1976 Billboard Disco Compilation Consensus Charts!!!

[markydefad]

Originally Posted by sfbeary

Well, I think the function of a yearly chart is to reflect what happened in that year. Simple as that. Once you introduce other elements from other years, your chart becomes distorted. I understand the concern that hit records with hot streaks that straddle two years will seem smaller, but if you include data from a previous (and even the next) year, your results no longer mirror what happened in the year you're documenting.

Say a record was really big in 1975, but dropped off the chart after one week in 1976. You'd have to include all of 1975's total in the 1976 chart, and then you've got a record that was much bigger in 1975 in your 1976 chart moving higher up the chart than records that were actually bigger in 1976. And then the same thing would happen with records that were actually bigger in 1977.

See what I mean?

I certainly do. But that's the way Billboard did it...and although I really didn't like seeing hits from the previous year in the following year's best list--I understood why they did it....as time goes by, I see they started listing certain records in 2 different year's charts.

OK, this will keep it concise and be the alternative to how Billboard compiled their year-end charts. So just use the points earned within a specific year in their rankings. I can always make a note that a certain number of points were earned the previous year, can't I?

Thanks for the input, Barry. Thanks to the thoughtful responses from Stephen, drlove and remicks also. remicks, your suggestion of doubling the point totals of the titles from the 6-chart era might be a good way to bring those totals in line with the post 9/76 charts if and when I ever get to compile a Disco's Greatest Hits list documenting all the years of Billboard chartings. OR maybe I could compile one cumulative list and bring it forward each year adding new titles as the years progress? Ah, a new project! [actually, I kinda did that at the end of the 6 chart system...using the 3 retailer's lists from Oct. 1974 - Aug. 1976...I compiled a master list of hits from the whole era....it's in the middle of this thread somewhere at the end of August....the Trammps were #1, quelle surprise!!!]

[tmob]

Originally Posted by remicks

One thing I am VERY disappointed with is that certain regions took their reporting so casually as to repeat a previous week's chart . Grounds for dismissal right there...

Don't automatically assume that it was the fault of the reporter(s) in a particular region. The Billboard chart department was far from infallible. Particularly in the early days and in the smaller markets that might have only had a couple of reporting DJs, when a reporter's chart got lost/misfiled/whatever at the magazine, they'd tend to reuse the previous week's chart.

[markydefad]

tmob,

What's your opinion on the preferred way to compile the 1976 year-end chart? I'm curious how you would do it.

[tmob]

Originally Posted by markydefad

tmob,

What's your opinion on the preferred way to compile the 1976 year-end chart? I'm curious how you would do it.

I guess I'm in with the others on doing a strict January-December chart calculation, and not worrying about the "straddlers." Barry's point about a song that charts at the end of '76 but gets most of its play in '77 is well made.

I also agree with using 6 of the most influential cities (NY, LA, Chicago, SF, Miami and Boston or Philadelphia, perhaps?) to extrapolate for the partial 16-chart period.

Whichever method you choose, I'm eagerly looking forward to it...

[markydefad]

Thanks tmob. What about this scenario---a record charts on 6 charts--but NONE of them are from the 6 influential cities being used--what do I do then? As long as it's not more than 6 charts, just use the data no matter which charts it comes from or somehow adjust the points to lessen its impact?

There are those "Play That Funky Music" type-records that were massive in the non-influential cities' charts..... but got no play in the major cities like NYC.

Just tryin' to pick the brains of you guys before I start this.

[STEPHEN L FREEMAN]

Originally Posted by markydefad

There are those "Play That Funky Music" type-records that were massive in the non-influential cities' charts..... but got no play in the major cities like NYC.

Just tryin' to pick the brains of you guys before I start this.

At the risk of repeating myself, or stating the same approach in yet another way, as is being done...

With regards to the lesser-influencial cities v. the biggies:

As I'd said, you're dealing with 1976. There were few actual Discos, outside of the larger cities at that point in time. I know... I worked in one of the first suburban Disco's, within 50 miles outside of NYC. And it opened in late summer/early autumn of 1976.

Other than The Comeback in Nyack (where I was)... There were barely a handful of actual Discos outside of NYC. We had The Sting, in White Plains. The Bell, in Riveredge, NJ. And The Playroom, in Yonkers. That was it, until 1977. (I reiterate from past postings: From 1975 - 1977, club equipment and lights were, at that time, extremely expensive! Opening a Disco, as opposed to the usual Jukebox-dance-floor bar, was a multi-partner/financier undertaking.)

