Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Record Retailer Errors (1960-1994)

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

  • #76
    I'm going to stick with RR as it was the source paper and that RM made the error in transposing the charts across, for the sake of consistency. My head is sore trying to wrap my head around all the confusion.

    The Ultimate Averaged Chart. The Definitive Chart Reflecting The Fifties and Sixties.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by MrTibbs View Post
      I'm going to stick with RR as it was the source paper and that RM made the error in transposing the charts across, for the sake of consistency. My head is sore trying to wrap my head around all the confusion.
      I was going to post the same this morning. RR is the chart source (rather than RM) so it's better to stick to what was in Record Retailer.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by MrTibbs View Post
        I'm going to stick with RR as it was the source paper and that RM made the error in transposing the charts across, for the sake of consistency. My head is sore trying to wrap my head around all the confusion.
        I agree Brian, the most logical conclusion one can make is to use the RR chart for the RR data for the Ultimate chart.

        However, the historical ramifications of this new RM data 1962-69 are astounding !!

        So it looks like at least 2 RR charts were produced for some weeks 1962-69 (possibly many weeks?). As proved by some weeks BB agreeing with RM, and they both disagreeing with RR. This would lead to the conclusion that the RM / RR differences were not due to typos, but due to recalculations (though of course there could be some typos as well).

        Why would RR be re-calculated? Maybe errors were found after the first calculation. Or maybe BB and RM had tight deadline schedules and needed a RR chart pronto to include in their next issue. Hmmm… Now that I’ve said that, I do remember reading something somewhere about a BB deadline, that if they didn’t get their UK chart in on time, they either skipped it that week, or used a prior week chart. And there could have been a time lag in there as well, BB carrying a 1-week-old RR chart on a regular basis. Don’t know who told me that, probably Dave Taylor. I’ll have to check my notes…

        So it could be that RR cranked out a BB / RM chart to meet their deadlines, with the record shop samples they had in hand at the time, and then as more shop samples came in they included those in a recalc which they then used for the final RR chart.

        Important question: which RR chart did the BBC use, the RM version or the RR version? This might could explain some BBC chart situations we thought were errors, as there are a lot of RM/RR differences in many Top 10’s. Amazing…

        And since RR could not be bought in shops (one had to subscribe), those who subscribed to RM or bought RM in shops were getting the RM version of the RR chart. The RM version went out to Brit music fans, and the RR version went out to industry subscribers. Thus more Brits knew about the RM version than the RR version 1962-69 !! Great googly moogly !!

        One can argue that the RM version of RR charts during this time were a separate entity, and should be recognized and considered as such, even though they were a preliminary version of RR. With extra records that did not appear on RR.

        So yes, Brian should use the RR charts for the Ultimate, but I confess I sure would like to see the RM charts off to the side even if they shouldn’t go into the Ultimate average. RM charts 1962-69 were a part of history !!

        Or some other way; we need a separate thread for RM vs RR, ha.

        I sure wish we could run all this by Alan Smith and Dave Taylor. Wonder if they knew anything about this? Incredible…

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by RokinRobinOfLocksley View Post
          Important question: which RR chart did the BBC use, the RM version or the RR version?
          For the first one it appears they used RR, because if they had used RM Ned and the Shadows would have tied on 10 points each. But here is the type of problem we are going to have in this analysis; how do we know that they didn't use RM and then do one of their tiebreakers?

          In our timeline we are coming to the point where the 'Please Please Me' LP reached number one. Perhaps, in a universe somewhere, it was prevented from getting to the top by 'Frank Ifield Sings'!

          Comment


          • #80
            It is entirely possible as Robin suggests that RR issued a preliminary chart to meet RM and BB deadlines. Maybe, we don't know for sure. But if that was the case then obviously the chart carried by RM and Billboard was incomplete as it was based on limited data and therefore the later published RR chart was the authoritative chart with complete data. (such as it was for RR)

            Other than that I can't understand why RM who contracted to carry the RR chart from March 1962 after they discontinued their own chart would tinker around the edges and make minor changes. It just doesn't make sense, where was the basis for their re-branded chart as they didn't sample any shops.

            If that was the case I'm surprised RR allowed them to do so. RR surely were aware of this and that such a practice diminished the authority of their chart when published.
            The Ultimate Averaged Chart. The Definitive Chart Reflecting The Fifties and Sixties.

