Factoid

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

According to this morning's paper, 2008 is set to be the highest-selling year for singles EVER, with total sales topping 100m for the first time (compared to 1979's 89m). Obviously physical sales are a miniscule proportion of this but even so, that's a lot of sales. (And christ only knows how many non-sale downloads are going on).

I was a bit surprised by this!

Comments

[carsmilesteve.livejournal.com]

but they're not really comparing apples with apples (hahahaha, honestly not an intentional pun!!!) are they?

100 million individual tracks downloaded != 100 million single sales

ppl be cherry picking tracks they like, not tracks The Man has decided they can buy...

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Yup, obviously there's some long tail stuff going on here, and the percentage of singles sales represented by the Top 40 is probably at an all time low too (which isn't the sort of data the Official Charts Co releases). I still think it's an impressive stat, though, given how easy it is to NOT pay for music.

And I think the percentage of tracks selling as singles which have never been promoted as singles is probably tiny too, so the real difference is in the capacity of shops to keep records in stock rather than in The Man's gatekeeping powers.

[carsmilesteve.livejournal.com]

rly? i was thinking it was more like, "well i like the single so i'll get that and i'll get these other two tracks off the album while i'm here"...

...admittedly i've not actually done this myself, but then i'm only responsible for 5 of this 100 million.

also, 79 million singles in 1979 would be at least 158 million tracks, amirite?

[vumgarda.livejournal.com]

Because people who want 2 old songs by a band (which wouldn't be easily available on their own) now download 2x'single' rather than buy 1xalbum, innit. If you just looked at equivalents to things that would have been available before, sales must be well down.

[vumgarda.livejournal.com]

Damn, beaten.

[lockedintheatti.livejournal.com]

There's also the long tail effect going on here - in the good old days, most people would only have been able to buy what was physically available in their local shop - i.e. the top 75 and maybe some new releases. Now they have a choice of millions of tracks it's no surprise they're buying more in total, even if they are buying a lot less of the top 75, hence number one sales being way lower than they have been historically.

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Number one sales are running at 40-50k or so I think, which is low compared to the vinyl era but higher than the 20-30k of the early 00s. I'll be interested to see what kind of totals the big sellers this year post, given the propensity of tracks to stick around in the charts forever on download: there's no need to buy a track while it's still 'hot' so downloads have the effect of flattening the head as well as lengthening the tail.

[damnspynovels.livejournal.com]

there's also the thing where before you kinda had to buy a single when it was hot, because it wouldn't be around for purchase once it cooled. Now, it doesn't matter, because even if they remove the "single" from iTunes (3 tracker or whatever), you can cherry pick anyway.

really, it's the concept of the single as an entity which is doomed now. it's not top 40 singles anymore, it's top 40 songs.

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

And don't forget the Leona Lewis effect innit.

[bengraham.livejournal.com]

What's the Leona Lewis effect? Some kind of SCIENCE?

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

I nearly made a joke about how her level of density is proportionate to her attractiveness but decided not to.

Anyway - dudes be downloading her shizzle in DROVES according to wikipedia:

These were the top selling singles in 2008 as of the week of September 20-27, 2008 (Week 39), according to United World Chart.[42]

Position Single title Artist Points Highest position in 2008
1 "Bleeding Love" Leona Lewis 9,171,000 1

[damnspynovels.livejournal.com]

How does this work with regards the charts anyway? Like does an individual track have to be flagged as a single to be considered for the chart?

Like if some obscure album track by someone happened to be featured in a popular tv commercial, causing 100,000 people to buy it through iTunes, would it chart?

In my mind, it ought to - it would cause the top 40 to be a direct reflection of what's popular with a nation, rather than seemingly being the most popular songs from a range of the industry's pre-selection.

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

AFAIK that is how the Top 40 currently works!There's obviously a distinction being made between albums and singles, which in practical terms is the distinction between bundles of tracks and single tracks, but I don't *think* a record needs to be flagged as a single. We've seen a few instances of adverts shifting digital units already.

[damnspynovels.livejournal.com]

Is a distinction made between where a song is found?

like for example say an advert features a relatively popular track by a band that has a considerable back catalogue - so much so that the individual song is featured on a million greatest hits albums, as well as it's original home on that act's debut LP.

Would it matter where I found said song? would they all count for the same cause?

[carsmilesteve.livejournal.com]

but didn't the artic monkeys end up with six tracks in the top 50 or something when their second alBUM came out? or was that a mistake?

