Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Record Retailer Errors (1960-1994)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by Splodj View Post
    By 1968 both Billboard and Cashbox magazines were carrying RR as their UK chart. So if RR had carried out post-op surgery on its 7-Sep-68 chart before handing it to RM, one might expect these changes also to have appeared in the Billboard/Cashbox versions.
    From the errors, Billboard Hits Of The World where printing the RR chart from at least Nov 1966 (not for the 1965 errors.)

    1966
    The issue dated 26 Nov contains the 19 Nov chart - same as RR
    The issue dated 2 Dec contains the 26 Nov chart - same as RR

    1967
    The issue dated 14 Oct contains the 7 Oct chart - and this has a whole different set of entries!

    RR - BB - RM - Artist - Title
    37 - 37 - 37 - Georgie Fame - Try My World
    38 - 48 - 48 - The Foundations - Baby, Now That I've Found You
    39 - 39 - 38 - Harpers Bizarre - Anything Goes
    40 - 40 - 39 - The Beatles - All You Need Is Love
    41 - 41 - 40 - The Monkees - Pleasant Valley Sunday
    42 - 42 - 41 - Sandie Shaw - You've Not Changed
    43 - 38 - 42 - Wilson Pickett - Funky Broadway
    44 - 43 - 43 - Frank Sinatra - The World We Knew (Over And Over)
    45 - 44 - 44 - Vikki Carr - It Must Be Him (Seul Sur Son E Toile)
    46 - 45 - 45 - The Bar-Kays - Soul Finger
    47 - 46 - 46 - Ethiopians - Train To Skaville
    48 - 47 - 47 - The Johnny Mann Singers - Up-Up And Away
    49 - 49 - 49 - The Mindbenders - The Letter
    50 - 50 - 50 - The Mama's And The Papa's - Creeque Alley

    1968
    No Hits Of The World in 14 sep issue (for 7 Sep chart)

    26 Oct issue (19 oct RR chart) confirms that RM printing.
    9 Nov issue (for 2 Nov chart) missing Hits Of The World page on the World History site.

    28 Dec issue confirms RR chart of 21 Dec.

    1969
    2 Aug issue (26 Jul chart) confirmed as RR printing

    27 Sep issue (20 Sep chart) has the RM version not the RR version
    8 Nov issue (1 Nov chart) confirms the RR chart printing
    http://thechartbook.co.uk - for the latest are best chart book - By Decade!
    Now including NME, Record Mirror and Melody Maker from the UK and some Billboard charts

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by RokinRobinOfLocksley View Post

      RR was designated 'official' for the 60s in 2001/2002, not RM.

      So "Satisfied" did get into the RM chart at #50, but not in RR (declared 'official' in 2001/2002), another non-Guinness hit.

      Glad to see another Lulu record charted !!
      But RM was using RR/MW from March 1962 - April 1991 so both magazines were using the official charts (as declared in Oct 2001 when CIN was rebranded OCC).

      RM stopped compiling their own charts on 17th March 1962, well so we thought?

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by RokinRobinOfLocksley View Post
        I just stumbled across the Rock File article linked above "How The Charts Are Compiled: Part 1 Britain" in the July-27-1975 issue of Music Week, page 16, on the World Radio History magazine site. It has 2 interesting BARS graphs / charts from 1971 and 1973 not included in the Rock File version.

        The article states the panel consists of 300 record shops, and "one of these [security / accuracy] checks is a series of telephone calls to 50 record dealers who are not part of the panel." Thus in a perfect week, BMRB would get and use 300 shop returns, and call an additional 50 to check / verify.

        Also stated, the diaries that arrive on time (here in 1975) are "in excess of 75 percent most weeks", which would thus be around 225 record shops plus or minus. Yet more proof that 300 shops were not yet attained.
        I posted the pages from the book years ago. They might be still on my blog!

        No survey organisation would ever get 100% results back. Even if you got them back from all asked, some would be faulty in some way.
        But Mr Tibbs on each chart he does states the shops used for NME, MM, RM, Disc etc. And nobody will convince me that each week those charts used the same numbers of shop each week to compile the their charts. Of course he doesn't know what each of the charts used each week. Just what they reported to be using. So he sticks with that.
        For the sake of being consistent. When he's doing the 1969+ charts. He must stick with what the chart makers says they are based on. Otherwise somebody will come in and say that they were using 300 shops most weeks, so these charts are wrong. Plus the BMRB were using the 300 to represent the UK. So they would have weighted the sales to compensate for missing diaries. This is shown in the BARS report that Lonnie posted.
        I have to say the figures are very low too One record at 50 had 104 sales. Spread that across 300 shops and it's less than half a copy in each shop! You only needed 41 more copies to reach 41!
        I think more people own records that only spent a week at 50 or 49 on 45 Cat than bought them at the time!
        With the figures for record sales from BMRB. I am amazed how record shops made money at all. Selling one record a week!
        That's why when I see 7,000 at 100 in the The Real Chart, it makes sense to me the shops stayed open as long as they did.
        Education for anyone aged 12 to 16 has made a mess of the world!

