The Ultimate Averaged Chart - The BBC Chart Re-Imagined

[MrTibbs]

Good News for you Splodj. The Ultimate Chart is already compiled way ahead of what is posted and I can confirm Are You Sure will reach #1, after a struggle, but wait and see when

[Graham76man]

Although Josh MacRae was from Scotland his 'Messing About' record received high national exposure so I would have expected it to have sold nationally.

And with 52 owns owns on 45 Cat I would say it did!

The Allisons also made the top on the Real Chart for one week on March 5 (week ending 11 March)

[Graham76man]

Spellings and apostrophes are all over the place between earlier charts some say one thing some say another so forgive where I go with one and not another.

I always use the 45 Cat site for the correct titles and names. They are always taken from what's on the label itself and punters of the site always make corrections. I wish they were more up-to-date on release dates. Sometimes they have the release date the same date of when it first entered the chart! That really annoys me!

[kingofskiffle]

I always use the 45 Cat site for the correct titles and names. They are always taken from what's on the label itself and punters of the site always make corrections. I wish they were more up-to-date on release dates. Sometimes they have the release date the same date of when it first entered the chart! That really annoys me!

Yes, and the comments then correct it. I download the images so I have something to refer to and am adapting the titles and artist credits in the database to exactly what is on the title.

Looking forward to seeing where the last 5 charting Lonnie Donegan singles make in the chart

[Gambo]

^ Yes indeed chaps; I wish there was a site that provided consistent and correct historical UK release dates of singles/albums. 45cat and Discogs sometimes provide this detail but all-too-often it's just a year, not even a month let alone an exact day. Artists' Wiki pages sometimes come good, but as we know, reliability can be variable with this source. I find it particularly difficult to ascertain original release dates for digital product and very annoying when I can't track what seems to be the right date down. Being someone who always likes to catalogue things, especially my music, I maintain a record of my 2001-2020 singles in order of release date, but it's only as complete as it is because I've recorded the relevant date contemporaneously. If trying to find accurate release details years afterwards it can get tricky. I'd like to re-order my stuff from 1981-2000 similarly, but the farther one goes back, the harder it is to pinpoint the week of initial release. Anyway sorry - off-topic!

[MrTibbs]

Yes, and the comments then correct it. I download the images so I have something to refer to and am adapting the titles and artist credits in the database to exactly what is on the title.

Looking forward to seeing where the last 5 charting Lonnie Donegan singles make in the chart

Yeah lets see where they land Lonnie lol, I'm looking forward to 1963 and charting The Beatles on The Ultimate Chart.

Thanks Graham that's useful, saves me looking through lots of books to find the correct info when there is doubt.

I'm working on November 1961 at present and as usual listen to some of the hits from that chart I'm not familiar with as I work. I've just heard Hayley Mills Let's Get Together and it is truly one of the worst records I have EVER heard, it's truly awful. When I look at some of the records that should have charted in 1961 and missed out then see that aberration in the top twenty there ain't no justice.

[MrTibbs]

