Singles
-------
Sean Kingston still #1, due to a surprising weak challenge from both 
James Blunt & Girls Aloud.

New Entries/Climbers
--------------------
Top 10 : Plain White T's #2, James Blunt #4, Girls Aloud #5, 50 Cent #8, 
Scouting For Girls #9,
Top 20 : Elvis #14, Reverend & The Makers #16, Armand Van Helden #19
Top 30 : Editors #27
Top 40 : Booty Luv #31, Peter, Bjorn & John #38

Also, a not unexpected re-entry for Pavarotti's 'Nessun Dorma' at #24.

New outside the top 40 : Interpol #44, Rooney #45, Taio Cruz #47, Go! 
Team #55, Siouxsie #59, Chemical Brothers #60, Rumble Strips #64, Akon 
#74

Also, Phil Collins re-enters at #42

Albums
------
Hard-Fi claim their 2nd #1, though probably with fewer sales than they 
hoped.

NE's (top 20) : Plain White T's #3, Athlete #5, Sean Kingston #8, 
Proclaimers #13


New outside the top 20 : Jamie Scott #24, Kate Rusby #32

Pink Floyd re-enter at #22.

Next Week
---------
Singles
-------
Sean Kingston again, probably. :(

Top 10 : none
Top 20 : Booty Luv, Elvis, White Stripes
Top 30 : Chemical Brothers, Dave Spoon, Hi-Tack
Top 40 : Rooney, Taio Cruz, Hellogoodbye

Any other possibilities?

Albums
------
The whole top 3 looks easy top predict this week. KT Tunstall will 
surely prevail though.

Top 20 NE : Kanye West, 50 Cent, Go! Team, Natalie Imbruglia
-- 
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:jcT0MTD4RE5GFwP8@blueyonder.co.uk...
> Singles
> -------
> Sean Kingston still #1, due to a surprising weak challenge from both James 
> Blunt & Girls Aloud.

Considering Kingston's margin of victory, it's not that staggering that he's 
managed a second week - but it's extraordinary that neither of the above 
came close to him.

> New Entries/Climbers
> --------------------
> Top 10 : Plain White T's #2, James Blunt #4,

I have a feeling that some more people might like this track if they didn't 
associate it with him. Not that they'd be right of course. Maybe that's why 
this single hasn't performed quite as well as expected.
As I'm not the first to point out, James Blunt was actually born in February 
1974, so he could hardly have visited any nightclubs in 1973 other than as a 
foetus, but he's apparently referring to some club in Spain that opened that 
year.
This is, of course, far from the first single named after a year to chart - 
lest we forget '1962' by Grass~Show, '1979' by the Smashing Pumpkins, '1980' 
by Estelle, '1985' by Bowling For Soup, '1998' (or '1999') by Binary Finery, 
the more famous '1999' by Prince, or New Order's oddly-spelt 'Nineteen63'.

>Girls Aloud #5,

The single some of us (well, me anyway) thought would never happen is a bit 
of a grower but I still think it's more 'Long Hot Summer' than 'Sound Of The 
Underground', although my longstanding dislike of vocoders is part of the 
problem.
They're obviously aware of the success of 'Rehab' (they even did their own 
version of it), but I'm sure they're right in deducing that what people want 
is more songs with "No, no, no" in the chorus.

> 50 Cent #8,

Is this the first track to rebound in the Top 40 on downloads only?

> Scouting For Girls #9,

I think I asked this last week, but how come the much-hyped 'It's Not About 
You' was a relative flop and yet this almost identical follow-up is selling 
hand over fist?

> Top 20 : Elvis #14,

We've skipped quite a few releases since last week, most surprisingly 'Love 
Me Tender'.
'(Let Me Be) Your Teddy Bear', to give the full title, has a very small 
place in history as his first UK single to carry the RCA logo - all the 
previous ones having been licensed to HMV Pop over here. It comes from the 
soundtrack to his film Loving You and, especially packaged in a sleeve that 
Pat Boone would probably consider a bit twee, hints at efforts to make his 
image more family-friendly and consolidate his career. The title song of the 
film is the B-side, and in 1957 became a Top 30 hit in its own right thanks 
to the way the charts were compiled back then.
It worked well enough that I can remember Russ Abbott doing an unfunny 
parody of it on his TV show, which must have been about three decades later.

> Reverend & The Makers #16,

Did you like 'Heavyweight Champion Of The World'? No, neither did I but 
somebody must have because they've got away with releasing pretty much the 
same thing again.
To be fair, this doesn't begin with the same irritating siren sound-effect, 
but it's otherwise far too similar musically, and also shares the single 
greatest weakness of their previous hit - the Reverend's delivery. It's 
always difficult in pop music to sing about "ordinary" people's lives in the 
third person without sounding patronising, but the Rev seems particularly 
ill-suited to this role, possibly because he sounds so much older than he 
actually is.

> Armand Van Helden #19

Really, there's no excuse for bringing Taylor Dayne back into the charts.

> Top 30 : Editors #27

 If you can forgive the title that sounds like Noel Gallagher trying to be 
profound, this is a more likeable single than 'Smokers Outside The Hospital 
Doors', but familiarity seems to have bred a certain amount of contempt as 
this becomes their lowest-charting new single since they debuted with 
'Bullets'.
It may be that there wasn't quite as much call for the second CD of remixes 
as they expected.

> Top 40 : Booty Luv #31,

Out tomorrow on CDs & 12".

>Peter, Bjorn & John #38

Out again on CD, 7" & 12" on the 17th.
Look out for Nena's version on YouTube.

> Also, a not unexpected re-entry for Pavarotti's 'Nessun Dorma' at #24.

No prizes for guessing how this got into the charts, even if it doesn't make 
that much sense.
And the Fray return to the Top 40, apparently because of Big Brother. I 
suppose we should count ourselves lucky it doesn't get many viewers now.

> New outside the top 40 : Interpol #44,

 Presumably titled 'Mammoth' for the huge drum sound at the start, this 
might have been a more sensible choice for lead single from the album than 
the 'Heinrich Maneuver', although an instrumental version of this snuck onto 
the CD single of that one. Of course, they're also competing with their 
replicants Editors.

>Rooney #45,

I'll resist the temptation to make football-related puns, and just point out 
that this is an OK but unremarkable power-pop track of the sort that tends 
to spend a few weeks in the lower half of the Top 40 every couple of years. 
No idea what's gone wrong this time.

>Taio Cruz #47,

Out tomorrow on CD & 12".

>Go! Team #55,

Apparently this used to open with the chant "G-O-Exclamation mark!" which 
would be rather a highlight of the track if they'd left it there.

> Siouxsie #59,

Her first chart single since 'Godzilla' by The Creatures staggered to 53 in 
2003. But there's little sign that anyone other than her long-term fans was 
all that interested.

>Chemical Brothers #60,

Out tomorrow on CD, 12" & 7".

> Rumble Strips #64,

The theme song to the much-promoted film Run Fatboy Run, of course, but as 
that only opened the day before yesterday, it's doubtful how much benefit 
they'll have got from the exposure.

>Akon #74

His famous apology song, which seems to have been around for months.