        Comment


        • #54
          So in those cases where Billboard published the RM version, on the assumption that Billboard would have obtained this information directly from RR as it was their own subsidiary, it does look like RR amended their chart.

          Comment


          • #55
            I agree to a big thank you to chartwatcherdl. If you have noted what you have searched thru’ without finding discrepancies we will know where to continue to compare. Maybe you have more coming, you’ve been sharing much interesting info earlier.

            Comment


            • #56
              I find the number of differences identified between RR and RM both interesting and surprising. I was always given to believe that RM completely stopped compiling a chart in March 1962 and started carrying the RR chart instead so I can't understand why there would be so many identified minor differences in the chart printed in both papers. This really muddies the waters.
              The Ultimate Averaged Chart. The Definitive Chart Reflecting The Sixties.

              Comment


              • #57
                Over the years of taking the official chart Music Week frequently made errors in printing. One week in 1987 they printed the same 76-100 two weeks running. In the early 1990’s (I forget all the dates of these by the way - sorry) they printed an error stating that the Torvell and Dean album had been missed for Compilations. Frequent last week and week count errors abound. In 1960, when it started, the chart had to be type set by hand. No computers to copy it across. Thus, transcription errors occur. Look at the errors MrTibbs makes here when, on occasion, a position is typed incorrectly on one of the charts. Entirely understandable, and yet at least some of these could be explained by that. I certainly do not know how RM compiled the chart for print. Did they keep the previous weeks and move the entries around as a block? Did a publishing deadline affect the chart for thats week (They rushed in other words)? Did they ever print a correction? Music Week frequently did, although not on the chart page. Human error can explain these (the week where two positions are transposed only would seem logical to me to be such a human error reason). That run in 1965 bothers me though, as thats a few weeks with errors one after the other. More research is needed though on all of these (though I admit the ones where Billboard was the same as RR are less of a worry to me.)
                http://thechartbook.co.uk - for the latest are best chart book - By Decade!
                Now including NME, Record Mirror and Melody Maker from the UK and some Billboard charts

                Comment


                • #58
                  I went ahead and looked into the early BMRB ties, using the OCC online charts. From the Feb-12-69 thru the Jun-25-69 charts (20 weeks), ties occurred at 1 to 10 times per chart, averaging out at 4.15 ties per week. Most ties were in the lower half of chart positions, but some were Top 20, Top 10, with the highest occurring at #4. Some were even 3 and 4-way ties. As Alan said, this should have been impossible for a summed sales chart.

                  The ties seem to have disappeared starting July 1969, but I didn't check every week, just the first week of each month going thru March 1971. During the Feb / Mar 1971 postal strike, BMRB cut its Top 50 back to a Top 40, as they got fewer returns. Probably the sales numbers were so low, and / or were tied, that the chart positions 41-50 were essentially meaningless. There were more postal strikes after this, Alan mentions 1973, when BMRB was forced to switch over to motorcycle couriers to gather record shop data.

                  Alan's research makes a strong case, the evidence pointing to BMRB still being a work in progress during the 70s, getting better all the time, but not up to where they wanted to be with 300 shop returns per week. By their own words in the article above, they were at 75% (225 shops) in 1975, and as we have seen sometimes slipping below that, 158 shops in 1976.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Adding to Robin's research -

                    Between 1960 and 1969 (The RR Compiled chart) I have 3 instances of tied positions.

                    Date - Pos - Tied
                    22/04/1965 - 37 - 2
                    12/01/1967 - 2 - 2
                    26/07/1967 - 39 - 2

                    In the BMRB chart (1969-1982) I have 127 instances of tied positions (this includes multiples per week).