Your smaller city charts are culled from considerably smaller pools of information. (ie: "Play That Funky Music" did better in smaller cities because it was a pop-music/dance-crossover recording. By 1976, the larger cities' clubs had patrons who were more open-minded to unknown Disco releases. And didn't need/want their evenings' programming tempered with pop-releases. These patrons were part of the elite, new underground. (Disco was the revolution. Not the trend. It was the {God, forgive me...} Hip-Hop of it's day.) This is true, even on a major city-to-suburban ratio. Again... I speak from experience. I lived/played it.) It's safe to stick with the larger cities' charts, with regards to 1976, simply because that's where your multiple clubs were, as well as the bulk of your Disco record sales. (You didn't drive to Connecticut to buy records. You drove into Manhattan, where the Disc-O-Mats, and Downstair Records, etc. were located.) The larger cities' charts were influence by much larger retail action. And more, actual dance-floors. (I worked for ABC Records Retail, just about 25-30 miles outside Manhattan, in 1976. I filled-out those weekly feedback/order forms. "Disco" wasn't even a category for stocking shelves, until close to 1978. Until then, it fell under "Soul/R&B", on the retail order sheets.)

If we were talking about late '77, and further on... The information resources would have to be considered much wider. But keep in context the times as they were. 1976 For the lion's-share of it's sales and popularity, Disco was still a mostly urban phenomenon.

To be completely comprehensive would, not only be nearly-impossible, it would also be factually flawed, with respect to the final tallies, in their reflection of the actual times.

PHEW! I guess I'd sum it up with "Keep It Simple!" At that point in time, 1976, it still was.

[STEPHEN L FREEMAN]

Oooh!!! Oooh!!! Afterthought!

If it can be done through Internet search... Find out which cities had dedicated DISCO radio stations. Or, at least, stations with shows dedicated to DISCO music programming, by the end of 1976.

Guaranteed, that would narrow-down your list, as to which cities' programmers were considering it a sociological and profitable phenomenon. As opposed to those that were "along for the ride".

[markydefad]

Thanks for the input Stephen. I agree with your points. I did a parallel track rundown of the mid-summer/early fall hits that were part of both the 6 chart & the 16 chart systems last night. Using the 6 cites of most consensus point totals versus the 6 best point totals from any city for all those records, for the most part, the 6 most influential cities gave me the best results.

Exception: "Getaway"--another of the radio records you were discussing--ended up with something like 46 points using the 6 most influential versus something in the 300-400 range using the most points from any city.

So, I think I see what I have to do... there will be a few titles that need to be compiled using the best score versus the most influential city scorings--but I can adjust those few.

Now I ask how to deal with whole LP vs. individual titles....in the old 6 chart system, LPs by The Trammps, Dr. Buzzard's Original Savannah Band, Donna Summer, Salsoul Orchestra, Tavares etc. were sometimes charted as (entire LP)...but when the switch to the national chart took place--individual titles from those LPs were charted....

Would you just bundle everything from the LP into the chart ranking--or try to break them down by title? This mostly applies to Dr. Buzzard....I'm thinking I should do something like the LP title featuring key tracks by title...or something like that?

Does the Dr, Buzzard;s OSB LP featuring "Cherchez La Femme/Sour & Sweet/ I'll Play the Fool" get one ranking...or do I break it down into 3 rankings by song title? I usually like to break it down because one title is usually the dominant one--but in this case and with The Trammps....it feels like I should just list the whole LP as one item

What do you think guys?

[markydefad]

Maybe some of you aren't aware of this list I compiled as I did the national charts... but I think this tells the story of which cities got it and which didn't..


Updated ranking of cities with the
most Billboard National Top 10 Disco Chart titles
in their weekly Top 15 city rankings:

(160 points would be a perfect score = 10 items per week x 16 weeks)

1) Baltimore-DC (132 points out of a possible 150)
2) New York City (127 points)
3) Miami (125 points)
4) Boston (124 points)
5) LA-San Diego (124 points)
6) Chicago (119 points)
7) Atlanta (118 points)
8. Philadelphia (113 points)
9) Houston (111 points)
10) San Francisco (110 points)
11) Phoenix (94 points)
12) Detroit (84 points)
13) Pittsburgh (80 points)
14) Denver (57 points)
15) Montreal (50 points)
16) Seattle ( 50 points) [chart not printed for 2 weeks; so point tally for only 14 weeks]
17) *New Orleans (*3rd chart week with 17 points)

[remicks]

****

OK before you move on completely .... can I have one more stab at this ?? And please understand that my interest here is in your getting the best results for all your hard work Marky....And since it is indeed your hard work that's required ...... WHATEVER you decide will be Okie Dokey.

----This was typed before your last post Marky based on Stephen's post :

Originally Posted by STEPHEN L FREEMAN

To be completely comprehensive would, not only be nearly-impossible, it would also be factually flawed, with respect to the final tallies, in their reflection of the actual times.

Stephen, I see why you feel this way ... but it could also be said that using all possible input would be the way to provide a tally that would best reflect the actual times ....


Yes certainly NYC was the hub and probably was all the way thru 1980 for that matter ... but Marky is calculating these songs based on the Billboard charts that went beyond that and he has been using them weekly for his tabulations. To use them for each weeks' totals ...and then not for the year-end ones seems to me to not line up.