[chezghost.livejournal.com]

i don't think we've seen a recent example of a single where the vast majority of people are buying a remix of the song rather than it's original (where the remix is included as part of the single package) - but it would be interesting to see the effect of that, or some kind of split where you have big sales for both the original and the remix, both versions finding equal support thru various channels. a bit like 'brimful of asha' but with the original not being quite as overshadowed as that.

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Though obviously industry pre-selection still happens in the form of radio playlists, selection of music for adverts/incidental use etc.

[bengraham.livejournal.com]

A very interesting thread... here's a question for you all to ponder this afternoon:

If a band releases a new album and 6 of the songs sell very well individually upon the album's release (through word of mouth, familiarity from festival and TV performances, general fan interest, ability to listen to clips before buying), does that make it less likely that a band/label will want to promote those songs as "singles" several months down the line? Will the new status quo result in more pressure on bands to release fresh output more frequently? Did Ash have it spot on when they made their announcement to ditch the album format and just go with regular EP-type releases?

[carsmilesteve.livejournal.com]

i think it says something (not a bad something, just a something) about our little group that this has got us more animated than any post about Actual Music for a fair while...

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

A BAD SOMETHING.

[koganbot]

I never believed the whole Death Of The Single thing that supposedly happened in the U.S. in the '80s and '90s, given that it was singles or hit album tracks that were selling the albums anyway, in most cases. So individual hit songs were still what the public heard. If you listened to Album Oriented Radio you were hearing hit tracks, whether a physical single existed or not. Physical single still seems to be something of a British fetish, but hit song and hit single have equivalent social meaning.

I wonder if now there might be an interesting quasi-reversal: albums as vehicles for promoting singles. "Album" is still a convenient way of organizing an artist's output in your mind if you're a radio station or record company or even a consumer who has no intention of buying the whole thing: "Taylor's fifth single off her first album" or "We've decided to drop Christina Milian after the first single tanked rather than push several more singles" etc. Also, is still an important tool for marketing reviews.

And most bands in the world aren't on the charts, so there's likely to be less of a promo focus on particular tracks and more on the artist, and again an album release (even if it's digital only) is still a way of focusing attention. Indies have been canny about using freebies and leaks to market their artists, but the album is still the focus around which they market the artist's work.

[lockedintheatti.livejournal.com]

The fetishisation of the Physical Single is gradually dying off here - of the current Top 100, 9 songs have no physical release planned (but are being promoted as singles), and a further three are album tracks. Generally the biggest hits do still all get released physically, but I can see that changing in the next year:

5. (5) DISTURBIA (Rihanna) [No Physical Release]

15. (NEW) SPOTLIGHT (Jennifer Hudson) [No Physical Release]

25. (17) VIVA LA VIDA (Coldplay) [ALBUM TRACK]

33. (NEW) SWAGGA LIKE US (Jay-Z And TI feat Kanye & Lil Wayne) [No Physical Release]

36. (25) SPIRALLING (Keane) [No Physical Release]

49. (26) JUST STAND UP (Stand Up To Cancer) [No Physical Release]

55. (66) THE DAY THAT NEVER COMES (Metallica) [No Physical Release]

60. (93) WHATEVER YOU LIKE (TI) [ALBUM TRACK]

71. (108) THE GALWAY GIRL (Sharon Shannon And Steve Earle) [No Physical Release]

84. (NEW) LOVE LOCKDOWN (Kanye West) [No Physical Release]

91. (143) THIS IS ME (Demi Lovato & Joe Jonas) [ALBUM TRACK]

100. (62) BRUISED WATER (Chicane vs Natasha Bedingfield) [No Physical Release]

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Well as I said up above, it's also the preferred format for a lot of artists! They'll have grown up with albums, they're used to albums being given greater respect and critical weight, I suspect also (Kat, can you confirm?) there's an advantage in publishing money in selling your latest 10 tracks as a bundle, and mentally it's a way of organising and periodicising your work. I think persuading bands to stop making albums won't become easy for quite a while.

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

Yes, even artists in singles-driven genres will tend to want to make albums.

I feel like an outlier statistic whenever reading about how people consume music, but physical singles are the most baffling: in this day and age, who still buys these and why?

[koganbot]

I don't know if this is relevant, but in the U.S. Kid Rock is still refusing to release a digital version of "All Summer Long," which means that three different versions of the song have charted: his, one by Hit Masters, and now one by The Rock Heroes.