days. How does RR handle these?

Back to Top
NightAire View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan


Joined: 20 February 2010
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NightAire Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 June 2011 at 5:14pm
I got the 1980s charts DVD and have LOVED it; I'd be thrilled with a similar setup, maybe download-only to save production / shipping costs?

It's possible the information I'm looking for is in the online database, but since I'd have to pay per search and don't know if it's in there (and could end up doing THOUSANDS of searches as I look up the R&B singles of the decade) I doubt I'll ever know.

Here's hoping for a R&B charts publication, online or otherwise! (Especially a year-end chart like the Top Pop 100 year-end charts!)
Gene Savage
http://www.BlackLightRadio.com
http://www.facebook.com/TulsaSavage
Tulsa, Oklahoma USA
Back to Top
aaronk View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 172 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aaronk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 June 2011 at 7:00pm
Yes, I strongly suggest a different pricing model for the searchable
database. That's the only reason I haven't used it. If there were an
affordable, annual (or monthly) unlimited search price, I would have
signed up long ago. Paying "per search" is not very appealing.
Aaron Kannowski
Uptown Sound
91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop
Back to Top
mstgator View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan


Joined: 06 September 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 0 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mstgator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 June 2011 at 7:57pm
Originally posted by Hykker Hykker wrote:

Originally posted by JMD1961 JMD1961 wrote:


I really have no problem with how Joel comes by his yearly rankings, with
one notable exception, that being how he determines year placement of
some songs. Particularly, I'm referring to songs that peak at the end of
one year and remain there through the start of the following year. Using
peak date alone, to me, doesn't really accurately place a song in the
proper year.


One thing I've noticed with Billboard's year-end charts over the past 8
years or so is that several songs make the year end chart in multiple years
(more noticeable on the country charts, but pop charts too), no doubt
owing to the time of year they debuted and the increased chart longevity
songs have these days. How does RR handle these?



For their yearly rankings, Record Research doesn't split songs between
years (aside from hits that are re-released years later). A song's entire
chart history goes with whatever year the song first
peaked in. (Although I'm not sure how they'll handle those songs that
chart for a week or two upon an album's initial release and then return for
another chart run a year or two later... that's a relatively recent
phenomenon enhanced by digital downloads.)

Edited by mstgator
Back to Top
Brian W. View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan


Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 17 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Brian W. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 June 2011 at 1:23am
Originally posted by aaronk aaronk wrote:

Yes, I strongly suggest a different pricing model for the searchable
database. That's the only reason I haven't used it. If there were an
affordable, annual (or monthly) unlimited search price, I would have
signed up long ago. Paying "per search" is not very appealing.

I do use Record Vault, and while I don't MIND paying per search... it's not really per search, it's per PAGE. If you search, say, Elvis's hits, you'll come up with multiple pages of results. You're charged per page, not per lookup... and furthermore, I believe that if you hit the "back" button on your browser, you're actually charged for the previously viewed page again.

That said, getting the peak dates and weeks for the few books where that info has previously been unpublished ("Pop Memories," for example) is invaluable.

But I agree with Aaron -- I'd prefer to pay a flat yearly or six-month fee for unlimited lookups.

Edited by Brian W.
Back to Top
mstgator View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan


Joined: 06 September 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 0 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mstgator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 June 2011 at 4:14pm
Just received my copy of the newest Top Pop Singles today... man, this
thing looks like a textbook (and that's a good thing). If RR chooses to
publish all their forthcoming books in this size, I'm all for it.
Back to Top
RoknRobnLoxley View Drop Down
Music Fan
Music Fan


Joined: 25 October 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 1 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RoknRobnLoxley Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 September 2019 at 6:23am
Just found this thread! So I'll add a new question.

Paul,
“Icewoman” on the UKMix forums discovered the following anomaly, and asked for opinions. I agreed with her, told her to contact you (haven’t heard back from her yet), but here’s the scoop.

May 3, 1941 (issue date) Billboard Best Sellers Chart

https://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Billboard/40s/1 941/BB-1941-05-03i.pdf

scroll down to page 13:

1 Amapola - Jimmy Dorsey
2 Oh, Look At Me Now - Tommy Dorsey
3 Dolores - Bing Crosby
4 Goodbye Now - Horace Heidt
5 Apple Blossom Time - Guy Lombardo
6 Alexander The Swoose - Kay Kyser
7 Intermezzo - Wayne King
8 Tonight - Xavier Cugat
9 Everything Happens To Me - Tommy Dorsey

There are 2 noteworthy things here:

(1) this isn’t a Top 10 chart, despite the fact that there are 23 different records in the 4 regional charts just to the right of this Top 9 national chart; one of them is surely eligible to be charted to make this a Top 10 chart. Billboard had Top 10 Best Seller charts for every week from July 1940 to Nov 1947 (when it upped to 15 positions), but only this May 3, 1941 chart is less than that, at a Top 9. Why?

(2) record #5 is a mismatch of a record title to an artist; as shown in the 4 regional charts to the right, Apple Blossom Time is by The Andrews Sisters. Guy Lombardo’s record is The Band Played On. Both records are listed in 3 of the 4 regional charts, and when you do the math both should seemingly be in the national Top 10 chart. Of the other 8 records in the Top 10 national chart, 2 charted on 4 of the regional charts, 1 charted on 3 of the 4 regionals, and 5 charted on 2 of the regionals. The other 13 regional only records charted on only 1 regional chart.

So Billboard obviously made a goof here, whether it was by the chart compiler, or the typesetter/printer.

In the following May 10 issue, there was no corrective note. Apple Blossom Time showed up as #5 again, but this time by The Andrews Sisters, and did not have a last week’s position. The Band Played On did not make the national Top 10 this week, but did chart a few weeks later, and in that resulting chart run it did peak at #6.

Billboard thus treated Apple Blossom Time by Guy Lombardo as a record, which made this national May 3 chart, but dropped off the next week May 10 chart. But no such record existed, I checked numerous Guy Lombardo online discographies.

So what are the possible corrections to fix this May 3, 1941 Best Sellers national chart?

1. Correct the #5 record Apple Blossom Time to show as by The Andrews Sister, drop Guy Lombardo from the chart.

2. Correct the #5 record by Guy Lombardo to show as The Band Played On, drop Apple Blossom Time from the chart.

3. Put both records in at #5 as a tie. Though Billboard did not have (or did not allow?) any ties on this chart until January 1945. But the ties came fast and furious after that, about 80% of the 1945 charts have one and sometimes multiple ties each week!

4. Put Apple Blossom Time by The Andrews Sisters at #5, and The Band Played On by Guy Lombardo at #6. And push records 6 thru 9 down to 7 thru 10.

Joel’s ‘fix’ was to do option #1 above. This was implemented at various times (the first in 1973) in 5 books, 2 of which showed his revised Top 9 chart (Pops Hits 1940-1954, and America’s Greatest Hits 1940-2015 Top 10 singles charts), and 4 (overlapping) which showed the usual records by artist listings.

But based on the evidence, option 1 is a less likely scenario. Options 3 or 4 seem much more likely to be the case. I think the evidence leads towards option 4, mainly because this should have been a 10 position chart, there were no ties until 1945, and the implied #5 listing shows Apple Blossom Time followed by Guy Lombardo. The goof in the #5 listing created the goof in not showing a #10 listing. Option 4 fixes everything.

Thoughts, comments? Thanks much...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.07
Copyright ©2001-2024 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.031 seconds.