
Back when Chartsengrafs was a regular feature (you never know, it may yet reappear), I celebrated Oasis failing to reach number one with the first single from their new album, and began by noting 'The first single from a new Madonna album will go to number one (unless it's "American Life"). The first single from a new U2 album will go to number one (unless it's "Stay"). And the first single from a new Oasis album will go to number one... unless it's "The Shock of the Lightning"'
I would love to similarly celebrate the second statement there being proved wrong, as U2's laughable "Get on Your Boots" has failed to even make the top ten, but at this point it's clear that there's something else going on. Just like Oasis, their album is still selling bucketloads in the usual fashion despite reviews that maintained grudging respect at best.
A couple more examples of the same pattern of failing single and successful album from long-established acts:
Morrissey went from two number 3 lead singles to "I'm Throwing My Arms Around Paris" recently stalling at 21, but the album was still 3 and not far below the last two for sales.
R.E.M. went from "Leaving New York" at 5 to "Supernatural Superserious" totally missing the top 40 last year. Even later singles from previous albums managed better than that. Yet Accelerate was still a number 1 album, just like its predecessor.
AC/DC came back with a number one album, but no sign of a charting single to support it.
So what's happening? Much of the success of such acts' lead singles was clearly down to large and long-established fanbases, not least because airplay for some of these was poor and publicity tended to be centred around the album even then. There weren't that many fans loyally buying every single though, or they wouldn't have all seen later singles from albums fare less well.
Although the album was undoubtedly the big deal for all of the above, the first single was a special case, a chance to own a song a couple of weeks early with a nice package and a couple of extra songs, for just a few quid. A chance which now looks a great deal less attractive, clearly. All still release CD singles but as finding them in shops becomes more and more difficult and their competition sell increasing numbers of downloads they don't have the power of before.
The single-buying audience has now very much switched to downloads and the previous U2 lead single buying audience has failed to make the switch with them. Either they are just not buying downloads at all (out-of-touch grandad jibes here) or, more likely, no longer seeing as much value in the purchase of a single that they are planning to get on an album anyway when it doesn't come as the same package as before. The fact that by time the single has released the album is likely to have already leaked may also have some impact here. I definitely buy far fewer singles than before although at least as many albums.
Rock acts that would previously have followed the pattern of more successful albums than singles can still overcome this effect. Look at Kings of Leon at number 1 for 4 weeks and Coldplay getting their first ever number 1 (not with the lead single, but that one's difficult to judge as they gave it away for free before selling). In both cases, with the songs continuing to sell despite album releases, it's clear that they got there by being bought by new fans, or at least those who weren't yet sure about buying the album. It takes airplay and exposure and positive reaction to mange that, not just fan loyalty. Which nicely brings us back to U2, who with all that prime time on TV maybe could have made a success of "Get on Your Boots" after all, if only it had actually been good.
There are two good opportunities to test the above trends coming up very soon, with comebacks from Pet Shop Boys and Depeche Mode. Both have consisently scored top ten albums and top ten lead singles regardless of the positivity of reaction to either. An added boost to PSB from their Brits performance notwithstanding, I expect the album record to hold true but would be surprised if the single one does.
Any thoughts or further examples/counterexamples welcome!
.
5 comments:
Looks like there's something in this, with the unprecedented low entry of the lead Depeche Mode single yesterday supporting your case. DM are a curious orb: despite having largely existed off the mainstream radar they have built a huge and loyal audience regardless.
This album is their first since Mute sold to EMI and the attendant publicity is much more than they've enjoyed in the past. Wrong is a strong single, backed by a genuinely shocking video which has been watched in excess of 2.25m times on You Tube, so one would presume a top ten placing, even if the single vanished the next week, would have been guaranteed only a few years ago.
Another example is Crowded House. They might never have been a big singles band - Don't Dream It's Over peaked at 27 IIRC - but whilst 2007's Time On Earth went in at #3, Don't Stop Now failed to chart in the top forty, which at least proves geography teachers and single women with cats don't buy singles.
If anything they showed it more dramatically than I expected, I expected a similar placing to Pet Shop Boys (#14) but I guess they got helped more than I realised by the Brits.
Thanks for the Crowded House example, not one I'd considered although it's not as easy a comparison since they weren't around for a while in between!
Doves getting a number 2 album and 28 single (compared to #6 and #1 last time) also fits and they've not even been around as long.
er, #1 and #6, I mean.
Excellent blog post.
I was dumbfounded seeing Depeche enter at #24 considering all their previous "lead singles" having gained healthy top ten positions.
Didn't realise other "album acts" were also going the same way.
Time to send your paper off to New Scientist: Sounds of the Universe debuts today at #2 in the UK album charts, their biggest hit since 1997's Ultra and matching Violator. Traditionally DM albums don't hang around long once the hardcore have rushed to buy it, but it'll be interesting to see how it does next week with a rare telly appearance on Jools Holland Tuesday and Friday.
Post a Comment