            Comment


            • #81
              Maybe the discussion so far is clearing the fog a bit. After we have established which chart is the better we should research the two charts to identify which weeks they have discrepancies, find the extra hits and compare them to the breakers to check whether they may be a hit on one chart and breaker on the other, and finally clarify who the breakers are. As of now my view is that the extra hits on the less reliable chart must be considered ranked breakers and for those weeks increase the number of breakers.

              Comment


              • #82
                3rd Chapter of RR & RM chart disagreements with special guests OCC website & Sixties book.

                26th March 1969

                RR RM/OCC Website
                41 --- IT'S ONLY LOVE Tony Blackburn
                42 42 ALBATROSS Fleetwood Mac
                42 42 SOMETHING'S HAPPENING Herman's Hermits
                44 44 COME BACK AND SHAKE ME Clodagh Rodgers
                45 44 TEARDROP CITY The Monkees
                46 47 THIS GUY'S IN LOVE WITH YOU Herb Alpert
                47 46 THE WALLS FELL DOWN The Marbles
                48 48 RIVER DEEP MOUNTAIN HIGH Ike & Tina Turner
                49 49 DANCING IN THE STREET Martha and the Vandellas
                50 --- I SPY (FOR THE FBI) Jamo Thomas And His Party Brothers Orchestra
                --- 50 YOU'RE MY EVERYTHING Max Bygraves

                Max was also in Graham's OCC Sixties Book & the song was in the charts for 5 weeks, but in his Collins Book in 2004, Max spent 4 weeks.

                30th April 1969

                RR RM OCC Book & Website
                33 - 33 - 34 WHERE DO YOU GO TO (MY LOVELY) Peter Sarstedt

                Comment


                • #83
                  This is turning into quite the chuckle. The OCC website apparently (at some times? most times?) might not be using the RR charts 1962-69, but rather the RM version of RR.

                  Which begs the question: which charts were the Guinness books using for all those years / decades, RR or the RM version of RR?

                  Egadzooks !!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    The 26 March 1969 chart was originally printed in error by Music Week.
                    https://www.dropbox.com/s/w6ry107fdd...20Pop.pdf?dl=0
                    See the above scan to see no 33 printed. When compiling the 60's book Graham asked my opinion and I asked Jon Kutner and then Graham made a judgement. The RR chart was printed in error, so corrections needed to be made.
                    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


                    • Graham76man
                      Graham76man commented
                      Editing a comment
                      Plus the quarter million sales for the new entry at 47!

                  • #85
                    Originally posted by kingofskiffle View Post
                    The 26 March 1969 chart was originally printed in error by Music Week.
                    https://www.dropbox.com/s/w6ry107fdd...20Pop.pdf?dl=0
                    See the above scan to see no 33 printed. When compiling the 60's book Graham asked my opinion and I asked Jon Kutner and then Graham made a judgement. The RR chart was printed in error, so corrections needed to be made.
                    So what was at #50?

                    Jon Kutner Book: I SPY (FOR THE FBI) Jamo Thomas And His Party Brothers Orchestra (2nd Re-Entry)
                    Graham Betts OCC Sixties Book: YOU'RE MY EVERYTHING Max Bygraves (Down from #43)
                    Last edited by Woz1234; Mon April 26, 2021, 00:48.

                    Comment


                    • #86
                      Jon now believes it was Max Bygraves. I emailed him when providing scans for Graham. Hence using that. If you look at the scan, Jamo is not listed anywhere including breakers. Whereas Max Bygraves was listed in RM.
                      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


                      • #87

                        I was looking through the RM's that they have on the world history site for 1969 to see if they say anything about the BMRB taking over the compilation of the chart and I noticed a letter sent into the February 8th issue:
                        "I'M concerned about the way certain record stores order their stock of records. On many occasions I have asked for a certain record which is not in the Top Fifty. The reply I always receive is that they only stock records which are in the top fifty!...".

                        Since RR was considered the trade paper, presumably this must be the Top 50 they are referring to as the NME and MM were only a Top 30 at that time right? It does make you wonder how any songs managed to enter the charts if that were the case though...

                        This also may explain why RR appears to be behind in new entries IF they used a higher proportion of stores that 'only stocked the Top 50'.
                        Last edited by braindeadpj; Mon April 26, 2021, 01:20.

                        Comment


                        • #88
                          There are more questions than answers and unfortunately The Ultimate 1963 chart has got lost in the thick of it. I think I will hold back on the remainder of these meantime until interest resumes as this sideline of RR v RM has become interesting and we are all engrossed in it.

                          The point made above by Lonnie is of concern and surprise. In February 1969 the BMRB assumed responsibility for providing RR and the BBC with a national Top 50 chart. This by now 'official' chart was to be the be all and end all so how can a published chart completely omit a number 33 and nobody notices ?. Was it BMRB who omitted it or RR. Irregardless RR printed it and yet nobody at the paper seemed to notice this gross error before it went out. How can an error like that happen. But, as well as the Top 50 printed in RR pages they also had a pull out Top 50 as I remember which shops could put on the wall, and I wonder if this contained the same error or it was just the paper copy itself. Not that it matters it was still sloppy printing and obviously not proof read.

                          How bad is that for the 'official' chart.

                          I can't understand for the life of me where RM enters into all this. I feel their printed chart is being elevated into an importance it never had because of some different listed chart positions, reason for this unknown and really unimportant. RM didn't compile a chart they took the RR chart.

                          After more thought into an earlier post I made I realised that RR could not have issued RM with a preliminary copy of the chart at least from February 1969 as RR didn't compile it the BMRB did, and this was only issued to the BBC and RR on the Tuesday morning of each week. Their was no preliminary chart issued as until then titles of records were unknown as the information was only contained on anonymous punched cards fed into the computer so RR had the chart before issue to RM.

                          I am no lover of the RR chart as you will all know by now. It would have been better for charted music if it had never existed but they were the originators of their chart and later through BMRB. RM did not really play a part in this and it really is unimportant that they offered some alternative chart positions, reason unknown, never authenticated in any way or by way of explanation, therefore irrelevant really.

                          Brain's point above is actually a good one. I personally can remember going into stores to be told they only stocked the chart records. The chain record stores seemed to be the worst offenders. All the little independent shops I frequented for most of my records when I first heard new releases etc were stocked by them.
                          The Ultimate Averaged Chart. The Definitive Chart Reflecting The Fifties and Sixties.

                          Comment


                          • #89
                            I have a moderator question: I feel the non Ultimate Chart chat should be moved (quite easily) to a new thread. Thoughts?
                            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


                            • #90
                              Originally posted by kingofskiffle View Post
                              I have a moderator question: I feel the non Ultimate Chart chat should be moved (quite easily) to a new thread. Thoughts?
                              Seems a good idea. 'RR Variations'?

                              Comment


                              • #91
                                You do have to put your mind into record store mode, rather than fan mode. Record shops had to buy the record in then sell them back to the public at a much greater cost then they paid for. So by selling chart records only they had a much less of a risk of losing money on none sold stock. None sold stock were either returned, presumably at a lost to the shop, or sold off at price that either was break even or less than sending it back. In some stores space was limited and displaying the top 50 took space, so some limited to smaller sized charts. I don't know about anyone else, but I would often visit all the shops in Sheffield Saturday afternoon to find a top 50 record and none had it in stock. In many you could go to the chart and see the gaps in the chart, you didn't need to ask!
                                Back in 1969 albums were all the rage and the single was seen as expensive by the public. Albums take up even more space, so limiting the singles to the top 50 and what was left over from the drop outs was an economic way. Stereo systems were growing in numbers and the record industry was slow at making singles stereo, so having stereo albums was another trend.
                                Education for anyone aged 12 to 16 has made a mess of the world!

                                Comment


                                • #92
                                  As in pull all the prior posts / discussions over into a new thread? Sounds good to Robin Hood...

                                  Comment


                                  • #93
                                    I agree with kingofskiffle. Makes it easier to read the charts.

                                    Comment


                                    • #94
                                      Originally posted by Splodj View Post

                                      Seems a good idea. 'RR Variations'?
                                      That would do, but it's too mild.

                                      How about:

                                      Record Retailer Charts: Errors / Discrepancies / Quirks / Unexplained Phenomena / UFO's

                                      More eye catching and fun, ha. And would draw in more viewers and participants...