> Also, Phil Collins re-enters at #42

The scariest part of this is that it was a high as 172 last week!
Also notably, the Proclaimers climb to 58 in the second week of physical 
availability; Maroon 5 surprisingly stick at 33; and the Foo Fighters 
finally occupy a position other than 28.

> Albums
> ------
> Hard-Fi claim their 2nd #1, though probably with fewer sales than they 
> hoped.

Their much-ballyhooed "killing" of the album cover (by writing NO COVER ART 
on the front) seems to have provoked something of a backlash from people who 
know that's not actually as original as the band seem to think. And how come 
you can get a free slipcase if you order it from HMV?
Reviews for the album itself have tended to the lukewarm as well.

> NE's (top 20) : Plain White T's #3,

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that they didn't call this 
album Every Second Counts in tribute to the Paul Daniels game show in the 
Eighties.
This album has been re-released to append the current hit and a "bonus" 
track.

>Athlete #5,

Third album from the Deptford funsters, which finds them moving in a 
slightly more guitar-oriented direction. Not necessarily a good thing. The 
deluxe hardback version also has a bonus DVD, which I hope is better than 
the one that came with their last album.

> Sean Kingston #8,

It still amazes me that even people who like his single could hear it and 
think "I bet he can make a good album".

> Proclaimers #13

Seventh studio album for the Reids, and their highest-charting since their 
last major-label set, Hit The Highway.

> New outside the top 20 : Jamie Scott #24,

At least this time around he's managed to release an album before getting 
dropped.

>Kate Rusby #32

Someone who's unlikely to get dropped, as she releases the records herself, 
Rusby releases has first album since making an unlikely singles chart debut 
alongside Ronan Keating. This seems to have gained her more fans than it 
lost, as she now enjoys her best ever chart performance. The CD also 
includes her version of 'The Village Green Preservation Society' as seen on 
TV, apparently.

> Pink Floyd re-enter at #22.

Not exactly a typical re-entry, but another chart appearance for their debut 
album The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn, the only complete album by the 
original Syd Barrett-led version of the band. It was famously produced by 
Hurricane Smith at Abbey Road next door to the Beatles working on Sgt 
Pepper, and originally hit the Top 10 in August 1967. It went Top 30 in 1974 
as part of the package A Nice Pair, and first appeared on CD in 1987, 
retuning to the Top 50 in a remastered version ten years later. Another 
decade passes and here it is again, now a double CD featuring both stereo 
and mono versions or a triple CD with all five early single tracks and four 
additional rarities. See you in 2017 for the next re-issue, then.
Also, Bat For Lashes makes what I'm pretty sure is her Top 75 debut after 
unsubstantiated rumours at the start of the week that she would win the 
Mercury prize.

> Next Week
> ---------
> Singles
> -------
> Sean Kingston again, probably. :(

You'd hardly bet against it, although the sales figures aren't in yet. If 
there's any threat at all it's the PWTs.

> Top 20 : Booty Luv,

Daringly, they've covered a song that was a hit in its original form this 
time.

>Elvis,

14 again? ;-)
This time it's, er, 'Party'.

>White Stripes

I think this might be a possibility for Top 10, simply because they've 
managed it the last few times - even with "difficult" singles like 'The 
Denial Twist'. But this release hasn't been much of an event.

> Top 30 : Chemical Brothers,

Could this sneak Top 20? Perhaps not.

> Dave Spoon,

Probably, as it's dawdled around the Top 60 on downloads.

> Hi-Tack

Sounds right - people must be getting tired of this formula by now.

> Top 40 : Rooney,

If it's not Top 40 now, I don't think it's ever likely to be, Proclaimers 
notwithstanding.

>Taio Cruz,

I would have said that, although he's done a touch better than I thought 
download-wise.

>Hellogoodbye

Who even knows this is coming out?

> Any other possibilities?

Paramore had a hit last time for no apparent reason. HIM have the typical 
metal cult following. And I suppose it's just about possible that somebody 
might remember who the Dead 60s are.

> Albums
> ------
> The whole top 3 looks easy top predict this week. KT Tunstall will surely 
> prevail though.

I think that's right, although she probably won't manage quite the sort of 
lead that I once thought of.

> Top 20 NE : Kanye West, 50 Cent,

With West comfortably in front of Cent, I should think/

>Go! Team,

I think you may have over-estimated their popularity here.

> Natalie Imbruglia

Yes, although I think it's hard to be more specific than that. I can't see 
anything else that looks likely to breach the Top 20.

    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

In uk.music.charts on Sun, 9 Sep 2007, Chris Brown 
 wrote :

>> Singles
>> -------
>> Sean Kingston still #1, due to a surprising weak challenge from both James
>> Blunt & Girls Aloud.
>
>Considering Kingston's margin of victory, it's not that staggering that he's
>managed a second week - but it's extraordinary that neither of the above
>came close to him.

As I've stated before, I can usually see what other people might like 
about a record, regardless of my own views, but for SK's...
>
>> New Entries/Climbers
>> --------------------
>> Top 10 : Plain White T's #2, James Blunt #4,
>
>I have a feeling that some more people might like this track if they didn't
>associate it with him.

Interesting theory.

>Not that they'd be right of course. Maybe that's why
>this single hasn't performed quite as well as expected.

I still put it down to waiting for the album.

>As I'm not the first to point out, James Blunt was actually born in February
>1974, so he could hardly have visited any nightclubs in 1973 other than as a
>foetus, but he's apparently referring to some club in Spain that opened that
>year.

As he said on the chart show yesterday.

>This is, of course, far from the first single named after a year to chart -
>lest we forget '1962' by Grass~Show, '1979' by the Smashing Pumpkins, '1980'
>by Estelle, '1985' by Bowling For Soup, '1998' (or '1999') by Binary Finery,
>the more famous '1999' by Prince, or New Order's oddly-spelt 'Nineteen63'.

If I'd tried to make a list, Prince's would have been the only one that 
came to mind.
>
>>Girls Aloud #5,
>
>The single some of us (well, me anyway) thought would never happen is a bit
>of a grower but I still think it's more 'Long Hot Summer' than 'Sound Of The
>Underground', although my longstanding dislike of vocoders is part of the
>problem.

I don't know what a 'vocorder' is.
>
>> 50 Cent #8,
>
>Is this the first track to rebound in the Top 40 on downloads only?

Nelly Furtado 'Say It Right', Christina 'Candyman' to name two.
>
>> Scouting For Girls #9,
>
>I think I asked this last week, but how come the much-hyped 'It's Not About
>You' was a relative flop and yet this almost identical follow-up is selling
>hand over fist?
>
Well, I have an outlandish theory about that - maybe people like it 
more? :)

>> Top 20 :
>
>> Armand Van Helden #19
>
>Really, there's no excuse for bringing Taylor Dayne back into the charts.

I don't know who that is.
>
>> Top 30 : Editors #27
>
> If you can forgive the title that sounds like Noel Gallagher trying to be
>profound, this is a more likeable single than 'Smokers Outside The Hospital
>Doors'

I preferred 'Smokers...' myself.
>
>> Top 40 :
>
>>Peter, Bjorn & John #38
>
>Out again on CD, 7" & 12" on the 17th.

