Polling Without Context
Jul. 10th, 2007 03:00 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
freakytigger.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
poptimistsfreakytigger.livejournal.com posting in poptimistsfreakytigger.livejournal.com posting in poptimists
Profile
Poptimists
Page Summary
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2007-07-10 03:59 pm (UTC)i mean lots of amazingly brilliant singles only got to between 41 and 200 in the charts but if you want to talk about them it makes more sense to do that outside of charts/popularity context surely.
some sort of round-up of every single that stalled at #41 might be funny tho - except 41 is so arbitrary a number in terms of what just misses out on being a hit so wouldn't spend too long on it.
i remember the Ruthless Rap Assassins earned a mention in one volume of the British Hit Singles book because they had TWO singles get into the top 75 but both peaked at...75 - this means they may technically be the least successful chart act ever in the BHS gan's view because they only list songs that got in the top 75. other acts may have equalled or 'bettered' this more recently tho.