Not content with excluding songs over 1 year old, and ones less than
that if they are deleted (even if still selling steadily on download),
they've now cut the size of the singles chart. :(

IMO their mandate should simply be to reflect what is actually selling,
regardless of age or release status. IMO the only justifiable exclusions
are blatant attempts to manipulate the charts.

Their minor concession on early download inclusion is merely a drop in
the ocean.
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:CfuO1WA2LlGEFwqq@activist.demon.co.uk...
>  IMO the only justifiable exclusions
> are blatant attempts to manipulate the charts.

But they allow all the X-Factor stuff!

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 06:11:02 +0000, Paul Hyett wrote:

> Not content with excluding songs over 1 year old, and ones less than
> that if they are deleted (even if still selling steadily on download),
> they've now cut the size of the singles chart. :(

Please explain.

> IMO their mandate should simply be to reflect what is actually selling,
> regardless of age or release status. IMO the only justifiable exclusions
> are blatant attempts to manipulate the charts.

We've been told for decades that it's a marketing tool under the guise of
it being a "true reflection of public popularity". Why would you think
differently? I think every national chart does have rules which limits what
records are eligible. No biggy.

Sarch
-- 
Spamblock in action: Remove NOTREAL from email address to reply via email.

  "Look, if that's where those poor children are, of course I'll go
   to Somalia."  -  Amanda Keller, "The Hub"

Paul Hyett wrote:
> Not content with excluding songs over 1 year old, and ones less than
> that if they are deleted (even if still selling steadily on download),
> they've now cut the size of the singles chart. :(
>
> IMO their mandate should simply be to reflect what is actually selling,
> regardless of age or release status. IMO the only justifiable exclusions
> are blatant attempts to manipulate the charts.
>
> Their minor concession on early download inclusion is merely a drop in
> the ocean.
> --
> Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

The charts are a joke slowly slipping into decay for over 20 years,
it's time to put a stake through it's rancid heart and reveal the
record company rigging vampires.

With the net you can find realm musical gems that go beyond just the
humdrum and boring, we are now in more wider vaster musical ocean which
doesn't need any chart to dictate our preferences.

Wizard of Odd wrote:
> Paul Hyett wrote:
> > Not content with excluding songs over 1 year old, and ones less than
> > that if they are deleted (even if still selling steadily on download),
> > they've now cut the size of the singles chart. :(
> >
> > IMO their mandate should simply be to reflect what is actually selling,
> > regardless of age or release status. IMO the only justifiable exclusions
> > are blatant attempts to manipulate the charts.
> >
> > Their minor concession on early download inclusion is merely a drop in
> > the ocean.
> > --
> > Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett
>
> The charts are a joke slowly slipping into decay for over 20 years,
> it's time to put a stake through it's rancid heart and reveal the
> record company rigging vampires.
>

I don't know about 20 years, I think the decay has been going on longer
than that.  I've always been a bit suspicious.

Remember all those years ago when Ultravox's Vienna was kept off the
top by Joe Dolce's Shaddap A Your Face?  Can you find anyone now who'll
admit to having actually bought a copy of the Joe Dolce record?  With
all the tons of vinyl used on that travesty, how come I've never seen a
copy in a second hand shop?  Or a charity shop?  Somebody's loft must
be creaking under the strain ... :-)


> With the net you can find realm musical gems that go beyond just the
> humdrum and boring, we are now in more wider vaster musical ocean which
> doesn't need any chart to dictate our preferences.

wrote in message 
news:1142603084.535626.155840@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
>
> Wizard of Odd wrote:
>> Paul Hyett wrote:
>> > Not content with excluding songs over 1 year old, and ones less than
>> > that if they are deleted (even if still selling steadily on download),
>> > they've now cut the size of the singles chart. :(
>> >
>> > IMO their mandate should simply be to reflect what is actually selling,
>> > regardless of age or release status. IMO the only justifiable 
>> > exclusions
>> > are blatant attempts to manipulate the charts.
>> >
>> > Their minor concession on early download inclusion is merely a drop in
>> > the ocean.
>> > --
>> > Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett
>>
>> The charts are a joke slowly slipping into decay for over 20 years,
>> it's time to put a stake through it's rancid heart and reveal the
>> record company rigging vampires.
>>
>
> I don't know about 20 years, I think the decay has been going on longer
> than that.  I've always been a bit suspicious.
>
> Remember all those years ago when Ultravox's Vienna was kept off the
> top by Joe Dolce's Shaddap A Your Face?  Can you find anyone now who'll
> admit to having actually bought a copy of the Joe Dolce record?  With
> all the tons of vinyl used on that travesty, how come I've never seen a
> copy in a second hand shop?  Or a charity shop?  Somebody's loft must
> be creaking under the strain ... :-)

I used to work with someone who would only buy a record if it was in the 
charts. He had no taste. If it was No1 - he bought it, regardless if he 
liked the song or not! I suspect there are other people who are just as 
shallow as the major record labels. More of a fashion statement, then a 
question of musical taste.