Why are people taking to this song, all of a sudden?

>Look out for Nena's version on YouTube.

Nena, as in '99 Red balloons' and hairy armpits?
>
>> Also, a not unexpected re-entry for Pavarotti's 'Nessun Dorma' at #24.
>
>No prizes for guessing how this got into the charts, even if it doesn't make
>that much sense.

Presumably it would if you spoke Italian. :)

>And the Fray return to the Top 40, apparently because of Big Brother.

I thought it was because of its use in a trailer for 'Casualty'?
>
>> New outside the top 40 : Interpol #44,
>
> Presumably titled 'Mammoth' for the huge drum sound at the start

You mean it isn't a tribute to that X-Factor winner of several years 
back? :)
>
>>Taio Cruz #47,
>
>Out tomorrow on CD & 12".

I'll do my best to ignore it.
>
>> Siouxsie #59,
>
>Her first chart single since 'Godzilla' by The Creatures staggered to 53 in
>2003. But there's little sign that anyone other than her long-term fans was
>all that interested.

Given that it had virtually no radio or TV airplay, is that surprising?
>
>>Chemical Brothers #60,
>
>Out tomorrow on CD, 12" & 7".

Weird video, even by CB's standards.
>
>>Akon #74
>
>His famous apology song, which seems to have been around for months.

It'll take more than one song to apologise for the crap he's inflicted 
on us over the past couple of years... :)
>
>> Also, Phil Collins re-enters at #42
>
>The scariest part of this is that it was a high as 172 last week!

Huh?

>Also notably, the Proclaimers climb to 58 in the second week of physical
>availability

Are they touring?

>; Maroon 5 surprisingly stick at 33; and the Foo Fighters
>finally occupy a position other than 28.

Someone else presumably using up most of their single's sales potential 
via downloads, well before the CD is out.
>
>> Albums
>> ------
>> Hard-Fi claim their 2nd #1, though probably with fewer sales than they
>> hoped.
>
>Their much-ballyhooed "killing" of the album cover (by writing NO COVER ART
>on the front) seems to have provoked something of a backlash from people who
>know that's not actually as original as the band seem to think. And how come
>you can get a free slipcase if you order it from HMV?

>Reviews for the album itself have tended to the lukewarm as well.

Surely that's just a polite way of saying they think it's crap?
>
>> NE's (top 20) : Plain White T's #3,

>This album has been re-released to append the current hit and a "bonus"
>track.

How do you know this is a re-release? It's never been in the top 200 
before.
>
>> Sean Kingston #8,
>
>It still amazes me that even people who like his single could hear it and
>think "I bet he can make a good album".

I don't think there's a lot more I can say about SK, that I haven't 
already said. :)

>Also, Bat For Lashes makes what I'm pretty sure is her Top 75 debut

you're right.

> after
>unsubstantiated rumours at the start of the week that she would win the
>Mercury prize.

I liked one of their songs I've heard.
>
>> Next Week
>> ---------
>> Singles
>> -------
>> Sean Kingston again, probably. :(
>
>You'd hardly bet against it, although the sales figures aren't in yet. If
>there's any threat at all it's the PWTs.

Great - would you rather be eaten by a shark or a lion...
>
>> Top 20 :
>
>>Elvis,
>
>14 again? ;-)
>This time it's, er, 'Party'.

It doesn't seem to make a difference which song it is - exactly the same 
people seem to be buying them each week.
>
>> Hi-Tack
>
>Sounds right - people must be getting tired of this formula by now.

But what about Bowie fans?
>
>> Top 40 :
>
>> Any other possibilities?
>
>Paramore had a hit last time for no apparent reason.

Other than it being a good song & an entertaining video, you mean?
>
>> Albums
>> ------
>> The whole top 3 looks easy top predict this week. KT Tunstall will surely
>> prevail though.
>
>I think that's right, although she probably won't manage quite the sort of
>lead that I once thought of.

We don't really have much basis to judge what her 1st week sales are 
likely to be, other than a vague 100k+.

I see have last album is back up to #44.
>
>> Top 20 NE : Kanye West, 50 Cent,
>
>With West comfortably in front of Cent, I should think

But a lot of people will buy both, surely.
>
>
>> Natalie Imbruglia
>
>Yes, although I think it's hard to be more specific than that. I can't see
>anything else that looks likely to breach the Top 20.
>
I think it's a pretty safe bet that whatever ends up at #1, it'll only 
have one week there!

I predict that JB will sell 300-350k first week!
-- 
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:LHWOaiFtVO5GFwrR@blueyonder.co.uk...
> In uk.music.charts on Sun, 9 Sep 2007, Chris Brown 
>  wrote :
>
>>> Singles
>>> -------
>>> Sean Kingston still #1, due to a surprising weak challenge from both 
>>> James
>>> Blunt & Girls Aloud.
>>
>>Considering Kingston's margin of victory, it's not that staggering that 
>>he's
>>managed a second week - but it's extraordinary that neither of the above
>>came close to him.
>
> As I've stated before, I can usually see what other people might like 
> about a record, regardless of my own views, but for SK's...

I don't think it's a lot different from a lot of other records that have 
been successful.

>>> New Entries/Climbers
>>> --------------------
>>> Top 10 : Plain White T's #2, James Blunt #4,
>>
>>I have a feeling that some more people might like this track if they 
>>didn't
>>associate it with him.
>
> Interesting theory.

It's not, in all honesty, that bad a record. Not that it's any good either, 
and it still has his stupid voice over the top of it, but I think if we're 
honest many of us would find it hard to admit to liking a James Blunt song 
now.

>>Not that they'd be right of course. Maybe that's why
>>this single hasn't performed quite as well as expected.
>
> I still put it down to waiting for the album.

That's obviously a factor too - but I'd been allowing for that already and 
it's still done worse than I expected. Plus, people who don't like other 
Blunt songs wouldn't want to wait for the album.

>>As I'm not the first to point out, James Blunt was actually born in 
>>February
>>1974, so he could hardly have visited any nightclubs in 1973 other than as 
>>a
>>foetus, but he's apparently referring to some club in Spain that opened 
>>that
>>year.
>
> As he said on the chart show yesterday.

I know but I'd already written that.

>>This is, of course, far from the first single named after a year to 
>>chart -
>>lest we forget '1962' by Grass~Show, '1979' by the Smashing Pumpkins, 
>>'1980'
>>by Estelle, '1985' by Bowling For Soup, '1998' (or '1999') by Binary 
>>Finery,
>>the more famous '1999' by Prince, or New Order's oddly-spelt 'Nineteen63'.
>
> If I'd tried to make a list, Prince's would have been the only one that 
> came to mind.

I actually own a few of those (including the Grass~Show one, which I admit 
is particularly obscure) but I'd forgotten about the Estelle track until I 
looked it up.
IIRC, those two Binary Finery hits are actually the same song.

>>>Girls Aloud #5,
>>
>>The single some of us (well, me anyway) thought would never happen is a 
>>bit
>>of a grower but I still think it's more 'Long Hot Summer' than 'Sound Of 
>>The
>>Underground', although my longstanding dislike of vocoders is part of the
>>problem.
>
> I don't know what a 'vocorder' is.