                    I'm breaking this into two sections - early 1969 (Feb to Jul)

                    Date - Pos - Tied
                    12/02/1969 - 16 - 2
                    12/02/1969 - 19 - 2
                    12/02/1969 - 31 - 2
                    12/02/1969 - 35 - 2
                    12/02/1969 - 39 - 2
                    12/02/1969 - 45 - 5
                    19/02/1969 - 18 - 2
                    19/02/1969 - 30 - 2
                    19/02/1969 - 37 - 2
                    19/02/1969 - 45 - 2
                    26/02/1969 - 31 - 2
                    26/02/1969 - 34 - 2
                    26/02/1969 - 36 - 2
                    26/02/1969 - 41 - 2
                    26/02/1969 - 43 - 2
                    26/02/1969 - 45 - 2
                    26/02/1969 - 48 - 2
                    05/03/1969 - 26 - 2
                    05/03/1969 - 28 - 2
                    05/03/1969 - 35 - 2
                    05/03/1969 - 37 - 2
                    05/03/1969 - 44 - 2
                    05/03/1969 - 46 - 3
                    05/03/1969 - 49 - 2
                    12/03/1969 - 32 - 2
                    12/03/1969 - 34 - 2
                    12/03/1969 - 38 - 2
                    12/03/1969 - 49 - 2
                    19/03/1969 - 4 - 2
                    19/03/1969 - 23 - 2
                    19/03/1969 - 28 - 2
                    19/03/1969 - 33 - 2
                    19/03/1969 - 36 - 2
                    19/03/1969 - 38 - 2
                    19/03/1969 - 40 - 2
                    19/03/1969 - 43 - 2
                    19/03/1969 - 45 - 2
                    19/03/1969 - 49 - 2
                    26/03/1969 - 31 - 2
                    26/03/1969 - 34 - 2
                    26/03/1969 - 42 - 2
                    02/04/1969 - 18 - 2
                    02/04/1969 - 28 - 2
                    02/04/1969 - 30 - 2
                    02/04/1969 - 35 - 3
                    02/04/1969 - 41 - 2
                    02/04/1969 - 46 - 2
                    02/04/1969 - 48 - 2
                    02/04/1969 - 50 - 2
                    09/04/1969 - 19 - 2
                    09/04/1969 - 38 - 3
                    09/04/1969 - 43 - 2
                    09/04/1969 - 49 - 2
                    16/04/1969 - 23 - 2
                    16/04/1969 - 26 - 2
                    16/04/1969 - 37 - 2
                    16/04/1969 - 41 - 2
                    23/04/1969 - 37 - 2
                    23/04/1969 - 39 - 2
                    30/04/1969 - 33 - 2
                    30/04/1969 - 36 - 2
                    30/04/1969 - 38 - 2
                    30/04/1969 - 40 - 2
                    30/04/1969 - 43 - 2
                    30/04/1969 - 47 - 2
                    07/05/1969 - 35 - 2
                    07/05/1969 - 37 - 2
                    07/05/1969 - 39 - 3
                    07/05/1969 - 43 - 3
                    07/05/1969 - 48 - 2
                    14/05/1969 - 22 - 2
                    14/05/1969 - 30 - 2
                    14/05/1969 - 36 - 2
                    14/05/1969 - 47 - 2
                    21/05/1969 - 33 - 2
                    21/05/1969 - 36 - 2
                    21/05/1969 - 40 - 2
                    21/05/1969 - 47 - 2
                    28/05/1969 - 25 - 2
                    28/05/1969 - 28 - 2
                    28/05/1969 - 32 - 2
                    28/05/1969 - 36 - 2
                    28/05/1969 - 40 - 2
                    28/05/1969 - 46 - 2
                    28/05/1969 - 49 - 2
                    04/06/1969 - 11 - 2
                    04/06/1969 - 22 - 2
                    04/06/1969 - 35 - 2
                    04/06/1969 - 41 - 2
                    04/06/1969 - 43 - 2
                    04/06/1969 - 50 - 2
                    11/06/1969 - 22 - 2
                    18/06/1969 - 40 - 2
                    25/06/1969 - 41 - 2

                    And the rest of 1969

                    Date - Pos - Tied
                    23/08/1969 - 43 - 2
                    06/09/1969 - 48 - 2

                    As I said, something changed around July - I remember reading in RR that BMRB was getting an expanded sample from July. When I can go back to the British Library I can locate the article.

                    The next tie is in 1972, and the other 31 are below.