Here is the next Ultimate Averaged Chart for Week Ending March 4th 1961

The Ultimate Averaged Chart - Week Ending March 4th 1961								NME	RM	MM	DISC	RR	Total
Last	This		The Sound Survey				Stores	80	60	110	50	30	Points
Week	Week		The Top 30 Singles Chart				BBC				TOP	30	Scored
3	1	Walk Right Back / Ebony Eyes - The Everly Brothers					1	1	1	1	2	1	9850
2	2	Sailor - Petula Clark					2	2	3	2	1	2	9560
14	3	Are You Sure - The Allisons					4	4	2	4	4	4	9030
1	4	Are You Lonesome Tonight - Elvis Presley					3	5	5	3	3	3	8960
6	5	Will You Love Me Tomorrow - The Shirelles					5	3	4	5	5	5	8800
4	6	F.B.I. - The Shadows					6	6	6	6	6	7	8220
7	7	Who Am I / This Is It - Adam Faith					7	7	9	7	7	6	7830
13	8	(Ghost) Riders In The Sky - The Ramrods					10	9	8	9	10	10	7240
5	9	Rubber Ball - Bobby Vee					8	10	10	8	8	11	7220
9	10	Calendar Girl - Neil Sedaka					9	8	11	10	9	8	7140
NEW	11	Theme For A Dream - Cliff Richard					11	11	7	11	12	21	6490
8	12	You're Sixteen - Johnny Burnette					12	12	20	12	11	9	5930
24	13	Wheels - The String-A-Longs					13	14	12	13	14	16	5780
10	14	Pepe - Duane Eddy					14	16	17	16	15	13	5030
20	15	Let's Jump The Broomstick - Brenda Lee					16	14	15	17	18	14	5020
15	16	Gather In The Mushrooms / Pepy's Diary - Benny Hill					15	23	18	14	13	12	4760
25	17	Ja-Da - Johnny and The Hurricanes					18	13	14	19		26	3930
11	18	Sailor - Anne Shelton					17	22		15	16	22	3500
16	19	Portrait Of My Love - Matt Monro					19	20		18	17	15	3490
17	20	New Orleans - The U. S. Bonds					20	17		20		23	2570
NEW	21	Samantha - Kenny Ball						18	13			24	2330
19	22	Mystery Girl - Jess Conrad						18			20	18	1980
12	23	Buona Sera - Mr. Acker Bilk						21			19	17	1820
NEW	24	Baby Sittin' Boogie - Buzz Clifford						25	16				1380
NEW	25	Dream Girl - Mark Wynter						29	18				940
18	26	Rubber Ball - Marty Wilde						27				19	680
NEW	27	African Waltz - Johnny Dankworth						26					400
26	28	Piltdown Rides Again - The Piltdown Men										20	330
27	29	Pepe - Russ Conway						28					240
23	30	A Thousand Stars - Billy Fury										25	180
		Ebony Eyes - The Everly Brothers						24
		A Scottish Soldier - Andy Stewart						30				29	140
		First Taste Of Love - Ben E. King										27	120
		Many Tears Ago - Connie Francis										28	90
		Poetry In Motion - Johnny Tillotson										30	30

[MrTibbs]

Mark Wynter's Dream Girl lost out to Are You Sure in the contest for Britain's entry to the 1961 Eurovision Song Contest. It was actually a decent song in it's own right which is more than can be said for our entries over recent years.

[Splodj]

I'm working on November 1961 at present and as usual listen to some of the hits from that chart I'm not familiar with ...

9th November 1961 was when Brian Epstein visited The Cavern to see the Beatles. There is light at the end of the tunnel!

[MrTibbs]

So he obviously passed on Hayley Mills then ha ha

[MrTibbs]

I don't understand why NME continued with charting double sided hits individually way past the time every other music paper stopped in the late fifties. This practise indicated the song took precedence over the record which was a throw back to The Sheet Music Chart. Given that the record chart really took over in 1955 from the song chart NME continued with individual songs way into the very late sixties.

All the more strange when NME prided itself on its 'first to have a record chart and still the first' slogan.

[Graham76man]

I don't understand why NME continued with charting double sided hits individually way past the time every other music paper stopped in the late fifties. This practise indicated the song took precedence over the record which was a throw back to The Sheet Music Chart. Given that the record chart really took over in 1955 from the song chart NME continued with individual songs way into the very late sixties.

All the more strange when NME prided itself on its 'first to have a record chart and still the first' slogan.

The only thing I can put it down to is idleness on the part of NME staff. Clearly the returns from the dealers would have some that listed the other side of the disc. But to sought these out across 80 shops would have taken time. So they didn't bother!
I'm just wondering if the other papers solved the problem by telling dealers to only list one side of a record, though I suspect they either ignored the other side returns or added them on.

On the dates of release thing, we do know that up to a certain point all records came out in the first or second week of the month. When the practice stopped is hard to pin down. As anyone come across anything in the music press - especially RR - about the introduction of Friday releasing?
If you search for records from 1961 and narrow it down to the month, with no day added on 45 Cat, nearly all the records have no day on them, though some do. Though clearly an entry to any chart will pin it down more. Unfortunately the problem of chart dating a record is more complex, since sometimes something can spark a record that has been issued ages ago into life!

The Cliff single does have a Friday 24 Feb date on it. None of the other new hits do. And with the chart date means that's just two days of sales for him!

[brian05]

NEW Theme For A Dream - Cliff Richard

Entered at no. 7 in RR but only no. 21 in RM.

Such a large gap. Again RM seems slow for new entrants. What was the problem?

[MrTibbs]

NEW Theme For A Dream - Cliff Richard

Entered at no. 7 in RR but only no. 21 in RM.

Such a large gap. Again RM seems slow for new entrants. What was the problem?