A spelling mistake! ;p
Vocoders are devices used to distort voices, originally invented to make 
early telephones clearer but since used by every two-bit producer to try and 
make tracks sound "interesting" - Hellogoodbye are particularly severe 
recent offenders.

>>> 50 Cent #8,
>>
>>Is this the first track to rebound in the Top 40 on downloads only?
>
> Nelly Furtado 'Say It Right', Christina 'Candyman' to >name two.

Ah yes - I hadn't thought of those because those were purely digital 
releases, whereas this one has had a double-dip run before coming out on 
disc.

>>> Scouting For Girls #9,
>>
>>I think I asked this last week, but how come the much-hyped 'It's Not 
>>About
>>You' was a relative flop and yet this almost identical follow-up is 
>>selling
>>hand over fist?
>>
> Well, I have an outlandish theory about that - maybe people like it more? 
> :)

Yeah, but how can they like one more than the other? They're exactly the 
same.

>>> Top 20 :
>>
>>> Armand Van Helden #19
>>
>>Really, there's no excuse for bringing Taylor Dayne back into the charts.
>
> I don't know who that is.

Lucky you! Big-haired eighties singer who is apparently sampled here.

>>> Top 30 : Editors #27
>>
>> If you can forgive the title that sounds like Noel Gallagher trying to be
>>profound, this is a more likeable single than 'Smokers Outside The 
>>Hospital
>>Doors'
>
> I preferred 'Smokers...' myself.

I didn't. But I've already said that. This at least has a bit of go to it, 
rather than just moping.

>>> Top 40 :
>>
>>>Peter, Bjorn & John #38
>>
>>Out again on CD, 7" & 12" on the 17th.
>
> Why are people taking to this song, all of a sudden?

It has been a bigger radio hit this time, although I suppose that's more 
effect than cause. They've also toured the UK a couple of times (well Peter 
and Bjorn have anyway).

>>Look out for Nena's version on YouTube.
>
> Nena, as in '99 Red balloons' and hairy armpits?

Yes, although she's started shaving them now.
It's actually a collaboration with one of Trio (who also wrote the German 
lyric) and a younger German bloke you won't have heard of.

>>> Also, a not unexpected re-entry for Pavarotti's 'Nessun Dorma' at #24.
>>
>>No prizes for guessing how this got into the charts, even if it doesn't 
>>make
>>that much sense.
>
> Presumably it would if you spoke Italian. :)

Who says I don't?
It's just that if you didn't want to buy it last week, why does his being 
dead make any difference? Assuming you don't really hate him.

>>And the Fray return to the Top 40, apparently because of Big Brother.
>
> I thought it was because of its use in a trailer for 'Casualty'?

Could be, but of course I only hear about this second-hand. I suppose it may 
be the combination of the two, because not everything that gets used in a 
trailer becomes a hit.

>>>Taio Cruz #47,
>>
>>Out tomorrow on CD & 12".
>
> I'll do my best to ignore it.

It's a bit of an odd tune, isn't it?

>>> Siouxsie #59,
>>
>>Her first chart single since 'Godzilla' by The Creatures staggered to 53 
>>in
>>2003. But there's little sign that anyone other than her long-term fans 
>>was
>>all that interested.
>
> Given that it had virtually no radio or TV airplay, is that surprising?

Not even remotely, but I had to find something to say about it.

>>>Chemical Brothers #60,
>>
>>Out tomorrow on CD, 12" & 7".
>
> Weird video, even by CB's standards.

I haven't seen it yet. Are there fish involved?

>>>Akon #74
>>
>>His famous apology song, which seems to have been around for months.
>
> It'll take more than one song to apologise for the crap he's inflicted on 
> us over the past couple of years... :)

He doesn't even apologise properly. But we'll come to that I'm sure.

>>> Also, Phil Collins re-enters at #42
>>
>>The scariest part of this is that it was a high as 172 last week!
>
> Huh?

I mean, it's bad enough that people are downloading it now they've seen the 
advert - but why were hundreds of people downloading it in a week before 
that?

>>Also notably, the Proclaimers climb to 58 in the second week of physical
>>availability
>
> Are they touring?

I don't actually know, but even if they're not they'll have been doing the 
rounds of radio and telly to plug the album I reckon.

>>; Maroon 5 surprisingly stick at 33; and the Foo Fighters
>>finally occupy a position other than 28.
>
> Someone else presumably using up most of their single's sales potential 
> via downloads, well before the CD is out.

Perhaps, although their label hasn't always made the best job of physical 
singles anyway.

>>> Albums
>>> ------
>>> Hard-Fi claim their 2nd #1, though probably with fewer sales than they
>>> hoped.
>
>>Reviews for the album itself have tended to the lukewarm as well.
>
> Surely that's just a polite way of saying they think it's crap?

If they wanted to say that, they would have.

>>> NE's (top 20) : Plain White T's #3,
>
>>This album has been re-released to append the current hit and a "bonus"
>>track.
>
> How do you know this is a re-release?

I looked it up.

>It's never been in the top 200 before.

Not surprisingly, as it didn't have 'Hey There Delilah' on it before.

>>Also, Bat For Lashes makes what I'm pretty sure is her Top 75 debut
>
> you're right.
>
>> after
>>unsubstantiated rumours at the start of the week that she would win the
>>Mercury prize.
>
> I liked one of their songs I've heard.

I think possibly the image got in the way of the music.

>>> Next Week
>>> ---------
>>> Singles
>>> -------
>>> Sean Kingston again, probably. :(
>>
>>You'd hardly bet against it, although the sales figures aren't in yet. If
>>there's any threat at all it's the PWTs.
>
> Great - would you rather be eaten by a shark or a lion...

Which is which?

>>> Top 20 :
>>
>>>Elvis,
>>
>>14 again? ;-)
>>This time it's, er, 'Party'.
>
> It doesn't seem to make a difference which song it is - exactly the same 
> people seem to be buying them each week.

Agreed.

>>> Hi-Tack
>>
>>Sounds right - people must be getting tired of this formula by now.
>
> But what about Bowie fans?

I haven't heard about a big leap in the suicide rate...

>>> Top 40 :
>>
>>> Any other possibilities?
>>
>>Paramore had a hit last time for no apparent reason.
>
> Other than it being a good song & an entertaining video, you mean?

Hmm, I presume you don't think either of those apply to this one then.

BTW, I forgot about the Status Quo single.

>>> Albums
>>> ------
>>> The whole top 3 looks easy top predict this week. KT Tunstall will 
>>> surely
>>> prevail though.
>>
>>I think that's right, although she probably won't manage quite the sort of
>>lead that I once thought of.
>
> We don't really have much basis to judge what her 1st week sales are 
> likely to be, other than a vague 100k+.

Which raises the question of what Kanye will sell.

> I see have last album is back up to #44.

Yes, although it's been marked down to as little as £3 in places so you 
can't necessarily read too much into that.

>>> Top 20 NE : Kanye West, 50 Cent,
>>
>>With West comfortably in front of Cent, I should think
>
> But a lot of people will buy both, surely.