                    06/05/1972 - 46 - 2
                    03/06/1972 - 47 - 2
                    18/11/1972 - 50 - 2
                    02/12/1972 - 43 - 2
                    08/06/1974 - 17 - 2
                    19/10/1974 - 45 - 2
                    02/11/1974 - 40 - 2
                    22/02/1975 - 31 - 2
                    05/04/1975 - 40 - 2
                    13/09/1975 - 31 - 2
                    13/12/1975 - 16 - 2
                    23/10/1976 - 11 - 2
                    12/02/1977 - 25 - 2
                    25/06/1977 - 48 - 2
                    25/03/1978 - 28 - 2
                    15/07/1978 - 43 - 2
                    12/08/1978 - 51 - 2
                    06/01/1979 - 65 - 2
                    10/02/1979 - 34 - 2
                    14/07/1979 - 54 - 2
                    21/07/1979 - 35 - 2
                    16/08/1980 - 71 - 2
                    27/09/1980 - 65 - 2
                    02/05/1981 - 75 - 2
                    15/08/1981 - 27 - 2
                    06/02/1982 - 56 - 2
                    31/07/1982 - 41 - 2
                    11/09/1982 - 75 - 2
                    25/09/1982 - 55 - 2
                    25/09/1982 - 65 - 2
                    23/10/1982 - 58 - 2

                    Ignoring the RR era, and focusing on BMRB, the highest pos for a tie was 4 in March 1969.

                    Removing this Feb-Jun 1969 period, the highest tie was 11 on 23 Oct 1976. The average tie position was 44.8.
                    http://thechartbook.co.uk - for the latest are best chart book - By Decade!
                    Now including NME, Record Mirror and Melody Maker from the UK and some Billboard charts

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Do we know if they tied only for the exact same number of sales, or if sales were within a particular percentage of each other?

                      Comment


                      • kingofskiffle
                        kingofskiffle commented
                        Editing a comment
                        For 19 Oct 1974 the sales are the same - 299. I don't have enough information to comment on the other one from 1974 (Only the sales for the '41' position) and have no other sales data covering tied weeks.

                    • #61
                      ^
                      there may also be a tie in 1973:

                      27/10/1973 - No 29 - Stevie Wonder - Higher Ground / Guy Darrell - I've Been Hurt

                      https://www.ukmix.org/forum/chart-di...e28#post918748

                      https://www.ukmix.org/forum/chart-di...50#post1099250

                      Music Week (and therefore the OCC database) have the titles listed at numbers 29 and 30. I'm assuming Record Mirror also has no tied positions as the above tie seems to only be remembered by the above two posters. Both posters recall the tie from hearing the top 30 on Radio 1.

                      Comment


                      • #62
                        Originally posted by Robbie View Post
                        ^
                        there may also be a tie in 1973:

                        27/10/1973 - No 29 - Stevie Wonder - Higher Ground / Guy Darrell - I've Been Hurt

                        https://www.ukmix.org/forum/chart-di...e28#post918748

                        https://www.ukmix.org/forum/chart-di...50#post1099250

                        Music Week (and therefore the OCC database) have the titles listed at numbers 29 and 30. I'm assuming Record Mirror also has no tied positions as the above tie seems to only be remembered by the above two posters. Both posters recall the tie from hearing the top 30 on Radio 1.
                        This is odd... Music Week printed as no tie.

                        https://www.dropbox.com/s/njdtzp53y9...0Week.jpg?dl=0

                        However, in a file I am not allowed to share because of how I got it (So sorry!), the original BARS paperwork from BMRB does show as a tie (Actually, sales also tie for 31 so 29, 30 and 31 have the same sales, with 30 and 31 showing the sales figure with a minus after, while the 29 has neither a minus or a plus, which other entries do have. This would be, to me, because the sales have only changed a tiny bit form the previous week, thus no "increase" or "decrease'). The 29 has a typed = after it, position 30 is whited out and typed as 29= and 31 is shown normally. '30' is shown as a 200 sales drop, while '31' is shown as a 100 sales drop, which might be why 29 and '30' are equal and '31' is not. RM does not show a tied 29. Billboard does not show as a tied 29.
                        http://thechartbook.co.uk - for the latest are best chart book - By Decade!
                        Now including NME, Record Mirror and Melody Maker from the UK and some Billboard charts

                        Comment


                        • #63
                          More RR & RM chart disagreements

                          14th January 1967
                          RR RM
                          02 02 MORNINGTOWN RIDE The Seekers
                          02 03 SUNSHINE SUPERMAN Donovan

                          26th July 1967
                          RR RM
                          39 39 CREEQUE ALLEY The Mamas & The Papas
                          39 40 DEDICATED TO THE ONE I LOVE The Mamas & The Papas

                          19th February 1969
                          RR RM
                          18 18 PEOPLE The Tymes
                          18 19 SURROUND YOURSELF WITH SORROW Cilla Black