I assume Brian you meant 7 in RM and 21 in RR.
You will see this pattern continue again and again and at times the difference is frankly ridiculous. When we shortly get to Elvis' 'Surrender' you will see it enter at #1 on NME, RM, Disc, #4 on MM, yet it enter away down at 27 on RR. There is no better example to demonstrate just how weak the RR chart is to be so out of step with all the others time after time.

[MrTibbs]

It is certainly unnecessary work for me NME with their split sides on the chart lol. Every week when split sides make the NME chart I need to assess how this impacts on the overall chart position and as a safe guard compare this with an average from the other papers in order to get the correct outcome for the Ultimate Chart.

[Metalweb]

I've always felt the whole idea of splitting double A sides in a chart is illogical. After all, nobody can buy just one side of a record!

Many double A sides would sell well if buyers liked both sides and felt they were getting good value for their money.

I'm sure buyers wouldn't necessarily ask the shop for the side they preferred (I know I didn't!) but probably the side that was better known /getting more airplay....

[Splodj]

RR's lag is obvious when a record is entering, and very apparent when a record is climbing or descending fast. But I think the best way of looking at it is that RR is about half a week behind on everything - just that it not noticable when a record is fairly static.

[MrTibbs]

Yeah Metal, it was fine to go by the song back in the forties and early fifties when The Sheet Music Chart focused purely on songs but not when a record chart was introduced.

[Robbie]

I assume Brian you meant 7 in RM and 21 in RR.
You will see this pattern continue again and again and at times the difference is frankly ridiculous. When we shortly get to Elvis' 'Surrender' you will see it enter at #1 on NME, RM, Disc, #4 on MM, yet it enter away down at 27 on RR. There is no better example to demonstrate just how weak the RR chart is to be so out of step with all the others time after time.

What was the chart sales week for the RR chart? Could it be that there was an earlier cut off point for RR when compared with the other newspaper charts?

[MrTibbs]

RR's lag is obvious when a record is entering, and very apparent when a record is climbing or descending fast. But I think the best way of looking at it is that RR is about half a week behind on everything - just that it not noticable when a record is fairly static.

Yeah I've been wondering about that. At times it would appear that the drag on both new entries and records hanging around was due to RR having one foot in the old week and one foot in the new a hybrid of a chart thus out of time with all the others.

[MrTibbs]

Yeah, does anybody know the actual days that each individual music paper used to compile their charts ?

[RokinRobinOfLocksley]

According to Alan Smith, and he was firm in his arguments based on his research, ALL the music papers sampled over the same period Monday to Saturday. The days they compiled the charts could be different. Most compiled on Mondays, but RR compiled on Tuesdays. And RM changed from Mondays to later in the week, thus why they couldn't get their info in on time to the BBC and why the BBC dropped them from the average 1960-1962.

But regardless of what the music papers told Alan, we can only guess some shop returns could have arrived too late, and were either not included at all, or were possibly included in the following week tabulation. Or, some shop returns may have been sent in extra early so that they would safely arrive in time for the compilation day, and their sampling days would thus have been cut back to Saturday to Friday, missing out on a weekend day of sales. Either of these situations could very well have been the problem with RR...

But I've also read where Dave Taylor did not agree that all charts sampled Monday to Saturday. And some of the those Dave imposters said the same thing. But Alan Smith was firm and argumentative on this.

[Splodj]

In his research Alan talked to an Associate Editor of RR and also the guy who actually tallied the chart each week. If he thought that all the charts used the same survey period, I would have thought an obvious question to ask the people at RR was: "Why did your chart lag behind the others?"

[RokinRobinOfLocksley]

I once thought up this alternative idea of doing an averaged chart, whether flat weighted or Brian ultimate weighted, assuming RR was out of kilter by one day. And that is this: (1) calculate a revised RR chart by averaging 6/7 of the current week chart plus 1/7 of the following week chart. Then (2) average this revised RR chart with all the other charts. This should take care of all those bizarre differences and debuts at #1. So lettit be written, so lettit be done, ha...

[MrTibbs]

There are interesting points made in both of those responses.

If RR used the same sampling period as the rest the outcome you would expect would be broadly the same, as the other four although differing slightly never were out of step to the degree RR was.
So, did the much smaller sample make the difference, was it the stores RR sampled, were the returns treated in a casual way like Robin suggested, or was the compilation method erroneous and haphazard. Whichever reason it was definitely well out of sync.

Splodj's point is a good one. Did nobody ever ask RR why there was such a lag in their chart outcome.