• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

1980's number one songs

Could someone please give good insights as to why, during the period 1980 thru 1984, fewer than 20 songs made number one on the Hot 100 each year, but from 1985 onward thru '89, far more songs made #1 each year, as high as 32 for '88 and '89.

As far as I know, the chart methodology was basically the same throughout the 80's. In late 1991, there was a major change that significantly reduced the #1's (too few) beginning with 1992, with the demise of the 45 rpm single. 45's were readily available throughout the eighties.

It's almost overkill to hear that many songs making #1 in 1986 thru '89, just like in 1974 and 1975. I think a good, representative amount is 18 to 24 songs per year. Any thoughts?
 
I recall reading a complaint in Billboard magazine in the late '80s similar to what you are saying here, that nearly all the #1s of 1988 only stayed on top for one or two weeks, and that all of the ones that managed to stay on top for a second week lost their bullet.

But equally annoying (maybe even more so) was the long number one/short number one/long number one pattern of early 1982. Consider the following:

"Physical" by Olivia Newton-John (carryover from '81): long number one
"I Can't Go For That," Hall & Oates, short number one
"Centerfold," J. Geils Band, long number one
"I Love Rock & Roll," Joan Jett, long number one (broke the pattern! ;D)
"Chariots of Fire," Vangelis, short number one
"Ebony & Ivory" Paul McCartney/Stevie Wonder, long number one

Did anyone think "Chariots of Fire" really deserved to be #1?
 
That's really a subjective question for which there isn't a simple answer. But here are some thoughts. One could make the argument that the first half of the decade brought us superior hits with longer staying power, as evidenced by the number of songs which held on to the No. 1 spot for 5 weeks or more... Call Me, Bette Davis Eyes, Endless Love, Physical, Centerfold, I Love Rock & Roll, Billie Jean, Every Breath You Take, When Doves Cry. (There may be others; I don't have the list in front of me now). But that's a matter of personal preference.

Maybe there would have been more songs reaching No. 1, but the timing just worked against them as they were competing with those No. 1's. I'm sure "Waiting For A Girl Like You," or "Rosanna," or "Open Arms" would have gotten to No. 1 had they been out at some other time.

Radio itself seemed different during both halves of the '80s. The first half was more or less still very much a part of the old Top 40 era. The Hot Hits formula started around '81, which basically condensed the Top 40 to a more restricted version of 20 or so tunes. But a repetitive countdown of the same songs over and over was the main feature. Just a theory, but hearing these same songs lends itself to familiarity which, in turn, might have led to their longevity at the top of the charts. Hot Hits and Top 40 declined by the end of the decade, replaced by more fragmented specialty formats, such as lite hits or urban. Even country witnessed a movement away from pop (Kenny Rogers, Anne Murray) to the more traditional sounds of George Strait, Randy Travis, & the Judds. It was not uncommon for a Top 10 from, say, 1981 to contain pop, rock, country, & R&B songs; not so by the end of the decade.

The dawn of MTV also provided a vehicle for that longevity factor, keeping songs in the public eye visually in addition to audibly on the radio.

Yes, 45's were available throughout the '80s, but they did lose ground to album cuts & CDs considerably. Many stores stopped carrying 45s altogether, making room for those larger CD cardboard boxes, cassettes, and what remained of vinyl albums.

Personally, I knew radio and music was changing for good by the end of the '80s. That was when a song hit No. 1 on the Billboard chart, "My Prerogative" by Bobby Brown, and I had never heard it. By that time, with Top 40 gone, people just gravitated toward their format of preference.
 
Otto Maddock said:
One could make the argument that the first half of the decade brought us superior hits with longer staying power, as evidenced by the number of songs which held on to the No. 1 spot for 5 weeks or more.

I agree with your whole post, but this quote tells it all.

If you look at 1988 or 1989, did 20 to 30% of those 64 songs really have to be #1? Songs like "Man in the Mirror", "Where do Broken Hearts go", "Dirty Diana", "Love Bites", "Wild Wild West", "Blame it on the Rain", "I'll be there for you", "Rock on", "My Prerogative"...etc....Most of these are one weekers that really aren't superior hits. Probably why they are never heard on the radio anymore.

The monsters of the early 80's, like "Physical", "Eye of the Tiger", Call Me", Billie Jean", "Every Breath You Take"..etc...were very popular in their day, sold tons of 45's and probably deserved to be at #1 for so many weeks. Not too crazy about "Physical" and it's 10 week run, effectively ruining Foreigner's chance of reaching #1 with "Waiting For A Girl Like You"... a much better song. But what was popular in 1981? The fitness craze and Richard Simmons, John McEnroe and so forth.

Nothing really popular in the late 80's tied in with music, so maybe the hits were not as popular, with fast turnover at the top making for a large list of chart toppers in the late 80's.
 
firepoint525 said:
Did anyone think "Chariots of Fire" really deserved to be #1?

Yeah, but probably inspired by the fitness craze then..Chariots of Fire is a running song...sort of an inspiration to finish the race. I'd prefer it at #1, than some of the silliness at the end of the decade.

The only song I can really relate to at decade's end is "Another Day in Paradise", the last #1 song of the 80's. One of Phil's best and deservedly #1.

But "Batdance" and "Blame it on the Rain"......what can I say?
 
Oldies 76, you brought out some good points, but even in the examples you gave, you missed one other really important point.  Record companies were putting out singles in "rapid fire" succession in the late '80s.  In 1988 alone, Michael Jackson, George Michael, INXS, Whitney Houston, Def Leppard, and many others managed to keep a single on the chart for most of the entire year.  Though the singles turned over rather quickly, it seemed like there was always a followup waiting in the wings ready to go as soon as the previous single lost its bullet.  And this was in the era when it was common for a single album to generate four, five, or even six hit singles!

Michael Jackson had five #1s from BAD, versus "only" two from Thriller, but since the five from BAD were only one or two-weekers, the two from Thriller actually combined for a longer time (10 weeks total) at #1 than the combined total of the five from BAD.

And one that I thought didn't deserve to be #1 was "Seasons Change" by Expose.  Nothing against the song itself, but it actually lost its bullet the week before it went to #1!  It was #2 without a bullet, but still went to #1 the following week, because there was nothing competing with it!

My fave from '88 is still "Roll With It" from Steve Winwood, which spent four weeks at #1 (easily the longest running #1 of '88), and it still gets airplay today!  :) 8)
 
oldies76 said:
If you look at 1988 or 1989, did 20 to 30% of those 64 songs really have to be #1? Songs like "Man in the Mirror", "Where do Broken Hearts go", "Dirty Diana", "Love Bites", "Wild Wild West", "Blame it on the Rain", "I'll be there for you", "Rock on", "My Prerogative"...etc....Most of these are one weekers that really aren't superior hits. Probably why they are never heard on the radio anymore.

Exactly. Those songs aren't memorable. I'm sure if I heard them, I might say, "Oh yeah, I remember that." But those titles alone aren't instantly recognizable as the earlier hits are. Just mention "Physical" or "Eye of the Tiger" and everyone knows what you're talking about. But "Batdance"? Oh, was that a song? Anyway, by 1990 I was well on my way to finding a new appreciation for country and re-discovering the standards for the first time.

oldies76 said:
Not too crazy about "Physical" and it's 10 week run, effectively ruining Foreigner's chance of reaching #1 with "Waiting For A Girl Like You"... a much better song. But what was popular in 1981? The fitness craze and Richard Simmons, John McEnroe and so forth.

...and seeing Olivia bounce around in that little warmup suit! That sure didn't hurt sales.

oldies76 said:
Nothing really popular in the late 80's tied in with music, so maybe the hits were not as popular, with fast turnover at the top making for a large list of chart toppers in the late 80's.

Come to think of it, I can't recall any movies from the late '80s that had the same impact as Flashdance, Footloose, and Urban Cowboy.

That fast turnover could also have been the result of changing attitudes as a whole. With increases in technology, people seem to get bored quicker, always looking for something new, so maybe the late '80s brought the beginnings of the "been there, done that" mentality. But then, I can't explain the resurgence of the really lengthy runs at No. 1 in the '90s (I Will Always Love You; Macarena). Maybe the release of superior songs is cyclical... whether you like them or not, you have to admit they are memorable.
 
firepoint525 said:
Michael Jackson had five #1s from BAD, versus "only" two from Thriller, but since the five from BAD were only one or two-weekers, the two from Thriller actually combined for a longer time (10 weeks total) at #1 than the combined total of the five from BAD.

Here's my thinking on that. The runs of "Billie Jean" and "Beat It" more or less coincided with the initial release of the Thriller album. As time went by, and everyone on the planet owned that album, the subsequent singles didn't fare as well because people already had the songs. How else could the single "Thriller" not have made it to No. 1? It's release was probably close to a year after the album was out.
 
Otto Maddock said:
But then, I can't explain the resurgence of the really lengthy runs at No. 1 in the '90s (I Will Always Love You; Macarena). Maybe the release of superior songs is cyclical... whether you like them or not, you have to admit they are memorable.

I think it had to do with a reformulation of the way Billboard tallies up it's singles charts, specifically the Hot 100, probably due to the demise of the 45 by then. Yeah..."One Sweet Day" 16 weeks at #1, are you kidding? or even "I Swear" & "End of the Road"...etc..

