Tag Archives: Baauer

TOP TEN: Wondering About One Hit Wonders — 2013 Edition

The end of 2013 is just a few weeks away, and unfortunately, some acts just won’t be able to carry another single onto the charts in the new year. It’s the sad truth. Some may find success on genre-specific surveys or on small market panels, but it just isn’t the same. So, I must tackle the inevitable: acts who could be past their glory days, as small a time window as it was. Only one big song can do the trick, and for these artists and bands, that could be it. (Nothing to look down upon, however, some people can’t even get to that point.)

(NOTE: I did not include several acts who still have active singles at the moment. Those include American AuthorsEmblem3, NONONO and Zendaya, among others. You better watch out for 2014!)

Let’s start the top ten of the could-be one hit wonders of 2013 when it comes to popular music and the Hot 100…

That's "the way" to sample.

Her team has a Grande problem.

The horror! Yes, as much as I know how many you like her, Grande’s team really can’t get it together when it comes to second significant radio hit. Though she will have an album out next year, I don’t feel she’ll have as big a hit as “The Way”.

Don't "Miss" this new track.

From #9 to Five.

The X Factor gals had a good 2013 with a top ten EP. However, “Miss Movin’ On” is the only charting single from Better Together and I don’t think Syco/Epic know what to do with them. I am not expecting much from their full-length album.

That's "Who" he is.

That’s “Who” he is.

This is another Epic act who seems to have been lost in the shuffle. His hit “Who Booty” managed some airplay at the Rhythmic and Urban formats, plus a minor CHR crossover. Baby got back, but he hasn’t been back on the charts since.

Darling Nikki.

Darling Nikki.

The South African singer took “Glowing” onto the pop airwaves but had its lights turned out midway up the survey. She plans to release a song called “Thank God It’s Friday” to CHR radio next year, but it’s very average and will underperform.

Livin' the life.

Not so “Alive” on the charts right now.

They hit the top ten at pop radio in May with “Alive”, though sales of the songs were tepid. I actually thought the followup titled “Live For The Night” was a stronger song, but radio wasn’t a big fan. At least they’ll have DJ’ing gigs to fall back on.

I like it, "I Love It".

I like it, “I Love It”.

They crashed their car into the bridge and wound up with a hit, “I Love It”, but when they wanted to do it “All Night”, radio and retail weren’t buying into it. Their album tanked and their buzz is largely gone. These two could only Pop for so long.

A "Safe" bet for some sales.

Their one and only “Safe” hit.

The Los Angeles based duo had a major Alternative crossover smash in “Safe And Sound”. Its longevity was the main reason why followup “Kangaroo Court” quickly hopped on radio and was then pulled. I doubt they’re due for another hit.

Cup, cup and away.

Cup, cup and away.

This one should be no surprise as no one expected “Cups (When I’m Gone)” from Pitch Perfect to blow up. Even though there’s a sequel in the works, Kendrick is focused on making films. Plus, “Plates” or “Utensils” couldn’t follow it up, right?

He really shook it up in 2013.

Really shook it up in 2013.

He captivated work places everywhere to film their staff shaking it out to the “Harlem Shake”, and a large change in the Billboard Hot 100 methodology lifted it to a #1 debut. Unfortunately, the DJ hasn’t busted out any chart moves recently.

"Fox" on the run.

“Fox” on the run.

Admit it, you watched the video for “The Fox” a few times and tried to howl along. It was a viral sensation for the duo from Norway, who lit up YouTube and iTunes and cracked the Hot 100’s top ten. Though this song is over now, the two keep churning out videos on the ‘net, even if they don’t get the attention their one big hit received. At least they’re consistent.

Agree with my picks? Totally disagree? Want to make a suggestion for another act you think will be known for just one song? Comment below or find PGTC on Facebook and Twitter by clicking the “Get Social!” tab.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Billboard, Please Stop Changing Your Chart Methodology Every Week. Love, Adam.

Getting to the chart of the matter.

Getting to the chart of the matter.

Dear Billboard,

Hi, paying customer and budding music journalist here. I think we need to sit down and have a talk. My dear Hot 100, I know you’re turning 55 this year, and I know you want to stay “hip and trendy” as any father would. You’ve now done it by adding video streaming data from YouTube into your chart formula as announced yesterday per the groaning of social media that Baauer‘s “Harlem Shake” is the new #1 song in the country. In fact, all of your cousins, the genre-exclusive charts, are doing the same thing. Oh, Billboard, sweet Billboard, you change your chart methodology more than you change your socks and underwear and it’s a little bit concerning. Let me remind you of what happened when you changed your formula to the Hot 100 in the past.

In 1968, you made your first minor change, as far as I can see, which put less emphasis on airplay in the top half on the chart, while it was fully allowed from positions 51-100. Hmmm. Seems rather odd, but OK, it worked for some time and the overall flow of the chart didn’t see any drastic changes.

June 9, 1973 marked a major overhaul in your formula under the direction of Tony Lanzetta due to a dropping list of sales reporters, so data from jukeboxes accumulated for nearly half of the total weight of the overall chart. Whoa. This was also the first date when computers tabulated the chart rather than being done by human. Way to go, technology! There were also changes to both how a song achieved a starred position, a “new entry” arrow, and the crediting of songwriters on the chart, which was awesome for those individuals who always wanted to see their named printed in the industry bible. Overall, it was necessary given what was happening in the industry, and for this, I’ll give you a pass. Although, we all could have done without Kris Kristofferson‘s 19-week run in the top 40 for “Why Me”. It peaked at #16. The slower chart runs eventually faded away.

In February 1982, you decided that you needed to further change the star system so that an open star, or superstar, meant a single exhibited by airplay and sales gain and a regular star (or bold star) meant a single just had a sales spike. Plus, how could I neglect to mention that no star at all meant that all you gained was a rejection sticker, a toss into the trash bin, etc. Yes, I know you want to forget when “Even The Nights Are Better” by Air Supply fell from 6-42 in a week on the September 25 chart or when “The Beatles Movie Medley” by The Beatles fell from 20-92 on the June 5 chart under that methodology. It was a sad time for all, especially for those acts that spent four, five and six weeks at their peak position because they couldn’t move down until they lost their star. Boy Meets Girl‘s unintentional ode to the matter in 1988 perfectly sums up that period. Luckily, this was reversed during the next year and everyone could breathe a sigh of relief. P.S. you also changed your name to the Billboard Hot 100 during the fall of that same year. Poor Pop Singles Chart. The first #1 single under the change was “Islands In The Stream” by Kenny Rogers and Dolly Parton. Ironic that we’re talking about streams now. History repeats, I suppose.

Then, we get to November 1991, which will forever be known as when the Hot 100 became the Lukewarm 100. These changes were made under chart director Michael Ellis. Sales were tabulated by SoundScan via the bar code label you see on products; airplay was tabulated via Broadcast Data Systems and now accumulated for not just pop stations, but rhythm and eventually rock and country stations. That was good. However, the way the ratio was edited at the time, everything urban-related ranked so highly and now spent double-digit weeks at #1 as opposed to just a few frames in the past. I’m looking at you, Boyz II Men. 13 weeks at the top for “End Of The Road” and 16 weeks for your collaboration with Mariah Carey, “One Sweet Day”? Somebody call the chart police. It was a mess. Songs went all over the place. Random limited physical releases ranked oddly. Hit singles that did well on airplay couldn’t chart because a physical single was needed to make the Hot 100. I don’t think I need to go any further than that.

In December 1998, you finally changed the rule on not allowing album cuts to chart on the Hot 100, which was probably the best conclusion you’ve ever come to even if it was a few years late. I realize that you weren’t the ones to tell record labels to stop producing physical singles and focus on full-length albums, but The Rembrandts, No Doubt and The Cardigans, among others, would still like a word with you on the matter. Bart Simpson was pretty offended that you didn’t do the bartman as well. Even Cashbox could do that.

Most of the changes between then and 2012 were positive ones. Digital download sales were ushered in from February 2005 so that airplay wasn’t the king of the formula, which was urgently needed at that point since the CD single was dead. Online streaming from two sources became a component of the chart in August 2007, not extremely necessary but it did help boost some songs that did well from that method and weren’t downloaded as much.

So, now we get to the point where things get ridiculous and look desperate because you weren’t able to change certain stipulations about the chart when they actually happened the first time. Michael Jackson‘s death in 2009 prompted a ruling on older songs to re-enter just after Whitney Houston‘s sudden death in February 2012. In May, you introduced an On-Demand Songs chart, which meant even more streaming was included into the Hot 100 and denied Justin Bieber a #1 debut with “Boyfriend” despite selling 500,000+ copies in its debut week. It wasn’t up for streaming until the next week. Genre-specific charts looked like tragedies in November when the traditional airplay-only tabulation turned into a combination of sales, streaming and spins, even from crossover airplay. Rihanna‘s “Diamonds” debuted at #1 on the R&B chart despite little airplay at Urban radio; Taylor Swift‘s “We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together” vaulted 21-1 on the Country chart despite being pulled at the format. PSY‘s “Gangnam Style” confined to the #2 spot for seven weeks on the Hot 100 prompted this newest change on YouTube streams to be counted. I know, you’re trying to right your wrongs, but it comes at suspicious moments and doesn’t make you look good. Four changes within one year isn’t what consumers and chart-watchers are looking for, especially at the times when the method changes. They want continuity and accuracy. You’re just asking for trouble from rabid fanbases who want their favorite singer or band at the top.

Equating a 30-second video on YouTube to one full view to count towards your chart is like saying that a 30-second radio ad that plays background music counts as one full spin towards a song or that buying one song on iTunes should be counted as an album. It does not work that way and you know it very well. 103 million views for “Harlem Shake” on YouTube didn’t come from viewers watching a video of the whole 3-minute song. It was those random 30-second clips that everyone and their friend’s workplace put together. If a 30-second clip is now considered an entire song, then why do artists bother making three and four minute compositions? What is a song? Their weight should be determined by length, not by overall statistics. 30 seconds of “Shake” equals just under 16% of the full song listened to.

Counting the views from official channels by artists, labels and VEVO are fine by me. I think they would fit nicely into the chart. Everything else, however, is a deal breaker. You do have the power to control this and I would expect that something will change again in the next few months given your recent history.

As frustrated as I may be, there’s nothing that I, as one single blogger, can do. My friend, don’t fret, and don’t shed any tears over the matter. It will be okay. Just remember that Cashbox and Record World are holding a place for you if you don’t realize the errors of your way before you can fix them in a timely manner. (Also, you don’t change your methodology every week. My apologies on that error.)

Sincerely yours (and Sweet Sensation didn’t need YouTube to get a Hot 100 hit),
Adam Soybel

(Chart changes I referenced can be found at this link.)


Filed under Charts/Trade Papers

“Shake” It Up: Will Baauer Bounce At Radio?

Eh, close enough, but not quite.

Eh, close enough, but not quite.

It’s exploded all over the Internet; in fact, your office may be next to upload a version on YouTube. One person is casually grooving to a funky-sounding song, and fifteen seconds in, a whole group of people are swaying to the beat in crazy costumes. In just thirty seconds, a viral sensation was born. Jimmy Fallon’s crew did it; so did Ryan Seacrest’s morning show. In fact, various versions have been popping up over the last two weeks, but it’s turned into a phenomenon over the last four or five days, totaling thousands of separate videos. It’s based off of the song “Harlem Shake”, credited to a 23-year-old producer from New York whose real name is Harry Rodrigues, but who goes by the stage name Baauer. It originally was released last spring but went largely unnoticed outside of a few compilation albums featuring mainly underground material. Now, it’s suddenly been rediscovered by millions of people watching all over the world, ready to boogie down to the infectious beat of the song and laugh a little bit at people’s creativity when it comes to making an Internet video.

In the States, Baauer is on Mad Decent Records, a company started by the producer Diplo, and its sub-label Jeffrees. He’s also signed to LuckyMe Records, a small company based out of the United Kingdom, where an EP of his is in production and will be out later this year. The song isn’t his first official release (a song called “Dum Dum” was issued last year) but it is the rising star’s first song to get some attention and in a big way. The song is obviously a hit at retail. “Harlem Shake” is now #3 on iTunes in the United States, as well as in the United Kingdom. (Look for a top 5 placing on the U.K. Singles Chart this weekend, which is purely sales-based.) It’s also #2 in Canada and #1 in Australia. Yet, with every huge song to come off of YouTube, there also a few problems associated with it.

First of all, it’s a viral hit and a novelty song all rolled into one. I mean, we just got over PSY‘s “Gangnam Style” recently, do we really need another one of these singles to blow up? It’s certainly not going to be easy following a music video that has over 1.3 billion hits on the web. Yet, they are two different songs incorporating two different styles of music. I guess we have no choice. The song’s already doomed to have a short shelf life, so we may as well enjoy it while it lasts and of course, prepare a spot for “Harlem” and Baauer on the list of the biggest one-hit wonders of all-time.

Then, there’s the composition itself. It’s a grimey-sounding record that’s largely instrumental in nature despite the “do the harlem shake” line and a few sound effects. Plus, people generally only know it from the first thirty seconds of the song; why would they be inclined to listen to the whole thing? That’s going to really hurt it, especially in leading into my last point. The last fully instrumental single to make the top 40 at CHR was “Sandstorm” by Darude in 2001. We’ve also had singles crossover from Europe to the States that are largely instrumental, but have a limited vocal in either a foreign or nonsensical language, like 2005’s “Axel F” by Crazy Frog and 2011’s “We No Speak Americano” by Yolanda Be Cool & DCUP. The thing is, neither of those three songs have made it out of the 30’s at this specific format despite a decent pace at retail. “Harlem Shake”, which is far bigger sales hit than any of these were, could likely do the same if the trend dies down faster than we think.

Lastly, as I began to explain, there’s the issue of radio. It’s not accumulating airplay very quickly here in the States, possibly because it hasn’t officially been serviced yet. It’s also on a really small label, so it would need to be picked up by a major one in order to get the proper promotion. The leader thus far at top-40 radio is WNOW-FM in New York City, with nine detections recorded in the past few days, followed by KHTT-FM/Tulsa and KSXY/Santa Rosa, CA with six, with additional small airplay in cities like Los Angeles, Miami, Nashville, Philadelphia, San Diego and Washington, DC. With all the electronic dance music on playlists at the format, it probably won’t struggle to fit in on the airwaves, but a #56 placing on the Hot 100 isn’t going to cut it when “Gangnam” just went to #2 for a month and a half on the Hot 100.

Whatever you may think of the song, it’s going to be around for a while and pushed to the point where you can’t stand it any longer. Hey, we could always have a rerelease of the “Harlem Shuffle” to counter it, couldn’t we?

Let me know what you think of the song and the trend based off of it in the comments or on Twitter: @AdamFSoybel.

Leave a comment

Filed under Charts/Trade Papers, Music News