Yes NYC was DISCO central ....but I think Billboard's point in part was that this scene was happening nationally... and the proof is in their charts. Billboard found the input of these various regions credible and worthy of the additional effort it took the magazine to collect them . And how the scene varied ( and yet was also the same ) depending on where you were ... gives a broader sense of the American disco scene in its totality... which I think would be important for the calculations to reflect.

Just because we personally weren't in Houston at the time doesn't mean they didn't have their disco going on .
In this regard --- I had a close friend during this very year of 1976 ... (& he was sooo disco that the SF clubs would limit his entering of their dance contests because he always won ) ....who would go home to Phoenix and come back and rave about how good the music there was . .

My thinking is that it is a shame to lose any of the information we are so fortunate Billboard bothered to gather. Doing so is what would make the totals factually flawed ... imo.

Of course the big problem remains how to bring together these two compilation methods so that they are equitable ....in that regard using only the original six regions for the whole year would be a solution

One issue ....Billboard rotated certain regions .... there was not a fixed six each week .... so .... Marky if you reduce it to six regions .... which six ?? .........Which 10 are not worthy



OK, let the eggs fly !



*****

[markydefad]

remicks, I'm going to include EVERYTHING--EVERY TITLE from EVERY CHART.

It's just a problem with the BIG HIT TITLES where I need to pare down the points to a 6 chart limit so as not to have the top 40 be all records released in the second half of the year.

If a record didn't chart in the big 6 cities--I will still include it's points and rank it...so I'm not excluding anything--just looking for equality among the biggest players....looking at my work from last night, I think it works out quite well. I just have to pare down the last batch of titles from after September, to see how they fit into the final tally. But I was pleased with what I got last night...it seemed a good compromise of the Billboard & Record World year-end charts....not exactly the same as either, but with all the same titles, just rearranged.

But don't worry, every title from Phoenix and Montreal and Denver and Seattle, etc. will be listed...but the data from these cities will not be used to tabulate the big ones..... at least that's the way it appears now.

There are over 600 titles.... judging from last time, remember over half of those will have less than 100 points and half of those will have less than 20 points....so there's not a problem tabulating those.

[markydefad]

Originally Posted by remicks

****
One issue ....Billboard rotated certain regions .... there was not a fixed six each week .... so .... Marky if you reduce it to six regions .... which six ?? .........Which 10 are not worthy
*****

In 1975, the 6th and 7th chart, when they were printed--sometimes it was only 5-- were rotations of cities--but when the national chart was established in Sept. 1976, the cities are the same from week to week--except Denver got dropped in December and replaced by New Orleans.

Am I understanding you correctly?

[remicks]

Originally Posted by markydefad

remicks, I'm going to include EVERYTHING--EVERY TITLE from EVERY CHART.

cool!!

If a record didn't chart in the big 6 cities--I will still include it's points and rank it...

OK .... so what are the big 6 cities.........


*****

[markydefad]

Originally Posted by remicks

cool!!




OK .... so what are the big 6 cities.........


*****

I thought I made this clear...

Updated ranking of cities with the
most Billboard National Top 10 Disco Chart titles
in their weekly Top 15 city rankings:

(160 points would be a perfect score = 10 items per week x 16 weeks)

1) Baltimore-DC (132 points out of a possible 160)
2) New York City (127 points)
3) Miami (125 points)
4) Boston (124 points)
5) LA-San Diego (124 points)
6) Chicago (119 points)


I originally thought I would use San Francisco--but they were too trendy-- like the old retailers in NYC that dropped the hits in favor of what was new.

When you aren't charting the number one record in the country [think Donna Summer's "Four Seasons Of Love"] in your top 15--then you are "too kewl for skewl" and performing as a trendsetter but not as a representative of what is happening across the country. Capiche?

[remicks]

Originally Posted by markydefad

I thought I made this clear...

Updated ranking of cities with the
most Billboard National Top 10 Disco Chart titles
in their weekly Top 15 city rankings:

(160 points would be a perfect score = 10 items per week x 16 weeks)

1) Baltimore-DC (132 points out of a possible 150)
2) New York City (127 points)
3) Miami (125 points)
4) Boston (124 points)
5) LA-San Diego (124 points)
6) Chicago (119 points)


I originally thought I would use San Francisco--but they were too trendy-- like the old retailers in NYC that dropped the hits in favor of what was new.

When you aren't charting the number one record in the country [think Donna Summer's "Four Seasons Of Love"] in your top 15--then you are "too kewl for skewl" and performing as a trendsetter but not as a representative of what is happening across the country. Capiche?

I guess what I didn't understand is that this is a sum total from all the weeks combined . I thought you were just posting the ranking results of a particular past week.

OK I understand .....but .... I don't think I like it !! .... Not using San Francisco as a primary chart especially !
I question if you risk homogenizing the results by choosing the regions that most match each other /most match the national Top 10. Plus the totals are not that far off ... i.e. .... you are choosing Chicago over Atlanta because of one point !


*****