Conference marvin::uk_music

    I remember seeing something about the charts many years ago (when
    it used to be done by BMRB). Wherever it was I read it, they reckoned
    that to get a representative chart, you should poll somewhere like
    HMV in Oxford St. (this is before the days of Virgin and Tower Records,
    too...). Trouble is, a big store like that has neither the time
    nor the inclination to fill out the necessary forms for the people
    doing the survey. As I recall, the argument against the then current
    system (which changed little when they changed to Gallup), was similar
    to yours in .0 - namely that smaller shops don't carry the range
    of stocks, nor do they have such a wide variety of customers, so
    the results of the poll never truly representative.
    
    Nick

    
    A point related to this note is the insidious rise of Our Price shops
    around the country.  Surely they hold the majority of record shops in
    England, thereby the public only gets to choose what they stock.  I've
    seen a lot of independent shops being swallowed up by this chain, and
    even shops belonging to other music chains. (Virgin, to be precise.)
    I know not many people actually take any notice of the charts nowadays,
    but the fact that this chart must be compiled from a majority of one
    chain is worrying.
    
    	Lee.

         
    Yes, I agree.
         
    I've been "faithfully" buying my records from 'Listen' in Reading
    town centre for years, but I'm now faced with an awkward predicament:
    Do I continue to buy from a shop which I am pretty sure is not on
    the survey, thus continuing my loyalty to the shop but depriving
    the writer of his chart rank, or do I go and buy my music from the 
    larger stores - who have less of a stock of my interest in music - 
    and get the band "one more sale", but at the same time reduce sales
    from my local friendly store.                                      
                                                                       
    Hmmm..                                                             
         
    -Tony

    
    
    
    You're dead right, Tony.
    
    I don't know which record shops are polled, but I'm sure what's
    in the chart is not a true representation of what's being bought.
    
    I'm sure we've all heard stories of record companies 'bulk buying'
    from selected stores to ensure a particular release gains vital
    chart entry.
    
    And make no mistake, whether or not you value the top 40, chart
    success can have a vital bearing on an artist's commercial success
    in not only the singles but albums market also.
    
    A more sinister aspect to this business is the infamous Radio 1
    'play list'.  Every week a group of people in the BBC decide which
    of the new releases will be played on Radio 1.   If a record doesn't
    make this list, it doesn't have a hope. (unless they actually ban
    it for some reason)
    
    
    The whole system stinks rotten.
    
    
    Michael
    

             
    Well, my mother is the record librarian for our local radio station
    (you know the one!).  She is responsible for the playlist, but when 
    she writes up the list, she has to go and show it to the controller
    to get his O.K.  Otherwise, it isn't used.
                                       
    There are certain records that are doing real well even in the Gallop
    charts that get very little or no airplay because they don't conform
    to the norm, or because Br*s-ettes or kylie fanatics aren't going,to
    go out in their thousands to buy it.  An example of this is the rock
    ballad "Sweet Child o'Mine" by Guns 'n Roses.  O.k, granted its not 
    everybody cup of tea as far as music goes but it was selling well.  
    Our local radio station refused to put it on the playlist because it
    was (and I quote) "too heavy".                   
                                                     
    sigh..                      
                                
    -Tony                       
    
    BTW - if you ever here 'Marianne' mentioned on the station - THATS
    MY MOM!!! :-)                    

    
    
  >>  anyway, I was eternally grateful that I was saved from having 
  >>  that rubbish played to me.
   
    
    That's not the point!   *Somebody* obviously wanted to hear it.
    If you don't like it, switch off.  I for one object to somebody
    'screening' what I should hear (or see for that matter, but we won't
    go down that rathole here)
     
    
    Michael
    

    >>    The whole system stinks rotten.

    In talking about who gets airplay, is 'payola' very prevalent
    in the UK radio market, you know, being bribed to play certain
    songs?  I would think that being given 'incentive' to play certain
    music would carry more weight with program directors than any
    arbitrary chart of record sales.
    
    Sue

    
    It MUST be prevalent. Why else would every DJ get so worked up about
    a chart that means nothing outside of an index to the profit the
    record companies can expect from their product? And NOBODY gets
    so excited about ANYTHING (and I mean anything) as does a DJ with
    a new record he wants to plug. If they're not on the take, then
    they need serious therapy.
    
    Richard.

    
    
       I'm sure that the "record Pushers" are given an amount of cash
      to get records airplay, not necessarily cash in the hand for the
      DJ's but other nice little perks.
    
    
    
    		Grub......

    Witness Holly Johnson's latest record.   Unfortunately although
    I'm loathed to admit it - if you take a look in Woolies or
    WH Smiths one day and watch what the 14-17 girls are buying
    (for it is only they who buy singles any more) then you will
    discover why Rick, Bros and Kylie are up amongst the stars.
    I agree with Keith that the radio "playlist" concept is the most
    worrying aspect of the charts.