saintsation said:

This is tooooo ridiculous.

For the record:

Beat It reached #1 on March 5, 1983.

Come On Eileen reached #1 on April 23, 1983. Billie Jean fell to #5.

Top 5 were:

1. Come On Eileen
2. Beat It
3. Mr. Roboto
4. Jeopardy
5. Billie Jean

Beat It reached #1 on April 30, 1983

Top 5 were:

1. Beat It
2. Come On Eileen
3. Jeapoardy
4. Mr. Roboto
5. Der Kommissar

Let's Dance reached #1 on May 21, 1983

Top 5 were:

1. Let's Dance
2. Beat It
3. Flashdance...What A Feeling
4. Overkill
5. She Blinded Me With Science

Ok, bye now!
[Edited 7/8/05 14:41pm]

saintsation said:

I never said you were a liar. When something like this goes from one person to another, facts tend to change. Stories get embellished and theories and speculation become fact as the story mutates from person to person. Which is why I never trust anything that is from a friend of a friend who knows....

VoicesCarry said:

ok sounds right. but i could've swrn it was billie jean oh well. i got the soul chart right though.

anon said:

No problem, i just wanted to post smething positive aboutthe woman, you know change the atmosphere.

Sowhat said:

i wasn't serious.

saintsation said:

saintsation said:

OK. Sorry.

saintsation said:

I get that and that's a good thing. I don't have a problem with her. I don't really listen to her music but she doesn't annoy me or anything. About her being quirky and wacky and all...that makes me like her more.

Was just curious as to why there is so much negativity.

Sowhat said:

I cant reveal my scource of how I saw Prince's Cars

saintsation said:

You can reveal sources. This is the internet. This is the org, nobody gives a shit who your source is. Reveal away!

I for one doubt Prince thinks much of her as an artist. I'd agree with him if that was the case, i'd certainly place Madonna and MJ a plateau above Mariah, purely because although they're not great musicians compared to Prince, MJ and Her Madgesty imprint themselves more on the music than Mariah does or is seemingly able to. I'd put her on par with Whitney at her peak. Most of their albums were crap with maybe one or two standout songs only.

IMHO.

I do not own none of her cds, but i do like some of her songs. I think she deserves to have the year she is having right now. The record company treated her unfairly & should not have dropped her that way. Prince sees something in her that some people don't i guess.

VoicesCarry said:

And on the R&B Charts, Atomic Dog.

VoicesCarry said:

No, they don't, Billboard had published music charts since the early 20th century. Media generally take into accounts #1s from the rock era, just by interest. But before that, Bing Crosby had 38 #1s on Billboard, more than the Beatles.
Second, the Hot 100 wasn't a name change, it was a methodology change.

Joel Whitburn has done a lot of good to Elvis` chart stats over the past decades. The old folks may remember that Elvis only had 14 No. 1 Hits in the first edition of Whitburn`s "Top Pop Singles" book (published 1969). That`s because in the two legitimate charts, the Top 100 (1955-58) and since 1958 the Hot 100, Elvis indeed only has 14 No. 1 Hits.

Yet in 1977, Whitburn began to compile a completely new chart for the years 1955-1958. I think you know it already, Billboard used to compile four different pop charts from 1955 to 1958, not just one. These four charts were the Disk Jockeys chart, the Sales Chart, the Juke Boxes Chart as well as the Top 100 (which put all 3 charts together).
Apart from the Top 100, the other charts only ranged from 20-50 positions. Thus Whitburn - when he compiled his first book - legitimately used the Top 100 for the 1955-58 period. However Elvis only had 9 No. 1 Hits in the Top 100. This was due to airplay factor reducing the power of his big hits. In the sales chart, a variety of songs hit no. 1, but failed to do so in the disk jockeys chart (airplay). That meant the sales power was limited in the Top 100 chart, which also used airplay and juke boxes.

In 1977, Whitburn created a new "amalgation" chart, using the peak position for one chart, the # of weeks spent at that peak and in the chart from another chart, and so on. Thus he created a chart that didn`t exist historically. This also meant that Elvis` # of no. 1 hits was increased from 14 to 17 (or 18 if "Hound Dog" is counted), because now the sales chart peaks were used.

One may argue that it is okay to use the sales chart instead of the Top 100, and I would agree here, BUT, the Hot 100 has always been a combination of sales and airplay, thus I see no reason why for the pre-1958 years, a pure sales chart should be used, especially since a Hot 100 precursor like the Top 100 existed that could have easily been uitilised. See, from 1958 onwards, all acts had to struggle if their songs didn`t get enough airplay, thus nothing is taken away from Elvis if the Top 100 is used for the 1955-58 period.

speeddemon said:

DUDE, I am talking about the methodology of counting chart hits (#1's) of the ROCK ERA. Billboard has defined a strict date for this. And yes, the Hot 100 was both a name and methodology change. But do we START OVER with chart counts every time there is a methodology change? Billboard certainly doesn't. In all of its columns, books, and overall stats, Billboard allots The Beatles with 20, Elvis with 17 and Mariah with (well, now) 16. It doesn't matter if you see no reason for Billboard's fiddling - the fact of the matter is it is what they do. You want to change the stats? Apply for Joel Whitburn's job at Billboard. Until then, you can argue all you like but officially, Elvis Presley has had 17 #1 hits in the rock era according to Billboard and unless their policy changes that is what goes in the record books. Mariah, too, has received her fair share of chart benefits from policy changes, including an extra week at #1 with WBT because Billboard counted free giveaways of the downloadable track as "sales". It gives you pause to think that many of her #1 hits would not have reached #1 without the beneficial sales/airplay split of the 90's. She was lucky to have emerged in the early 90's instead of the early 00's, and she was also lucky to benefit from Tommy Mottola's questionable strategies for making her records hits - just as Elvis was lucky to benefit from Billboard's revisionist policies.

P.S. Billboard doesn't count Hound Dog as a separate track - it is included as a double A side with Don't Be Cruel.
[Edited 7/9/05 6:49am]

Never liked her.

I feel the same about her as I do Whitnay: Beautiful, supremely blessed vocally, and a lot of good songs.. but formulaic, annoying as a person, and goin' to hell vocally these days (though I guess it started later than Whitney).