Yeah, I suppose some people will, but some will only buy one or the other.

>>> Natalie Imbruglia
>>
>>Yes, although I think it's hard to be more specific than that. I can't see
>>anything else that looks likely to breach the Top 20.
>>
> I think it's a pretty safe bet that whatever ends up at #1, it'll only 
> have one week there!

Agreed. Well, unless it's Hard-Fi again, which I think we can safely rule 
out.

> I predict that JB will sell 300-350k first week!

I think so - in any case, it'll be a comfortable chart-topper whatever it 
does in the long run.

    Chris

In uk.music.charts on Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Chris Brown 
 wrote :
>>
>>>> Singles
>>>> -------
>>>> Sean Kingston
>>
>> As I've stated before, I can usually see what other people might like
>> about a record, regardless of my own views, but for SK's...
>
>I don't think it's a lot different from a lot of other records that have
>been successful.

All that means is - there are a lot of records whose success mystifies 
me. :)
>
>>>> New Entries/Climbers
>>>> --------------------
>>>> Top 10 : James Blunt #4,
>>>
>>>I have a feeling that some more people might like this track if they
>>>didn't
>>>associate it with him.
>>
>> Interesting theory.
>
>It's not, in all honesty, that bad a record. Not that it's any good either,
>and it still has his stupid voice over the top of it, but I think if we're
>honest many of us would find it hard to admit to liking a James Blunt song
>now.

Not me, I like all of his singles so far - even more remarkable given my 
preference for female vocals...
>
>>>As I'm not the first to point out, James Blunt was actually born in
>>>February
>>>1974, so he could hardly have visited any nightclubs in 1973 other than as
>>>a
>>>foetus, but he's apparently referring to some club in Spain that opened
>>>that
>>>year.
>>
>> As he said on the chart show yesterday.
>
>I know but I'd already written that.

I always go back & check my commentary before I send it out - it doesn't 
catch *all* mistakes, but...

>Vocoders are devices used to distort voices, originally invented to make
>early telephones clearer but since used by every two-bit producer to try and
>make tracks sound "interesting" - Hellogoodbye are particularly severe
>recent offenders.

What - you mean they don't *really* sound like that? :)
>
>>>
>> Well, I have an outlandish theory about that - maybe people like it more?
>> :)
>
>Yeah, but how can they like one more than the other? They're exactly the
>same.

You claim that about dance tracks too...
>
>>>Look out for Nena's version on YouTube.
>>
>> Nena, as in '99 Red balloons' and hairy armpits?
>
>Yes, although she's started shaving them now.

Given that she must be in her late 40's now, who'd care? :)
>
>>>> Also, a not unexpected re-entry for Pavarotti's 'Nessun Dorma' at #24.
>>>
>>>No prizes for guessing how this got into the charts, even if it doesn't
>>>make
>>>that much sense.
>>
>> Presumably it would if you spoke Italian. :)
>
>Who says I don't?

>It's just that if you didn't want to buy it last week, why does his being
>dead make any difference?

A question that needs to be asked of Elvis fans, too...
>
>>>>Taio Cruz #47,
>>>
>>>Out tomorrow on CD & 12".
>>
>> I'll do my best to ignore it.
>
>It's a bit of an odd tune, isn't it?

I can't really say, since I've carefully avoided hearing more than a few 
seconds of it at a time!
>
>>>>Chemical Brothers #60,
>>>
>>>Out tomorrow on CD, 12" & 7".
>>
>> Weird video, even by CB's standards.
>
>I haven't seen it yet. Are there fish involved?

Talking fish!
>
>>>> Also, Phil Collins re-enters at #42
>>>
>>>The scariest part of this is that it was a high as 172 last week!
>>
>> Huh?
>
>I mean, it's bad enough that people are downloading it now they've seen the
>advert - but why were hundreds of people downloading it in a week before
>that?

I recall seeing the advert during the week it reached #172.
>
>>>> Albums
>>>> ------
>>
>> Surely that's just a polite way of saying they think it's crap?
>
>If they wanted to say that, they would have.

I could never be a professional reviewer, due to all the music I'd be 
obliged to review that I couldn't stand.
>
>>>> Next Week
>>>> ---------
>>>> Singles
>>>> -------
>>>> Sean Kingston again, probably. :(
>>>
>>>You'd hardly bet against it, although the sales figures aren't in yet. If
>>>there's any threat at all it's the PWTs.
>>
>> Great - would you rather be eaten by a shark or a lion...
>
>Which is which?

Which would be quicker? :)
>
>>>> Any other possibilities?
>
>BTW, I forgot about the Status Quo single.

I didn't even *know* about it! Their fanbase might well propel it top 20 
then.

I notice the White Stripes were doing one of those 3 for £3 offers, 
which presumably means their sales will be even more front-loaded than 
usual.
>
>>>> Albums
>>>> ------
>>
>> We don't really have much basis to judge what her 1st week sales are
>> likely to be, other than a vague 100k+.
>
>Which raises the question of what Kanye will sell.

75-100k, I suspect - rap albums tend to do relatively poorly here, 
selling for duration at modest chart positions, rather than initial 
quantity.
-- 
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:MqgfxXF1fj5GFw4b@blueyonder.co.uk...
> In uk.music.charts on Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Chris Brown 
>  wrote :
>>>
>>>>> Singles
>>>>> -------
>>>>> Sean Kingston
>>>
>>> As I've stated before, I can usually see what other people might like
>>> about a record, regardless of my own views, but for SK's...
>>
>>I don't think it's a lot different from a lot of other records that have
>>been successful.
>
> All that means is - there are a lot of records whose success mystifies me. 
> :)

Indeed there are, but this seems to be a track that's unleashed a lot of 
venom from a lot of people.

>>>>> New Entries/Climbers
>>>>> --------------------
>>>>> Top 10 : James Blunt #4,
>>>>
>>>>I have a feeling that some more people might like this track if they
>>>>didn't
>>>>associate it with him.
>>>
>>> Interesting theory.
>>
>>It's not, in all honesty, that bad a record. Not that it's any good 
>>either,
>>and it still has his stupid voice over the top of it, but I think if we're
>>honest many of us would find it hard to admit to liking a James Blunt song
>>now.
>
> Not me, I like all of his singles so far - even more remarkable given my 
> preference for female vocals...

I'd have to say he's not the most masculine vocalist I can think of, but I 
take the point. However, as you liked the previous ones you're not really 
one of the people you're talking about.

>>>>As I'm not the first to point out, James Blunt was actually born in
>>>>February
>>>>1974, so he could hardly have visited any nightclubs in 1973 other than 
>>>>as
>>>>a
>>>>foetus, but he's apparently referring to some club in Spain that opened
>>>>that
>>>>year.
>>>
>>> As he said on the chart show yesterday.
>>
>>I know but I'd already written that.
>
> I always go back & check my commentary before I send it out - it doesn't 
> catch *all* mistakes, but...

I get rid of any actual mistakes I see, but this wasn't one.

>>> Well, I have an outlandish theory about that - maybe people like it 
>>> more?
>>> :)
>>
>>Yeah, but how can they like one more than the other? They're exactly the
>>same.
>
> You claim that about dance tracks too...