                          2nd April 1969
                          RR RM
                          18 18 I CAN HEAR MUSIC The Beach Boys
                          18 19 WICHITA LINEMAN Glen Campbell

                          16th April 1969
                          RR RM
                          20 20 GET READY The Temptations
                          21 20 MAN OF THE WORLD Fleetwood Mac
                          41 41 EVERYDAY PEOPLE Sly and The Family Stone
                          41 41 I'LL BE THERE Jackie Trent
                          --- 41 I WILL SEE YOU THERE Linda Kendrick (& On OCC Website)
                          43 44 LILY THE PINK The Scaffold
                          44 46 BLUER THAN BLUE Rolf Harris
                          45 45 BEHIND A PAINTED SMILE The Isley Brothers
                          46 47 ALBATROSS Fleetwood Mac
                          47 48 DIZZY Tommy Roe
                          48 48 OB-LA-DI OB-LA-DA The Marmalade
                          49 50 NOWHERE TO RUN Martha and the Vandellas
                          50 --- AQUARIUS / LET THE SUNSHINE IN Fifth Dimension (Not On OCC Website & Billboard Hits Of The World)
                          YOU DON'T KNOW LIKE I KNOW Sam And Dave (#50 On OCC Website & Billboard Hits Of The World)

                          4th June 1969
                          RR RM
                          11 11 LOVE ME TONIGHT Tom Jones
                          11 12 TIME IS TIGHT Booker T & The MG's

                          23rd August 1969
                          RR RM
                          43 43 NO MATTER WHAT SIGN YOU ARE The Supremes
                          43 44 OH HAPPY DAY The Edwin Hawkins Singers
                          Last edited by Woz1234; Sun April 25, 2021, 14:11.

                          Comment


                          • kingofskiffle
                            kingofskiffle commented
                            Editing a comment
                            16 April (and the previous week) are in error in RR as printed. The Complete Book states this in their intro covering chart milestones. I think I used the following weeks LWK pos to backtrack to create the chart. The Graham betts 60’s book shows as RR above. I went with 50 for Aquarius as that was what was used the following week. OCC Website went with Sam and Dave I assume because that was listed as the first Breaker. I think I emailed Jon Kutner author of their Complete Book (with others) to get the position.

                        • #64
                          Originally posted by kingofskiffle View Post
                          Adding to Robin's research -

                          In the BMRB chart (1969-1982) I have 127 instances of tied positions (this includes multiples per week).

                          I'm breaking this into two sections - early 1969 (Feb to Jul)

                          23/04/1969 - 37 - 2
                          23/04/1969 - 39 - 2
                          There's another tie on that week

                          23/04/1969 - 49 - 2
                          RR RM
                          49 49 I'LL BE THERE Jackie Trent
                          49 49 I'M GONNA MAKE YOU LOVE ME The Supremes And The Temptations

                          Comment


                        • #65
                          Originally posted by Woz1234 View Post

                          There's another tie on that week

                          23/04/1969 - 49 - 2
                          RR RM
                          49 49 I'LL BE THERE Jackie Trent
                          49 49 I'M GONNA MAKE YOU LOVE ME The Supremes And The Temptations
                          That above was in Graham Betts "The Official Charts: The Sixties" Book

                          there is another tie from that book on 16/04/1969 - 49 - 2

                          49 AQUARIUS / LET THE SUNSHINE IN Fifth Dimension
                          49 NOWHERE TO RUN Martha and the Vandellas

                          is that right or wrong?
                          Last edited by Woz1234; Sun April 25, 2021, 00:10.

                          Comment


                          • #66
                            Originally posted by Woz1234 View Post

                            That was in Graham Betts "The Official Charts: The Sixties" Book

                            there is another tie from that book on 16/04/1969 - 49 - 2

                            49 AQUARIUS / LET THE SUNSHINE IN Fifth Dimension
                            49 NOWHERE TO RUN Martha and the Vandellas

                            is that right or wrong?
                            Working off the next weeks chart lwk pos - wrong.
                            https://www.dropbox.com/s/wickr6re3k...20Pop.pdf?dl=0
                            I think I sorted that one properly after the book had been printed.
                            http://thechartbook.co.uk - for the latest are best chart book - By Decade!
                            Now including NME, Record Mirror and Melody Maker from the UK and some Billboard charts

                            Comment


                            • #67
                              Originally posted by kingofskiffle View Post

                              Working off the next weeks chart lwk pos - wrong.
                              https://www.dropbox.com/s/wickr6re3k...20Pop.pdf?dl=0
                              I think I sorted that one properly after the book had been printed.
                              "Aquarius/Let The Sunshine In" starts their chart run at #35 on OCC website & Polyhex but really should start at 50.