                                      Comment


                                      • #95
                                        Okay, I'll move them tonight after work unless MrTibbs objects (Can't see it but just want to make sure).
                                        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


                                        • #96
                                          I don't have an issue with this at all. A dedicated site for this topic would be appropriate as it does deflect from the flow of charts and chat and comments relevant to that.

                                          I say this even knowing it's gonna take a lot of interest away from here now though lol.

                                          Is it possible to move across all relevant entries from here ?

                                          I'd simply call the new thread what it is 'RR v RM Chart Differences'

                                          'Record Retailer Charts: Errors / Discrepancies / Quirks / Unexplained Phenomena / UFO's' I'm not so sure the errors, discrepancies, and quirks are Record Retailers though. Much more likely to be on the Record Mirror side.
                                          The Ultimate Averaged Chart. The Definitive Chart Reflecting The Fifties and Sixties.

                                          Comment


                                          • #97
                                            Yeah, I proposed moving the RR/RM discussion several days ago. Brian deserves to have his interesting thread dedicated to completing the best ever pre 69 chart, and I expected this new discussion to take off since it’s the one chart supplying most of the hit info since 60. Must admit it’s taken off more than my fantasy opened for.

                                            Comment


                                            • #98
                                              Posts have bene moved to here as a new topic.
                                              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


                                              • #99
                                                Originally posted by Woz1234 View Post
                                                3rd Chapter of RR & RM chart disagreements with special guests OCC website & Sixties book.

                                                26th March 1969

                                                RR RM/OCC Website
                                                41 --- IT'S ONLY LOVE Tony Blackburn
                                                42 42 ALBATROSS Fleetwood Mac
                                                42 42 SOMETHING'S HAPPENING Herman's Hermits
                                                44 44 COME BACK AND SHAKE ME Clodagh Rodgers
                                                45 44 TEARDROP CITY The Monkees
                                                46 47 THIS GUY'S IN LOVE WITH YOU Herb Alpert
                                                47 46 THE WALLS FELL DOWN The Marbles
                                                48 48 RIVER DEEP MOUNTAIN HIGH Ike & Tina Turner
                                                49 49 DANCING IN THE STREET Martha and the Vandellas
                                                50 --- I SPY (FOR THE FBI) Jamo Thomas And His Party Brothers Orchestra
                                                --- 50 YOU'RE MY EVERYTHING Max Bygraves

                                                Max was also in Graham's OCC Sixties Book & the song was in the charts for 5 weeks, but in his Collins Book in 2004, Max spent 4 weeks.

                                                30th April 1969
                                                I have the RM and RR scans for 26th March and the positions differ slightly from above. I have also included the ones from the Billboard Hits of the World (BB) and the Last Week Positions shown in the following week's RR (RR LW):
                                                RR RR LW RM BB
                                                33 33 Missing
                                                34 33 33 34 Mockingbird - Inez and Charlie Foxx
                                                35= 34 35 35= Lily The Pink - Scaffold
                                                35= 35 34 35= Ob-La-Di Ob-La-Da - Marmalade
                                                37 36 36 37 All The Love In The World - Consortium
                                                38 37 37 38 Breakfast On Pluto - Don Partridge
                                                39 38 39 Kum-Ba-Ya - The Sandpipers
                                                40 39 39 40= With Pen In Hand - Vikki Carr
                                                41 40= 40- You Got Soul - Johnny Nash
                                                42 41 40= 42 It's Only Love - Tony Blackburn
                                                43= 42 43= Something's Happening - Herman's Hermits
                                                43= 42 42 43= Albatross - Fleetwood Mac
                                                45 44 44= 45= Come Back And Shake Me - Clodagh Rodgers
                                                46 44= 45= Teardrop City - The Monkees
                                                47= 47 46 47= Walls Fell Down - The Marbles
                                                47= 47 47= This Guy's In Love With You - Herb Alpert
                                                49 48 49 River Deep Mountain High - Ike and Tina Turner
                                                50 49 49 50= Dancing In The Street - Martha Reeves and the Vandella
                                                50 50= You're My Everything - Max Bygraves

                                                Comment


                                                • Thanks for that. It does explain why we have Max at 50 as both RM and BB used that. It could well be a mess up on the BMRB data as provided. Given the mess of it all across multiple places which would all, I assume, have all come from the same print out.
                                                  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