Only 9 songs made #1 in 1994 vs. 32 songs in 1989. Even in 2002, just 7 songs made it. Crazy huh?
 
Otto Maddock said:
firepoint525 said:
Michael Jackson had five #1s from BAD, versus "only" two from Thriller, but since the five from BAD were only one or two-weekers, the two from Thriller actually combined for a longer time (10 weeks total) at #1 than the combined total of the five from BAD.

Here's my thinking on that. The runs of "Billie Jean" and "Beat It" more or less coincided with the initial release of the Thriller album. As time went by, and everyone on the planet owned that album, the subsequent singles didn't fare as well because people already had the songs. How else could the single "Thriller" not have made it to No. 1? It's release was probably close to a year after the album was out.
Thriller was released November of 1982 (I think), so "Billie Jean" and "Beat It" were the second and third singles from that album. The single "Thriller" did not make it to #1 (only #4), but even that was due to the amped-up hype over the ridiculously over the top video! ::)
 
oldies76 said:
If you look at 1988 or 1989, did 20 to 30% of those 64 songs really have to be #1? Songs like "Man in the Mirror", "Where do Broken Hearts go", "Dirty Diana", "Love Bites", "Wild Wild West", "Blame it on the Rain", "I'll be there for you", "Rock on", "My Prerogative"...etc....Most of these are one weekers that really aren't superior hits. Probably why they are never heard on the radio anymore.
This is kinda sorta similar to a point I made in the "late '80s re-release craze" thread, that those half-dozen or so singles that were re-issued in the late '80s time frame were re-released because they missed their shot at being hits in 1982-83 when most of them were originally released because they were (as I put it on that other thread) "crushed" by the Thriller juggernaut that was going on about that time. However, when these singles were reissued in the 1988-89 time period, the ones that went to #1 ("Red Red Wine" and "When I'm With You") each stayed only a week at #1, so they certainly continued the pattern that was in place in the late '80s.
The monsters of the early 80's, like "Physical", "Eye of the Tiger", Call Me", Billie Jean", "Every Breath You Take"..etc...were very popular in their day, sold tons of 45's and probably deserved to be at #1 for so many weeks. Not too crazy about "Physical" and it's 10 week run, effectively ruining Foreigner's chance of reaching #1 with "Waiting For A Girl Like You"... a much better song. But what was popular in 1981? The fitness craze and Richard Simmons, John McEnroe and so forth.
One could make the case that Foreigner got "robbed" when "Waiting For a Girl Like You" was forced to do some waiting of its own, at #2 for 10 weeks! :eek: I've never checked, but that has to be the longest run ever at #2 for a single that never went on to be a #1 hit. However, I could also be cynical here, and argue that "I Want to Know What Love Is" (which was a #1 hit) was actually the same song (as "Waiting") and that their 1987-88 single "I Don't Want to Live Without You" was actually the third re-write of that same ballad. All three songs are certainly very similar.
 
oldies76 said:
Otto Maddock said:
But then, I can't explain the resurgence of the really lengthy runs at No. 1 in the '90s (I Will Always Love You; Macarena). Maybe the release of superior songs is cyclical... whether you like them or not, you have to admit they are memorable.
I think it had to do with a reformulation of the way Billboard tallies up it's singles charts, specifically the Hot 100, probably due to the demise of the 45 by then. Yeah..."One Sweet Day" 16 weeks at #1, are you kidding? or even "I Swear" & "End of the Road"...etc..
Only 9 songs made #1 in 1994 vs. 32 songs in 1989. Even in 2002, just 7 songs made it. Crazy huh?
Beginning with the week of November 30, 1991 (the week of my 28th birthday), Billboard started using Broadcast Data Systems and Soundscan (whatever those are! ::)) to compile their chart data, and that is what resulted in singles not only having longer stays at #1, but overall longer runs on the charts, too. LeAnn Rimes stayed in the top 40 for well over a year with "How Do I Live"! I can't help but think that some money was passed under the table to keep such a lame song on the charts for so long! ::)
 
firepoint525 said:
One could make the case that Foreigner got "robbed" when "Waiting For a Girl Like You" was forced to do some waiting of its own, at #2 for 10 weeks! :eek: I've never checked, but that has to be the longest run ever at #2 for a single that never went on to be a #1 hit. However, I could also be cynical here, and argue that "I Want to Know What Love Is" (which was a #1 hit) was actually the same song (as "Waiting") and that their 1987-88 single "I Don't Want to Live Without You" was actually the third re-write of that same ballad. All three songs are certainly very similar.

Actually, those are my three favorite Foreigner songs. :) "Feels Like the First Time" and "Double Vision" are good ones too.

