A kung fu fighter in a disco

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.

From:

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?

From:

furthermore, if this is the case and it does not indeed matter where we find a particular song, whether it be on Now 34, an artists Greatest Hits or like I said, their debut LP - will we see a time come in iTunes where i'm casually browsing through an artists collection, only to be confronted with a message akin to "did you know this album features that song from the Dairy Milk ad", even if I'm looking at the movie soundtrack for Risky Business?

From:

Yes, and when the last Now came out, people cherry-picked tracks off it and they re-entered the chart

From:

carsmilesteve.livejournal.com

i suppose "in the air tonight" is probably the key example here innit? i guess it's looooooooads easier to send an email saying "dere itunes, this is an single nao" than y'know, actually making some new bits of plastic/sleeves etcetc

From:

I guess the key test would be whether there's been a UK hit yet where the public picked a song that the record label WASN'T promoting as a single. I don't think that's happened - though we've seen examples of older singles being picked up (that rash of Ting Tings hits for instance).

From:

I think Adele and Duffy both had non-promoted songs in the chart around the time of the January hype but tbh I was trying not to pay attention.

'No Air' first hit the top 75 at exactly the same time when the record company were trying to promote 'Tattoo'.

(no subject)

From:

koganbot - Date: 2008-09-24 04:11 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

braisedbywolves.livejournal.com

And "99 problems" post-Glasto, I suspect.

From:

I don't think a distinction is made - I can't remember what recent dance bobbins track this was, but it sold enough to get in the top 75 before ANY copies, digital or physical, existed, because it had featured on some random mix compilation and it was that individual mp3 which people were snapping up.

I bought an mp3 of Gabrielle's 'Dreams' recently by cherrypicking it off some anonymous early 90s comp, because none of her own releases were on 7digital as a high-quality mp3.

From:

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?

From:

Well, if people want to buy tracks from a new album individually you can't stop them! But AFAIK more people buy albums than singles, so we can deduce there's some method which stops an 'album sale' having an effect on the singles chart.

From:

chezghost.livejournal.com

'so we can deduce there's some method which stops an 'album sale' having an effect on the singles chart'

yes, very dodgy ground here but it may just come down to how many times people are clicking 'buy album' rather than grabbing all or enough of the tracks individually. obviously there's a threshold before buying only the tracks you like on an album becomes uneconomical. they've been astute to keep the prices of 'albums' online fixed but cynical in making it still possible to buy all or most of the tracks individually and spend a lot more in the process - but yes only a fool would do that!

From:

exactly. if an album has 10 tracks on it, and i only download 9 of them, are they all eligible for a singles chart placing?

From:

As far as I know, yes! And indeed if you dl'ed all 10 individually! But from an economic point of view you would be mental if you did this, so people tend not to. Perhaps Arctic Monkeys fans can't do sums.

From:

what's therefore peculiar about this, if it's true - is that it might possibly change the way albums are compiled, like prog rock might've been accused of doing.

will we see more intro songs, track transistions and outros available as 'album only tracks' on releases simply to increase the value of a single album. ie, a 27 track album where by 10 of those tracks are album only songs (but they're filler anyway), therefore increasing the value of an album's £10 sticker price over the purchase of 17 individual tracks at £1 each?

From:

bengraham.livejournal.com

On a sort-of related note, the iPod is the most popular music playing device in the world, yes? And most people that I know who own an iPod leave it set to shuffle most of the time, because it's irritating to have to go backwards and forwards through menus to turn shuffle off (unless there's a shortcut I don't know). Therefore, when I get a new album, more often than not, I end up listening to it in an incorrect order. And gradually, as I become more familiar with it, I will rate the songs and stop listening to the ones I don't like. So I end up with the cherry-picked random mix of songs off the album anyway. Not sure where I'm going with this point... I guess just adding to the sentiment of "the album is dying and needs some new thinking to reinvigorate it".

(no subject)

From:

damnspynovels.livejournal.com - Date: 2008-09-24 03:17 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

Yeah, they did, as the tracks were available as separate downloads (as are most albums). It's easy enough for a record company to stop this from happening, by making it so you can only download the whole album at once. Interestingly that doesn't happen often.

From:

Didn't it just happen in the US with Estelle? For like two weeks and then they realised it was a massive mistake.

A couple of times I've seen one or two tracks from an album unavailable individually but it's less likely to be the big singles than the bonus tracks or any particularly long tracks - eg you can't buy Erykah Badu's 'I Want You' (which is 10min plus) individually, you have to buy the whole Worldwide Underground album (though you can buy every other track individually.

From:

Yeah, happened with Estelle.

From:

carsmilesteve.livejournal.com

elbow did it, didn't they?

From:

In the iTunes top 100 at the moment, there are 4 tracks from Disney's "Camp Rock" soundtrack, and 5 tracks from the new Kings of Leon album (1 of which is the current single). Obviously they won't all make the top 75 singles chart next week, but there's a chance several will.

From:

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.

From:

I think it happened with Kelly Rowland's 'Work' (even though the original was better). As far as I know, sales of the original and sales of the remix all counted towards the same song's tally.

From:

chezghost.livejournal.com

i think the original was overshadowed in that case. never heard it anywhere. maybe it got 1Xtra support prior to the remix (which would have ended up getting more surely) but where else?

From: