independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > If Soundscan were around in the 1980s...
« Previous topic  Next topic »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 01/28/17 7:56am

MotownSubdivis
ion

If Soundscan were around in the 1980s...

Say Soundscan came to be a decade earlier than it did. How would the charts in the 1980s have looked in comparison to what they actually do?

Let's look at 1984 ( biggrin ) where a record-low of 5 albums hit #1 that year. With Soundscan would more of the year's popular albums have charted? Would those albums that did chart at #1 have lasted longer on the charts?

In retrospect, it is amazing how only 5 albums managed to top the chart in a single year but when you consider that no hard data was collected until Soundscan was implemented in the 1990s then you can assume there may have been some cooking of the books going on (nothing excessive but still a little exaggerated).

Here's the article that got me to thinking about this:
https://www.google.com/am...d-boost-us
The comparison to 1984 is 18 paragraphs in.

I think the title is a great exaggeration and definitely don't think 2016 stacks up to 1984 musically but it's an interesting and informative read.
[Edited 1/28/17 8:01am]
[Edited 12/30/18 5:59am]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 01/28/17 2:23pm

spacedolphin

avatar

hmmm Yeah it's an interesting one hey. I didn't read the article because as soon as I saw the photo of Drake I clicked x, but I guess what 1984 showed was the momentum that could be generated by saturation and good reviews. Yes it's true maybe soundscan could have clarified the week-by-week data, but those number one albums all finished with huge numbers. Stores might have been fudging the numbers but very clearly demand was more than supply. The most curious case of course would be Welcome to the Pleasuredome, to this day a few insiders say that the pre-sale numbers were fudged, so it would be interesting what soundscan data could have given on that. Once it was touted as "the number one album", I am sure people would have hopped on the bandwagon and that was that. Actually, for some reason I had assumed W2tP was one of the big five in the US that year, but then I saw its sales were really among the soap-dodgers only, boy time sure can blur the memory neutral

music I'm afraid of Americans. I'm afraid of the world. music
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 01/28/17 3:06pm

MotownSubdivis
ion

spacedolphin said:

hmmm Yeah it's an interesting one hey. I didn't read the article because as soon as I saw the photo of Drake I clicked x, but I guess what 1984 showed was the momentum that could be generated by saturation and good reviews. Yes it's true maybe soundscan could have clarified the week-by-week data, but those number one albums all finished with huge numbers. Stores might have been fudging the numbers but very clearly demand was more than supply. The most curious case of course would be Welcome to the Pleasuredome, to this day a few insiders say that the pre-sale numbers were fudged, so it would be interesting what soundscan data could have given on that. Once it was touted as "the number one album", I am sure people would have hopped on the bandwagon and that was that. Actually, for some reason I had assumed W2tP was one of the big five in the US that year, but then I saw its sales were really among the soap-dodgers only, boy time sure can blur the memory neutral

I thought people were buying "Relax" more than the album itself. The song was huge over in the UK thanks to BBC banning it and was a hit over here in the US as well.

I wouldn't doubt that labels were fudging some of the numbers back then but all the same, those albums had a bigger challenge to hit #1 than today's albums do. The fact that they did at all much less remain in that spot as long as they did is testimony to how truly popular they were. You couldn't lie just any album to the top of the charts like the article seems to imply.
[Edited 12/30/18 6:01am]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 01/31/17 4:32pm

bobzilla77

IIRC the big difference was that sales prior to Soundscan were largely based on how many records were pressed & shipped... not how many actually sold at the counter. So you had situations like the four KISS solo albums in 1978, each of four titles shipping a million copies, and making the charts for a few weeks - then ending up in the bargain bin a couple months later when 3 of 4 million copies came back as cutouts.

.

It probably would have been different from what the charts really looked like in 1984, but maybe not massively different. One of the big discoveries after Soundscan was that rap and metal records sold A LOT more than people assumed based on chart position. And neither of those was selling huge numbers yet in 1984.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 02/03/17 7:24pm

thesexofit

avatar

bobzilla77 said:

IIRC the big difference was that sales prior to Soundscan were largely based on how many records were pressed & shipped... not how many actually sold at the counter. So you had situations like the four KISS solo albums in 1978, each of four titles shipping a million copies, and making the charts for a few weeks - then ending up in the bargain bin a couple months later when 3 of 4 million copies came back as cutouts.

.

It probably would have been different from what the charts really looked like in 1984, but maybe not massively different. One of the big discoveries after Soundscan was that rap and metal records sold A LOT more than people assumed based on chart position. And neither of those was selling huge numbers yet in 1984.

What about Garth Brooks, who nobody who watched MTV knew who the hell he was, yet suddenly with soundscan he is number one outselling everyone on the album chart LOL

[Edited 2/3/17 20:52pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 02/04/17 5:51pm

lastdecember

avatar

A lot of things would be different. ONE would be you would not have singles like you did since the focus would have been to sell as many records as possible, the 90's and on were about pulling singles out of the climate. Also in the 80's i think there were records that were under counted, take Bon Jovi Slippery When Wet the label could not press them quick enough and literally was selling 250,000 a week during its first 3 months and then still selling 250,000 a month the rest of the year slowly tapering off so Soundscan honestly may have registered many more for them.

Soundscan really was the end of it, mainly because it became all about the numbers at that point. It was all about week one, most rap artists wore debuting at number one as a must or it was a failure. Basically what soundscan did was destroy longevity period. Shelf life for albums became a few months if they were lucky.


