»

[Ross]

Elvis is 5,000 ahead in the Midweeks

Manics @ Number 2
Killers @ Number 3

Couldn't have gone to a nice chap.

[nullmouse]

I think it would be better for the 1000th Number 1 to represent what was currently popular rather than an undoubtedly talented bloke, but ultimately a dead one. Dead for 27 years. Where's the relevence to the 1000th number 1 in that?

[jester1470]

Originally Posted by nullmouse

I think it would be better for the 1000th Number 1 to represent what was currently popular rather than an undoubtedly talented bloke, but ultimately a dead one. Dead for 27 years. Where's the relevence to the 1000th number 1 in that?

Well it kinda seems fitting that the guy who is the biggest rock star of all time some would say gets it.

Cheers

Stuart

[nullmouse]

Originally Posted by jester1470

Well it kinda seems fitting that the guy who is the biggest rock star of all time some would say gets it.

I don't agree, I think it would be more fitting if a contemporary artist got the 1000th number one and not a wide-spread reissue campaign. Elvis was a phenomenal artist of his time who, whilst alive, got to number one a record number of times. I just don't see the relevence of a reissue campaign topping what are supposed to be charts indicative of current popular music. Scanning the last 999 number ones shows the transitional fads and phases that pop music has gone through in the last 50 odd years, I can't help but feel Elvis at 1000 proves nothing.

[Ross]

Well only the Manics or The Killers can catch him...

[PaulDW]

And neither of them should have it... Hehe... So Im gonna stick with the King...

[jester1470]

Originally Posted by nullmouse

I don't agree, I think it would be more fitting if a contemporary artist got the 1000th number one and not a wide-spread reissue campaign. Elvis was a phenomenal artist of his time who, whilst alive, got to number one a record number of times. I just don't see the relevence of a reissue campaign topping what are supposed to be charts indicative of current popular music. Scanning the last 999 number ones shows the transitional fads and phases that pop music has gone through in the last 50 odd years, I can't help but feel Elvis at 1000 proves nothing.

The only things the charts are indicitive is of who sells the most singles, I mean Mike Flowers Pop and Mr Blobby getting to number one didn't show that music was going in the direction of pink rubber men or easy listening, just that people bought most of them that week. Elvis getting to number 1 now shows that he is probably the most popular artist of all time and someone who can still outsell any other artist almost 20 years after his death. Whjat gets to number onew in reality has little to do with the way music is at a speciufic time, just what is hyped or captures people's imagination. In no way can the Band Aid single be indicitive of the musical trend at he time, iy just caught a moment of people wanting to support a charity...

Cheers

Stuart

[nullmouse]

Originally Posted by jester1470

The only things the charts are indicitive is of who sells the most singles, I mean Mike Flowers Pop and Mr Blobby getting to number one didn't show that music was going in the direction of pink rubber men or easy listening, just that people bought most of them that week. Elvis getting to number 1 now shows that he is probably the most popular artist of all time and someone who can still outsell any other artist almost 20 years after his death. Whjat gets to number onew in reality has little to do with the way music is at a speciufic time, just what is hyped or captures people's imagination. In no way can the Band Aid single be indicitive of the musical trend at he time, iy just caught a moment of people wanting to support a charity...

Cheers

Stuart

I'd say that Band Aid was more indicative of the time than Elvis now, given that all the contributing artists are currently releasing music that's doing well in the charts. I'm not for a minute dissing the King, his contribution to music is fantastic, but I think that this 1000th single thing is less about his musical contribution and more about SonyBMG raking in profits from an extensive re-release of his back catalogue. Again, if you look at the type of songs getting to number in context they make sense, Mr Blobby was a charity record based on a popular character of the time - If Mr Blobby was released now, when only a select audience remember who he was, then it would be totally irrelevent.

Sure, people may not view The Killers or the Manics as being anywhere near as influential as Elvis but they are actively releasing, making and being influenced by events and music now - Which to me is what the charts should be about.

[jester1470]

Originally Posted by nullmouse

I'd say that Band Aid was more indicative of the time than Elvis now, given that all the contributing artists are currently releasing music that's doing well in the charts. I'm not for a minute dissing the King, his contribution to music is fantastic, but I think that this 1000th single thing is less about his musical contribution and more about SonyBMG raking in profits from an extensive re-release of his back catalogue. Again, if you look at the type of songs getting to number in context they make sense, Mr Blobby was a charity record based on a popular character of the time - If Mr Blobby was released now, when only a select audience remember who he was, then it would be totally irrelevent.

Sure, people may not view The Killers or the Manics as being anywhere near as influential as Elvis but they are actively releasing, making and being influenced by events and music now - Which to me is what the charts should be about.

Actually Blobby wasn't a charity single, the money went to Noel Edmonds and the BBC.

Cheers

Stuart

[mmd040]

Nobody should pay any attention to the charts after the age of about 14 or so.