**SS**

johnbooth@tinyworld.co.uk wrote in
news:1142603084.535626.155840@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com: 

> I don't know about 20 years, I think the decay has been going on
> longer than that.  I've always been a bit suspicious.
> 
> Remember all those years ago when Ultravox's Vienna was kept off the
> top by Joe Dolce's Shaddap A Your Face?  Can you find anyone now
> who'll admit to having actually bought a copy of the Joe Dolce record?

I wouldn't be ashamed of buying it.

> With all the tons of vinyl used on that travesty, how come I've never
> seen a copy in a second hand shop?  Or a charity shop?  Somebody's
> loft must be creaking under the strain ... :-)

No matter how bad you think that song is, it's a muscial masterpiece 
compared to what's in the charts these days.

In uk.music.charts on Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Sarch wrote :
>On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 06:11:02 +0000, Paul Hyett wrote:
>
>> Not content with excluding songs over 1 year old, and ones less than
>> that if they are deleted (even if still selling steadily on download),
>> they've now cut the size of the singles chart. :(
>
>Please explain.

%0 places shorter.
>
>> IMO their mandate should simply be to reflect what is actually selling,
>> regardless of age or release status. IMO the only justifiable exclusions
>> are blatant attempts to manipulate the charts.
>
>We've been told for decades that it's a marketing tool under the guise of
>it being a "true reflection of public popularity". Why would you think
>differently? I think every national chart does have rules which limits what
>records are eligible. No biggy.

But AIUI there are about 100 exclusions in a 200 position chart!
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

In uk.music.charts on Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Wizard of Odd wrote :
>
>The charts are a joke slowly slipping into decay for over 20 years,
>it's time to put a stake through it's rancid heart and reveal the
>record company rigging vampires.
>
>With the net you can find realm musical gems that go beyond just the
>humdrum and boring, we are now in more wider vaster musical ocean which
>doesn't need any chart to dictate our preferences.
>
True, there is a lot of music out there which never gets a look in, but
I'm not a fan of indie/raw/unsophisticated music, so that doesn't bother
me.
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

"Anthony Haines"  wrote in message
news:Xns9789BF5C1B028AH@195.188.240.200...
> johnbooth@tinyworld.co.uk wrote in
> news:1142603084.535626.155840@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com:
 >
> > With all the tons of vinyl used on that travesty, how come I've never
> > seen a copy in a second hand shop?  Or a charity shop?  Somebody's
> > loft must be creaking under the strain ... :-)
>
> No matter how bad you think that song is, it's a muscial masterpiece
> compared to what's in the charts these days.

I doubt there was anything untoward going on with the Joe Dolce
record. In fact it must be unique in chart history as being remembered
*only* for another single, the aforementioned Vienna.

We have a fine tradition of comedy no.1's in this country, going right
back to The Scaffold's 'Lily the Pink' back in 1969 or 69. I can't think
of a comedy no.1 earlier than that.

Col
--
Hand in glove,
The sun shines out of our behinds.

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message
news:0FOjz6A32vGEFwsn@activist.demon.co.uk...
 >
> %0 places shorter.

How many??

50?

Col
--
Hand in glove,
The sun shines out of our behinds.

wrote in message 
news:1142603084.535626.155840@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
>
> Wizard of Odd wrote:
>> Paul Hyett wrote:
>
> Remember all those years ago when Ultravox's Vienna was kept off the
> top by Joe Dolce's Shaddap A Your Face?  Can you find anyone now who'll
> admit to having actually bought a copy of the Joe Dolce record?  With
> all the tons of vinyl used on that travesty, how come I've never seen a
> copy in a second hand shop?  Or a charity shop?  Somebody's loft must
> be creaking under the strain ... :-)

Maybe somebody bought them all to annoy Midge Ure. Well, you've got to admit 
it's a temptation.

    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 Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Col wrote :
>
>"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message
>news:0FOjz6A32vGEFwsn@activist.demon.co.uk...
> >
>> %0 places shorter.
>
>How many??
>
>50?

D'oh!

Yes.
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

"Col"  wrote in message 
news:dvf1fm$37d$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
>
> "Anthony Haines"  wrote in message
> news:Xns9789BF5C1B028AH@195.188.240.200...
>> johnbooth@tinyworld.co.uk wrote in
>> news:1142603084.535626.155840@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com:
> >
>> > With all the tons of vinyl used on that travesty, how come I've never
>> > seen a copy in a second hand shop?  Or a charity shop?  Somebody's
>> > loft must be creaking under the strain ... :-)
>>
>> No matter how bad you think that song is, it's a muscial masterpiece
>> compared to what's in the charts these days.
>
> I doubt there was anything untoward going on with the Joe Dolce
> record. In fact it must be unique in chart history as being remembered
> *only* for another single, the aforementioned Vienna.

Maybe, although of course there are plenty that aren't remembered at all.

> We have a fine tradition of comedy no.1's in this country, going right
> back to The Scaffold's 'Lily the Pink' back in 1969 or 69. I can't think
> of a comedy no.1 earlier than that.

A matter of opinion in some cases, I reckon. ;-)
How about 'My Old Man's A Dustman'?

    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