"We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 02/05/17 6:57am

MotownSubdivis
ion

lastdecember said:

A lot of things would be different. ONE would be you would not have singles like you did since the focus would have been to sell as many records as possible, the 90's and on were about pulling singles out of the climate. Also in the 80's i think there were records that were under counted, take Bon Jovi Slippery When Wet the label could not press them quick enough and literally was selling 250,000 a week during its first 3 months and then still selling 250,000 a month the rest of the year slowly tapering off so Soundscan honestly may have registered many more for them.



Soundscan really was the end of it, mainly because it became all about the numbers at that point. It was all about week one, most rap artists wore debuting at number one as a must or it was a failure. Basically what soundscan did was destroy longevity period. Shelf life for albums became a few months if they were lucky.

I was hoping I'd see you here, december.

I do blame Soundscan for killing longevity even if they were reporting more honest numbers of actual albums sold. Views reigning on top for as long as it did last year was impressive but all the same, isn't quite as impressive as many are making it out to be. 2016 was light on album releases, especially big name releases. If Drake had some more competition then his album probably wouldn't have been so dominant.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 02/05/17 10:33am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

1984, that time rings a bell. hmmm

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 02/07/17 5:54pm

thesexofit

avatar

MotownSubdivision said:

lastdecember said:

A lot of things would be different. ONE would be you would not have singles like you did since the focus would have been to sell as many records as possible, the 90's and on were about pulling singles out of the climate. Also in the 80's i think there were records that were under counted, take Bon Jovi Slippery When Wet the label could not press them quick enough and literally was selling 250,000 a week during its first 3 months and then still selling 250,000 a month the rest of the year slowly tapering off so Soundscan honestly may have registered many more for them.

Soundscan really was the end of it, mainly because it became all about the numbers at that point. It was all about week one, most rap artists wore debuting at number one as a must or it was a failure. Basically what soundscan did was destroy longevity period. Shelf life for albums became a few months if they were lucky.

I was hoping I'd see you here, december. I do blame Soundscan for killing longevity even if they were reporting more honest numbers of actual albums sold. Views reigning on top for as long as it did last year was impressive but all the same, isn't quite as impressive as many are making it out to be. 2016 was light on album releases, especially big name releases. If Drake had some more competition then his album probably wouldn't have been so dominant.

Music sales have been dead for at least 5 years now. The fact that views on youtube count as sales was the (millionth) nail in the coffin for how relevant sales are now. And yes, thanks to there only being about 4 major record companies left, competition has of course been near non-existent for years aswell

Funnily enough, soundscan came in (around 1990?), when most, if not all the still independant record companies got sold or merged. MCA, Geffen, Capitol, Island, Motown, Chrysalis, Columbia, A and M (they lasted 'till the mid 90's I think?), Virgin, Arista (BMG in the 80's I think bought them) etc...

Anyway, all these guys, plus Atlantic (part of Warner), Electra (Warner again), and the RCA and Columbia offshoots that worked seperately, all them guys had their own attempt at cashing in on top 40 pop, rnb and rock (and later rap). Where are they now? As I said, all merged into about 3-4 left today (Sony, Universal, BMG, Warner?). That's yet another factor to the sheer limited quality in the top 40 today which brings me to the point about how unimportant today's music and sales seem to be. No competition mean long running number one albums and singles appear less important despite the stats that say otherwise.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 02/07/17 7:33pm

MotownSubdivis
ion

thesexofit said:



MotownSubdivision said:


lastdecember said:

A lot of things would be different. ONE would be you would not have singles like you did since the focus would have been to sell as many records as possible, the 90's and on were about pulling singles out of the climate. Also in the 80's i think there were records that were under counted, take Bon Jovi Slippery When Wet the label could not press them quick enough and literally was selling 250,000 a week during its first 3 months and then still selling 250,000 a month the rest of the year slowly tapering off so Soundscan honestly may have registered many more for them.



Soundscan really was the end of it, mainly because it became all about the numbers at that point. It was all about week one, most rap artists wore debuting at number one as a must or it was a failure. Basically what soundscan did was destroy longevity period. Shelf life for albums became a few months if they were lucky.



I was hoping I'd see you here, december. I do blame Soundscan for killing longevity even if they were reporting more honest numbers of actual albums sold. Views reigning on top for as long as it did last year was impressive but all the same, isn't quite as impressive as many are making it out to be. 2016 was light on album releases, especially big name releases. If Drake had some more competition then his album probably wouldn't have been so dominant.

Music sales have been dead for at least 5 years now. The fact that views on youtube count as sales was the (millionth) nail in the coffin for how relevant sales are now. And yes, thanks to there only being about 4 major record companies left, competition has of course been near non-existent for years aswell



Funnily enough, soundscan came in (around 1990?), when most, if not all the still independant record companies got sold or merged. MCA, Geffen, Capitol, Island, Motown, Chrysalis, Columbia, A and M (they lasted 'till the mid 90's I think?), Virgin, Arista (BMG in the 80's I think bought them) etc...



Anyway, all these guys, plus Atlantic (part of Warner), Electra (Warner again), and the RCA and Columbia offshoots that worked seperately, all them guys had their own attempt at cashing in on top 40 pop, rnb and rock (and later rap). Where are they now? As I said, all merged into about 3-4 left today (Sony, Universal, BMG, Warner?). That's yet another factor to the sheer limited quality in the top 40 today which brings me to the point about how unimportant today's music and sales seem to be. No competition mean long running number one albums and singles appear less important despite the stats that say otherwise.



Another good point. I think some of those labels lasted well into Soundscan though (Arista, for example, folded back in 2010 or 2011).

The severe lack of label variety is reflected in the severe lack of popular music variety.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > If Soundscan were around in the 1980s...