Some of them, yeah. But the people I accuse of that tend to get 
progressively less successful.

>>>>Look out for Nena's version on YouTube.
>>>
>>> Nena, as in '99 Red balloons' and hairy armpits?
>>
>>Yes, although she's started shaving them now.
>
> Given that she must be in her late 40's now, who'd care? :)

She's 47, FWIW, and actually quite well preserved.

>>>>> Also, a not unexpected re-entry for Pavarotti's 'Nessun Dorma' at #24.
>>>>
>>>>No prizes for guessing how this got into the charts, even if it doesn't
>>>>make
>>>>that much sense.
>>>
>>> Presumably it would if you spoke Italian. :)
>>
>>Who says I don't?
>
>>It's just that if you didn't want to buy it last week, why does his being
>>dead make any difference?
>
> A question that needs to be asked of Elvis fans, too...

But the Elvis records that are recharting now have been specifically 
re-issued - you couldn't have bought 'Party' on a physical single last week 
if you wanted to.

>>>>>Chemical Brothers #60,
>>>>
>>>>Out tomorrow on CD, 12" & 7".
>>>
>>> Weird video, even by CB's standards.
>>
>>I haven't seen it yet. Are there fish involved?
>
> Talking fish!

Yeah, I saw it on YouTube. I even spotted the obligatory Tom & Ed cameo.

>>>>> Also, Phil Collins re-enters at #42
>>>>
>>>>The scariest part of this is that it was a high as 172 last week!
>>>
>>> Huh?
>>
>>I mean, it's bad enough that people are downloading it now they've seen 
>>the
>>advert - but why were hundreds of people downloading it in a week before
>>that?
>
> I recall seeing the advert during the week it reached #172.

Oh, that's slightly reassuring.

>>>>> Albums
>>>>> ------
>>>
>>> Surely that's just a polite way of saying they think it's crap?
>>
>>If they wanted to say that, they would have.
>
> I could never be a professional reviewer, due to all the music I'd be 
> obliged to review that I couldn't stand.

Some people would say that was the best bit!

>>>>> Next Week
>>>>> ---------
>>>>> Singles
>>>>> -------
>>>>> Sean Kingston again, probably. :(
>>>>
>>>>You'd hardly bet against it, although the sales figures aren't in yet. 
>>>>If
>>>>there's any threat at all it's the PWTs.
>>>
>>> Great - would you rather be eaten by a shark or a lion...
>>
>>Which is which?
>
> Which would be quicker? :)

Well, the Plain White Ts song is about ten seconds shorter...

>>>>> Any other possibilities?
>>
>>BTW, I forgot about the Status Quo single.
>
> I didn't even *know* about it!

It's an eight-minute symphony of ambient keyboard sounds and strangely 
manipulated samples, with falsetto vocals from a Patagonian choir... no, 
just kidding.

>Their fanbase might well propel it top 20 then.

Indeed they might.

> I notice the White Stripes were doing one of those 3 for £3 offers, which 
> presumably means their sales will be even more front-loaded than usual.

If people can find them... bizarrely, HMV Harrow had both 7"s but no CDs. 
It's not a great value package anyway.

>>>>> Albums
>>>>> ------
>>>
>>> We don't really have much basis to judge what her 1st week sales are
>>> likely to be, other than a vague 100k+.
>>
>>Which raises the question of what Kanye will sell.
>
> 75-100k, I suspect - rap albums tend to do relatively poorly here, selling 
> for duration at modest chart positions, rather than initial quantity.

In general that does tend to be the case, but he seems to have become a 
somewhat exceptional act.

    Chris

In uk.music.charts on Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Chris Brown 
 wrote :
>>>>
>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>> -------
>>>>>> Sean Kingston
>>>
>>>I don't think it's a lot different from a lot of other records that have
>>>been successful.
>>
>> All that means is - there are a lot of records whose success mystifies me.
>> :)
>
>Indeed there are, but this seems to be a track that's unleashed a lot of
>venom from a lot of people.

Whom? I must have missed that.
>
>>>>>> New Entries/Climbers
>>>>>> --------------------
>>>>>> Top 10 : James Blunt #4,

>>> I think if we're
>>>honest many of us would find it hard to admit to liking a James Blunt song
>>>now.
>>
>> Not me, I like all of his singles so far - even more remarkable given my
>> preference for female vocals...
>
>I'd have to say he's not the most masculine vocalist I can think of, but I
>take the point.

I doubt many people would voice that insinuation to his face though, 
given he was an army captain... :)
>>
>>>It's just that if you didn't want to buy it last week, why does his being
>>>dead make any difference?
>>
>> A question that needs to be asked of Elvis fans, too...
>
>But the Elvis records that are recharting now have been specifically
>re-issued - you couldn't have bought 'Party' on a physical single last week
>if you wanted to.

If Nessun Dorma was re-released on CD it would also sell more, so I 
still don't get your point?
>
>>>>>>Chemical Brothers #60,
>>
>> Talking fish!
>
>Yeah, I saw it on YouTube. I even spotted the obligatory Tom & Ed cameo.

Tom & Ed?
>
>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>> ------
>> I could never be a professional reviewer, due to all the music I'd be
>> obliged to review that I couldn't stand.
>
>Some people would say that was the best bit!

Huh?
>
>>>>>> Next Week
>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>> -------
>>>>
>>>> Great - would you rather be eaten by a shark or a lion...
>>>
>>>Which is which?
>>
>> Which would be quicker? :)
>
>Well, the Plain White Ts song is about ten seconds shorter...

Both seem like they last longer than an ice-age, though.
>
>> I notice the White Stripes were doing one of those 3 for £3 offers, which
>> presumably means their sales will be even more front-loaded than usual.
>
>If people can find them... bizarrely, HMV Harrow had both 7"s but no CDs.
>It's not a great value package anyway.

That hasn't seemed to matter before.

I see they're only top 15 though, so far.
>
>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>> ------
>>>
>>>Which raises the question of what Kanye will sell.
>>
>> 75-100k, I suspect - rap albums tend to do relatively poorly here, selling
>> for duration at modest chart positions, rather than initial quantity.
>
>In general that does tend to be the case, but he seems to have become a
>somewhat exceptional act.

I am looking forward to James Blunt kicking his ass next week, though. 
:)
-- 
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:5Q4y$hCXX45GFwNN@blueyonder.co.uk...
> In uk.music.charts on Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Chris Brown 
>  wrote :
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>> -------
>>>>>>> Sean Kingston
>>>>
>>>>I don't think it's a lot different from a lot of other records that have
>>>>been successful.
>>>
>>> All that means is - there are a lot of records whose success mystifies 
>>> me.
>>> :)
>>
>>Indeed there are, but this seems to be a track that's unleashed a lot of
>>venom from a lot of people.
>
> Whom? I must have missed that.

Read one of the chart show threads on Buzzjack, for example.

>>>>>>> New Entries/Climbers
>>>>>>> --------------------
>>>>>>> Top 10 : James Blunt #4,
>
>>>> I think if we're
>>>>honest many of us would find it hard to admit to liking a James Blunt 
>>>>song
>>>>now.
>>>
>>> Not me, I like all of his singles so far - even more remarkable given my
>>> preference for female vocals...
>>
>>I'd have to say he's not the most masculine vocalist I can think of, but I
>>take the point.
>
> I doubt many people would voice that insinuation to his face though, given 
> he was an army captain... :)

That did occur to me as well. But he did say today that he wasn't an 
agressive person... which might be why he left the army I suppose.

>>>>It's just that if you didn't want to buy it last week, why does his 
>>>>being
>>>>dead make any difference?
>>>
>>> A question that needs to be asked of Elvis fans, too...
>>
>>But the Elvis records that are recharting now have been specifically
>>re-issued - you couldn't have bought 'Party' on a physical single last 
>>week
>>if you wanted to.
>
> If Nessun Dorma was re-released on CD it would also sell more, so I still 
> don't get your point?

What I'm saying is that the people who are buying these Elvis rereleases are 
almost invariably Elvis fans who for all I know might have bought them had 
he been alive too - and what they're doing is more about collecting the set 
than getting hold of the music which they've almost certainly already got. 
It's possibly relevant that Elvis singles reissued singly (er, no pun 
intended) haven't tended to do as well as when there's a whole series of 
them.
That's quite a different phenomenon from what's happened with 'Nessun Dorma' 
where people who didn't own the track have suddenly rushed to get it for no 
other reason than because the bloke who sings it isn't alive anymore. And 
yes, I do know that happened when Elvis died too. It didn't make much sense 
then either. But if it happens when Gary Glitter dies...

>>>>>>>Chemical Brothers #60,
>>>
>>> Talking fish!
>>
>>Yeah, I saw it on YouTube. I even spotted the obligatory Tom & Ed cameo.
>
> Tom & Ed?

Er, yes. Rowlands and Simons, ie. The Chemical Brothers. AFAIK they make 
some sort of cameo appearance in all their videos.

>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>> ------
>>> I could never be a professional reviewer, due to all the music I'd be
>>> obliged to review that I couldn't stand.
>>
>>Some people would say that was the best bit!
>
> Huh?

The ability to give the records you don't like a real pasting.
As anybody who's read my commentaries will know, it's a lot easier to say 
what you don't like about a record than what you do.

>>>>>>> Next Week
>>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>> -------
>>>>>
>>>>> Great - would you rather be eaten by a shark or a lion...
>>>>
>>>>Which is which?
>>>
>>> Which would be quicker? :)
>>
>>Well, the Plain White Ts song is about ten seconds shorter...
>
> Both seem like they last longer than an ice-age, though.

I'm guessing that what you really don't want to hear is the Plain White T's 
doing a cover version of 'Beautiful Girls'.

>>> I notice the White Stripes were doing one of those 3 for £3 offers, 
>>> which
>>> presumably means their sales will be even more front-loaded than usual.
>>
>>If people can find them... bizarrely, HMV Harrow had both 7"s but no CDs.
>>It's not a great value package anyway.
>
> That hasn't seemed to matter before.

It does if you're trying to sell people three formats of a track they've 
already got on album though.

> I see they're only top 15 though, so far.

Yeah, and I suppose that's not vastly surprising.

    Chris

In uk.music.charts on Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Chris Brown 
 wrote :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>>> -------
>>>>>>>> Sean Kingston
>>>
>>>this seems to be a track that's unleashed a lot of
>>>venom from a lot of people.
>>
>> Whom? I must have missed that.
>
>Read one of the chart show threads on Buzzjack, for example.

I tend only to read the chart stats threads.
>
>>>>>>>> New Entries/Climbers
>>>>>>>> --------------------
>>>>>>>>James Blunt
>>>
>>>I'd have to say he's not the most masculine vocalist I can think of, but I
>>>take the point.
>>
>> I doubt many people would voice that insinuation to his face though, given
>> he was an army captain... :)
>
>That did occur to me as well. But he did say today that he wasn't an
>agressive person... which might be why he left the army I suppose.

Or he had a far better foresight of was likely to happen in Iraq 
/Afghanistan than the UK & US gov'ts did...
>
>>>>>>>>Chemical Brothers #60,
>>>>
>>>> Talking fish!
>>>
>>>Yeah, I saw it on YouTube. I even spotted the obligatory Tom & Ed cameo.
>>
>> Tom & Ed?
>
>Er, yes. Rowlands and Simons, ie. The Chemical Brothers. AFAIK they make
>some sort of cameo appearance in all their videos.

Artists appearing in their own videos - how bizarre... :)
>
Seriously though, how many artists *don't* appear in their own videos?

>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>> ------
>>>Some people would say that was the best bit!
>>
>> Huh?
>
>The ability to give the records you don't like a real pasting.
>As anybody who's read my commentaries will know, it's a lot easier to say
>what you don't like about a record than what you do.

Except that you might have to tone it down a bit - the PC 'thought 
police' may be watching...
>
>>>>>>>> Next Week
>>>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>>> -------
>
>>>> I notice the White Stripes were doing one of those 3 for £3 offers,
>>>> which
>>>> presumably means their sales will be even more front-loaded than usual.
>>>
>>>If people can find them... bizarrely, HMV Harrow had both 7"s but no CDs.
>>>It's not a great value package anyway.
>>
>> That hasn't seemed to matter before.
>
>It does if you're trying to sell people three formats of a track they've
>already got on album though.

But fans will buy *everything*, regardless of duplication - they are 
gullible that way, which is *why* the record companies come out with 3 
for £3's, 'special edition albums', etc...
-- 
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:jlakSNCTGN6GFwk0@blueyonder.co.uk...
> In uk.music.charts on Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Chris Brown 
>  wrote :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>>>> -------
>>>>>>>>> New Entries/Climbers
>>>>>>>>> --------------------
>>>>>>>>>James Blunt
>>>>
>>>>I'd have to say he's not the most masculine vocalist I can think of, but 
>>>>I
>>>>take the point.
>>>
>>> I doubt many people would voice that insinuation to his face though, 
>>> given
>>> he was an army captain... :)
>>
>>That did occur to me as well. But he did say today that he wasn't an
>>agressive person... which might be why he left the army I suppose.
>
> Or he had a far better foresight of was likely to happen in Iraq 
> /Afghanistan than the UK & US gov'ts did...

Well, yeah, that did occur to me - although one presumes that even Tony 
Blair knew there would be some violence involved. And I don't actually know 
exactly when Blunt left the army, although it must have been at least three 
years ago.

>>>>>>>>>Chemical Brothers #60,
>>>>>
>>>>> Talking fish!
>>>>
>>>>Yeah, I saw it on YouTube. I even spotted the obligatory Tom & Ed cameo.
>>>
>>> Tom & Ed?
>>
>>Er, yes. Rowlands and Simons, ie. The Chemical Brothers. AFAIK they make
>>some sort of cameo appearance in all their videos.
>
> Artists appearing in their own videos - how bizarre... :)

Well, yeah but the point is that they only ever have a little walk-on part, 
at most, rather than making a leading appearance.

> Seriously though, how many artists *don't* appear in their own videos?

Quite a few, and particularly those in dance/electronic music because that 
doesn't really lend itself to performance-based clips.

>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>Some people would say that was the best bit!
>>>
>>> Huh?
>>
>>The ability to give the records you don't like a real pasting.
>>As anybody who's read my commentaries will know, it's a lot easier to say
>>what you don't like about a record than what you do.
>
> Except that you might have to tone it down a bit - the PC 'thought police' 
> may be watching...

For saying you don't like a record? Get real!

>>>>>>>>> Next Week
>>>>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>>>> -------
>>
>>>>> I notice the White Stripes were doing one of those 3 for £3 offers,
>>>>> which
>>>>> presumably means their sales will be even more front-loaded than 
>>>>> usual.
>>>>
>>>>If people can find them... bizarrely, HMV Harrow had both 7"s but no 
>>>>CDs.
>>>>It's not a great value package anyway.
>>>
>>> That hasn't seemed to matter before.
>>
>>It does if you're trying to sell people three formats of a track they've
>>already got on album though.
>
> But fans will buy *everything*, regardless of duplication - they are 
> gullible that way, which is *why* the record companies come out with 3 for 
> £3's, 'special edition albums', etc...

There certainly are people who'll buy *everything* regardless, but they're 
not the entire market. Otherwise there would be no point in doing the 3 for 
£3 because everybody would be prepared to buy 3 for £5:98 anyway.

    Chris

In uk.music.charts on Thu, 13 Sep 2007, Chris Brown 
 wrote :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>>>>> -------
>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/Climbers
>>>>>>>>>> --------------------
>>>>>>>>>>James Blunt
>>>>>
>>>>>I'd have to say he's not the most masculine vocalist I can think of, but
>>>>>I
>>>>>take the point.
>>>>
>>>> I doubt many people would voice that insinuation to his face though,
>>>> given
>>>> he was an army captain... :)
>>>
>>>That did occur to me as well. But he did say today that he wasn't an
>>>agressive person... which might be why he left the army I suppose.
>>
>> Or he had a far better foresight of was likely to happen in Iraq
>> /Afghanistan than the UK & US gov'ts did...
>
>Well, yeah, that did occur to me - although one presumes that even Tony
>Blair knew there would be some violence involved. And I don't actually know
>exactly when Blunt left the army, although it must have been at least three
>years ago.

2002, it looks like :

http://www.popstarsplus.com/music_jamesblunt.htm
>>
>> Artists appearing in their own videos - how bizarre... :)
>
>Well, yeah but the point is that they only ever have a little walk-on part,
>at most, rather than making a leading appearance.
>
>> Seriously though, how many artists *don't* appear in their own videos?
>
>Quite a few, and particularly those in dance/electronic music because that
>doesn't really lend itself to performance-based clips.

Good point.
>
>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>>Some people would say that was the best bit!
>>>>
>>>> Huh?
>>>
>>>The ability to give the records you don't like a real pasting.
>>>As anybody who's read my commentaries will know, it's a lot easier to say
>>>what you don't like about a record than what you do.
>>
>> Except that you might have to tone it down a bit - the PC 'thought police'
>> may be watching...
>
>For saying you don't like a record? Get real!

Unfortunately I *am* being realistic - don't forget that in the past I 
have been accused of racism here for merely expressing my dislike of rap 
music.

Also, you only have to read newspapers to discover instances of people 
being targeted for utterly trivial matters - like having stuffed pigs in 
shop windows near mosques.

For other examples of PC absurdity, see :

http://www.capc.co.uk/damaging_political_correctness.htm
-- 
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message
news:uLGHZSEjsi6GFwXC@blueyonder.co.uk...
> In uk.music.charts on Thu, 13 Sep 2007, Chris Brown
>  wrote :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Singles
>>>>>>>>>>> -------
>>>>>>>>>>> New Entries/Climbers
>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>James Blunt

>>And I don't actually
>>know
>>exactly when Blunt left the army, although it must have been at least
>>three
>>years ago.
>
> 2002, it looks like :
>
> http://www.popstarsplus.com/music_jamesblunt.htm


That's believable.

>>> Artists appearing in their own videos - how bizarre... :)
>>
>>Well, yeah but the point is that they only ever have a little walk-on
>>part,
>>at most, rather than making a leading appearance.
>>
>>> Seriously though, how many artists *don't* appear in their own videos?
>>
>>Quite a few, and particularly those in dance/electronic music because that
>>doesn't really lend itself to performance-based clips.
>
> Good point.

Particularly in the late 1990s, you used to get a lot of promos that showed 
a vocalist miming the song, intercut with the bloke who played the samples 
sort of wandering around because he couldn't mime. You can see why the 
Chemicals wanted to avoid this - AFAIK none of their guest vocalists has 
ever appeared in a video, although that may partly be for other reasons.

>>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>>>Some people would say that was the best bit!
>>>>>
>>>>> Huh?
>>>>
>>>>The ability to give the records you don't like a real pasting.
>>>>As anybody who's read my commentaries will know, it's a lot easier to
>>>>say
>>>>what you don't like about a record than what you do.
>>>
>>> Except that you might have to tone it down a bit - the PC 'thought
>>> police'
>>> may be watching...
>>
>>For saying you don't like a record? Get real!
>
> Unfortunately I *am* being realistic - don't forget that in the past I
> have been accused of racism here for merely expressing my dislike of rap
> music.

Not by me. I've accused you of dabbling in racism when I think you've gone 
down that road, but it takes more than merely criticising a record by a 
person of a different race from oneself... after all, I certainly do that.

> Also, you only have to read newspapers to discover instances of people
> being targeted for utterly trivial matters - like having stuffed pigs in
> shop windows near mosques.

Yeah - and some of them are even true.
But then again, a lot of people still get stabbed or spat at or beaten up 
for being the wrong colour, or the wrong religion, or the right sect of the 
same religion. There are a lot of wingnuts out there but none of this means 
that people can't and don't give records bad reviews.

    Chris

In uk.music.charts on Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Chris Brown 
 wrote :
>
>>>
>>>> Seriously though, how many artists *don't* appear in their own videos?
>>>
>>>Quite a few, and particularly those in dance/electronic music because that
>>>doesn't really lend itself to performance-based clips.
>>
>> Good point.
>
>Particularly in the late 1990s, you used to get a lot of promos that showed
>a vocalist miming the song, intercut with the bloke who played the samples
>sort of wandering around because he couldn't mime.

Like Britney in her recent MTV appearance? :)
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Albums
>>>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>
>>>> Except that you might have to tone it down a bit - the PC 'thought
>>>> police'
>>>> may be watching...
>>>
>>>For saying you don't like a record? Get real!
>>
>> Unfortunately I *am* being realistic - don't forget that in the past I
>> have been accused of racism here for merely expressing my dislike of rap
>> music.
>
>Not by me. I've accused you of dabbling in racism when I think you've gone
>down that road, but it takes more than merely criticising a record by a
>person of a different race from oneself... after all, I certainly do that.

I certainly don't hate all music by black artists either - I like 
Beyonce, Kelis, Rihanna, to name three.
-- 
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)