                              35-35-25-22-13-{11}-16-16-31-33-46->11wks

                              All the books have it down as doing 12 weeks in the charts.

                              Comment


                              • #68
                                Originally posted by Woz1234 View Post
                                14th January 1967
                                RR RM
                                02 02 MORNINGTOWN RIDE The Seekers
                                02 03 SUNSHINE SUPERMAN Donovan
                                Official Chart goes with RM on this.

                                Comment


                                • #69
                                  Originally posted by Splodj View Post

                                  Official Chart goes with RM on this.
                                  Depends on which 'official' chart source. The OCC website goes with RM, as does the Virgin Top 40 Charts Book, but the latest Graham Betts OCC 60s charts book goes with RR. It's all a mess...

                                  Comment


                                  • #70
                                    Graham goes with RR because, as they say thats the source, thats the source he has used with whatever positions they showed - unless it could be proved an error had occurred.
                                    http://thechartbook.co.uk - for the latest are best chart book - By Decade!
                                    Now including NME, Record Mirror and Melody Maker from the UK and some Billboard charts

                                    Comment


                                    • #71
                                      But I thought OCC used Graham's database.

                                      Guinness says Donovan peaked at 2, but this is inconclusive as it had been at 2 a couple of weeks before.

                                      Comment


                                      • #72
                                        Originally posted by Splodj View Post
                                        But I thought OCC used Graham's database.

                                        Guinness says Donovan peaked at 2, but this is inconclusive as it had been at 2 a couple of weeks before.
                                        No. OCC database is years old and comes from many sources. Graham yes probably for some but not all.

                                        When making the books I was able to assist Graham with scans and I formation so the books match the scans. In most cases - obviously for errors I gave him my views on what it should be but the source was always RR and then others if RR was wrong (as I said above if he had used the 76-100 positions he would have used RM for the week Music Week printed the previous weeks positions by mistake).

                                        hope that makes sense. The OCC website is not a trusted source and should not be relied upon - at least pre 1994 anyway. I have found no errors relating to positions after that point. But then I don’t really look that closely. After 1994 OCC comes direct from their own database so should be perfect.
                                        http://thechartbook.co.uk - for the latest are best chart book - By Decade!
                                        Now including NME, Record Mirror and Melody Maker from the UK and some Billboard charts

                                        Comment


                                        • #73
                                          There is also some confusion on the Official Chart online in the week BMRB takes over.

                                          Dancing In The Street is at 5 but described as a New Entry, whereas it had been at 4 the previous week. The following week it is at 7 but described as a Re-Entry.

                                          I Guess I'll Always Love You is at 11 but described as a Re-Entry, whereas it had been at 12 the previous week. The following week it is at 15 but still described as a Re-Entry.

                                          Comment


                                          • #74
                                            Originally posted by Splodj View Post
                                            There is also some confusion on the Official Chart online in the week BMRB takes over.

                                            Dancing In The Street is at 5 but described as a New Entry, whereas it had been at 4 the previous week. The following week it is at 7 but described as a Re-Entry.

                                            I Guess I'll Always Love You is at 11 but described as a Re-Entry, whereas it had been at 12 the previous week. The following week it is at 15 but still described as a Re-Entry.
                                            The two records have two listings on the OCC archive for their respective 1969 entries. One is simply the title of the record, the other has {1969} added to the title.

                                            For example, Dancing In The Street

                                            charts as Dancing In The Street {1969} before the title switches to Dancing In The Street on the first BMRB chart. The {1969} title version then returns for 3 weeks from 04/03/69. The {1969} entry seems to be titled that was to differentiate the entry from the original 1964 chart run which was credited to Martha and the Vandellas (no Reeves).

                                            https://www.officialcharts.com/artis...the-vandellas/

                                            It must be something to do with the source(s) of the charts. The same mix-up happens with I Guess I'll Always Love You.

                                            Comment


                                            • #75
                                              If you look at Polyhex database you may note he uses {year} notation for re-entries. An uncharitable person may wonder if they had simply mined his database for the charts from 1969-1994....
                                              http://thechartbook.co.uk - for the latest are best chart book - By Decade!
                                              Now including NME, Record Mirror and Melody Maker from the UK and some Billboard charts

                                              Comment

                                              Working...
                                              X