Regarding the longest at #2, another song tied Foreigner in 2002, "Work It" by Missy Elliott and actually there's a song that stayed at #3 for 11 weeks, "Another Night" by Real McCoy, but these are under new chart methodologies, unlike 1981.
 
I think the first half of the 80s was essentially the end of a mass culture music scene. A big hit was, still, really a "big hit;" something that both the kids and the adults would hear and recognize.

By the late 80s, Top 40 was no longer the mainstream, but a sub-genre, sitting alongside Modern Rock, Oldies, AOR, the new term "Classic Rock," hair metal... You couldn't really have a big hit, because you couldn't reach the entire populace anymore. Most of the big songs from that time that have stood the test of time were really sprung from a format OTHER than Top 40. Guns and Roses. (AOR) Depeche Mode and U2 (Modern) Def Leppard (AOR/Hair Metal) Achey Breaky Heart (Country)

It's still that way in the 90s and 00s. A few things slip through and get everyone's attention (Hey Ya, La Vida Loca, MMM Bop, Macarena, maybe Maroon 5) but most #1 songs are playing to a small group. The rest of the country is not hearing it.
 
every post has some good theories,and I agree with alot of those comments, especially the phenom of Michael Jackson, with some support from Prince, Madonna, in the early 80's , and the explosion of the Dance culture, had more staying power in that 80-85 time frame. Certainly the LP "Thriller" could be argued alone, was responsible for this question. As a fulltime Club DJ from 1978-2001 and from a standpoint of instant feedback that certainly was the case with "Thriller" which sold more records in 16 months than "Eagles Greatest Hits" which at that point was about 10 years in exsistence. It was incredible what impact Jackson, Prince and Madonna had on the dance culture and record sales. Billboard Hot 100 was still using several criteria for compiling and the popularity and residual effects, of Jackson, Prince and Madonna in 80-85 certainly influenced those charts. Eagles Grts Hits finally overtook Thriller a couple of years as the biggest seller of all time, again the album has been around since maybe 74.

.........In the early 90's Billboard went to total sales only as the methodology, If I am not mistaken, and groups like Boy 2 men, No Doubt, Mariah Carey were now spending 14-16 weeks at #1.....1994-1997 average of only 10 number songs ........2002 only 7 made it to number 1.
 
Actually, it was the release of 'Thriller' which changed both the method and number of singles which could be released from a single CD.

'Billie Jean' & 'Beat It' were released as singles less than three months apart; a superb article which appeared in Billboard shortly after MJ's death pointed out the fact that an unprecedented seven singles were released from 'Thriller', which changed the record industry's mindset regarding singles forever.

Otherwise, folks such as George Michael (his 'Faith' blockbuster was the first CD in history with six top five singles and four charttoppers), Def Leppard ('Hysteria' matched 'Thriller's avalanche of seven singles, including six top twenty tunes), and Janet Jackson ('Rhythm Nation 1814' upstaged 'Faith' with five charttoppers and seven top five singles) wouldn't have found their way into the record books.

Bruce Springsteen's 1984 epic 'Born In The USA' featured six singles, all of which reached the top twenty, IIRC.
 
Gotta give Springsteen credit here. He had seven singles from Born in the U.S.A., and put them all into the top 10!

Springsteen had 12 songs on Born in the U.S.A., and Michael Jackson had a total of nine on Thriller. Important to note that neither of them used other tracks on their respective albums for b-sides. Springsteen wrote and recorded separate non-album singles for b-side tracks (like "Pink Cadillac"), while M.J. either used tracks from earlier albums, or instrumental versions of the a-sides for his b-sides. The instrumentals might have been nice for anyone practicing karaoke, but Springsteen made his singles into collector's items.

I was not aware that there was an unwritten rule about only four singles per album prior to Thriller. I could certainly have seen Fleetwood Mac pulling more singles from their '70s albums like Rumors. "The Chain," "Gold-dust Woman," and "Landslide" still receive almost as much airplay as the singles from those albums.
 
Shania had twelve hits off of "Come Over"..she was on fire..and hot too.
 
How much of an influence did all of those motion picture soundtrack/music videos of the 1980's have on a song reaching #1? I recall from about 1985 up to 1989, almost every single movie had an accompanying soundtrack album/cassette on sale at the time of its release, "Breakfast Club", "Pretty in Pink", "Ferris B.'s Day Off", "Top Gun", "Dirty Dancin'", etc, etc,etc. Back then the exwife always complained about not being taken to the movies often enough. So I sat her down to watch WTBS "NightTracks" and after a few hours, she saw 3 to 4 movie high light clips in the music videos from the soundtrack album. And 99% of the time the movie scenes contained in the music videos were more concise and entertaining than wasting 2 hours sitting in front of an over-hyped, lame movie. Are motion picture still accompanied by those soundtrack compilations like they were in the 80's?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom