mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Feb 16, 2024 20:42:23 GMT 1
Diana Ross. Terrible. This could be literally any female vocalist. It's as if Motown threw it at her from the office bin because she was complaining about a lack of choons. She's doing her damnedest with it but you can't polish a turd. She'd been on EMI since the early 1980s.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on May 25, 2023 23:05:51 GMT 1
Executive Producer Rik Blaxill was actually 32 at that time.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on May 24, 2023 21:12:24 GMT 1
Well you wouldn't promote a show with something that WOULDN'T be on it.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on May 23, 2023 23:02:15 GMT 1
Of course there was a reason for those old tracks to be on the playout. They were promoting the newly created TOTP2.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Apr 17, 2023 20:28:25 GMT 1
The new producer referred to is already there (Rik Blaxill), since February 1994. The next producer came along in 1997.
Editing of shows from 1978 was necessary to cut 40 minute shows from that period to fit the 30 minute BBC4 slot, from 2013 in this particular instance. Tracks edited out for that purpose from one show were usually included in the BBC4 repeat of another show from usually 2 weeks before or after. Late at night BBC4 was repeating the full 40 minute original, but the current random repeat slot is also 30 minutes only.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Mar 3, 2023 22:15:39 GMT 1
Those sales figures were record company shipment figures, not over-the-counter sales. 30,000 for a single past its peak and probably over-shipped previously would be reasonable - not that I entirely believed the figures supplied for the show.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Jan 9, 2023 0:30:24 GMT 1
Not at all. The updated version was created in December 2001, by which time it was already necessary to edit out Gary Glitter and probably send the original version into room 101. So they simply retrieved the 'safe' version rather than edit out the same bits from the original all over again.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Oct 23, 2022 20:40:35 GMT 1
It's the same producer and the same methodology.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Apr 23, 2022 21:53:52 GMT 1
Go West's sales increase was not a massive one despite the big climb. The next week it would drop from 13 to 19 with a further sales increase (school half-term weeks often did that).
Leo Sayer's performance was from the last week of October in 1976, and the other 'oldies' were also re-shown roughly on their anniversaries, which is what TOTP2 did at first, so I think this is where the idea for that show started.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Mar 2, 2022 21:10:40 GMT 1
Perhaps, but presumably both companies had existing distribution deals with Pinnacle. As it turned out, the KWS version was more successful. I can't find any sign that an attempt was made to stop Pinnacle distributing their single here until it had been a hit. Where there's a hit there's a writ, as they say.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Feb 28, 2022 22:15:14 GMT 1
Not sure how Pinnacle came to be sued, since they were the distributor, rather than the artist, and also distributed the ZYX version.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Feb 24, 2022 0:18:52 GMT 1
My recollection is that a judge eventually dismissed ZYX Records' claim that KWS had nicked their idea to cover Please Don't Go in that style.
Sales were not really as low as The Wedding Present's chart placings suggested. A disproportionately high percentage of the limited stock was being distributed to chart return shops, to the annoyance of proprietors (and customers) of other shops.
Their total sales for the year should have been 120,000 but were actually around 175,000 to 180,000 using the multiplier - the methodology assuming that sales would be equal across shops in the same 'cell' irrespective of their panel status, but this was being subverted in this case. I think the distribution anomaly was less marked in the second half of the year than in the first.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Oct 9, 2021 19:32:43 GMT 1
That's school half-term weeks for you.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Oct 8, 2021 23:33:50 GMT 1
Right Said Fred's weekly sales never got close to Bryan Adams'. I think Adams outsold them by getting on for two to one most of those weeks. His sales only declined by about 25% between the first week and last week of Right Said Fred's 6 weeks at number 2. The absolute peak came in the fourth week, but it was still selling more than two thirds of that peak 7 weeks later.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Jun 13, 2021 23:14:34 GMT 1
AND AFTER WEEKS OF BRILLIANT NEW ENTRIES WITH NO BREAKERS NOW THESE b*st*rds BRING BACK THE BREAKERS. Jesus f***ing Christ. Julian Cope with something that sounds almost Caribbean. Stevie f***ing B gets a play at 35 whereas real acts don't get a play from previous weeks. This is worse than MC f***ing Hammer. f***ing American twattish sh*te. And Rocky V with something even worse than Stevie f***ing B. Someone is taking a backhander from dance labels. It's patently obvious now. Crazy Theory. None of MC Hammer, Stevie B or Rocky V were on dance labels, while ironically Mark Summers was, but presumably didn't make a video or become available for the studio.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on May 9, 2021 20:57:37 GMT 1
13/12. At 27 is Enigma, which is in fact interesting and challenging, so only gets a breaker but we get Stevens in full despite being way way lower. And The Carpenters, because we've gone a full minute without a cover version.
Of course this illustrates the value of being available for the studio. The screening of a movie about Karen Carpenter's life prompted the re-issue, by the way.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Mar 31, 2021 20:39:59 GMT 1
My observation only applies to the difference between whether you become a breaker of get a full appearance in the studio.
Sinitta was on Fanfare, not PWL. Sonia was on Chrysalis. Rick Astley was on RCA. Big Fun were on Jive. Only Kylie Minogue and Jason Donovan were actually on PWL, of the acts people associate with SAW. At this point the third most successful act on PWL was probably Sybil.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Mar 31, 2021 19:30:27 GMT 1
Don't go letting facts get in the way of Vastariner's distorted opinion They seem to support it though... In what way? Were they slavishly following the chart while you thought they should take a punt on something lower down at the expense of a bigger hit? Or were they knowingly or unknowingly already doing that by editing out some acts and favouring others despite their chart positions? You can't have it both ways.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Mar 31, 2021 19:25:27 GMT 1
I Dont know, there is reason to believe that something was going on. If you look at the release schedules indie and rock releases tried to land in the week they were most likely to get a Chart Show play, this gets even more apparent as we move into the 90s. So scheduling the top 5 albums in the week that indie songs are most likely to chart, maybe a coincidence or not, who knows. Thankfully the top 5 will be going soon. But cmon it must be annoying that Sonia gets a play at #38 one week and Jesus Jones doesnt at #31. It maybe just how the entries fall but really. Indie and rock releases were occurring all the time, as their individual or label's resources allowed. For independent companies (PWL included) they almost certainly, unlike the majors, didn't have their own manufacturing plants and also had to fit into the schedules of their distributors. Therefore I can't see they would all be released the same week. They would be crazy to compete against each other so directly as well. How many charts did the Chart Show feature? I remember they did indie, rock and dance. Was there a fourth? Even so the monthly look at the album charts on TOTP wouldn't coincide with what the Chart Show was doing for long. It's probably not known by many that there actually was a monthly album chart, though TOTP's use of the feature didn't always coincide with the release of it, but delaying the October top 5 from the November 1st to November 8th shows would have enabled them to feature the official chart for October rather than commissioning one. What the chart position of the lowest single featured on TOTP would be would have been impossible to predict in advance, because there were too many variables, and of course that position went up and down. In an era when virtually every single had a promo video, knowing that TOTP had to have a proportion of studio performances meant that the smart thing to do was to make sure your act was available to appear in the studio whenever TOTP might call, just in case it mattered.
|
|
mfr
Member
Posts: 1,079
|
Post by mfr on Mar 30, 2021 21:27:15 GMT 1
I get that he doesn't like a lot of the songs that were on TOTP at that time. But I don't see any evidence of favouritism. The buying public put singles in the chart, the TOTP remit was to put what people had bought into a 30 minute show each week. It wasn't in their remit to judge the musical merits of any of it.
|
|