Originally Posted by
sup_fan
in the US, there's a disproportionate emphasis on the pop chart rankings when judging success of a record. a #1 on adult contemp or dance or r&b is usually not viewed as "successful" as pop. and it's Billboard's chart rankings, not Cashbox or any others.
Part of this would be due to historic economics. White US audiences tended to follow the Pop charts more than R&B and, in years past, the white audiences tended to have more discretionary spending power for things like lps, lots of 45s for the kids, tickets to clubs and high-end venues.
Another part would have to be the general apathy for all non-white forms of entertainment. basically racism. the overall population tended to only consider "white entertainment" to have any major redeeming values.
Finally, chart rankings can be deceiving. Everyone wants a #1, even if it means your record or album races up the charts, hits the top spot and then sinks like a rock. Everyone wants to be the top and have that title whereas the more profitable viewpoint is to have a song that lingers for weeks in the upper ranges. a song that sits in the top 20 or 10 for many weeks probably outsold that previous example. in the 60s, a lot of the Sup releases flew quickly up the charts, hit #1 and then began to descend. Motown was putting all of the promotional oomph behind them in order to help drive the high chart placements. but the Sup songs are rarely the biggest sellers of the year. Bayou on here has made several excellent posts on this throughout the years. I think he said in 66 the top seller was What Becomes of Brokenhearted. Track of my Tears [[i think) is another he mentions. neither hit #1 but both charted high and charted long.
Bookmarks