|
|
Post by #Infinity on Jan 14, 2018 16:49:43 GMT 10
I was thinking of this idea while riding in my car earlier today. While we usually rely on the pop singles chart to measure the popularity and relevance of music, there are occasionally instances in which a particular song is clearly a huge phenomenon in one country, yet makes a completely underwhelming performance on the charts, which would erroneously suggest that it either tanked or made no real impression on the general public whatsoever. Sometimes, this can be the result of said track's life and form of consumption existing primarily outside of physical sales or radio airplay, while in other cases, it's maybe either more enduring in retrospect or whose success was too gradual and stretched out to ever enjoy one particular week during which it peaked high up on the charts. Whatever the case, to kick off this thread, here are a few songs that I remember being a huge deal yet "flopped" on a commercial level:
With one of the most famous music videos of the '90s and a general reputation as the Beastie Boys' greatest song, it comes as a total shock to me that "Sabotage" only charted at an underwhelming #18 on the Modern Rock Tracks chart and #15 on the Bubbling Under Hot 100 Singles chart in the United States. While it did reach #19 in the UK, it was certainly way, way more significant in the US than its chart placement would lead you to believe.
Similar sentiments can made about "So What'cha Want," which made it only to a pathetic #93 on the Billboard Hot 100 yet is also just as famous as "(You Gotta) Fight for Your Right (To Party!)" and "Intergalactic," both of which were solid top 40 hits, and it still pops up a lot on the radio.
This was just barely a top 40 hit in the United States in 1995, but if you were actually there in the '90s, you'd most likely recognize it as one of the single most iconic dance songs of the decade. It was an enormous staple of sporting events, to the point where that synth riff would often start playing in my head just by merely thinking about basketball.
Considering everybody knew this song back when it came out, you'd never guess that it only peaked at #40 in the United States, in spite of its high placement in most other countries. Like "Get Ready for This," much of this song's popularity was a result of its use at sporting events alongside much older songs like "We Will Rock You," but even so, it's pretty astounding that it technically did worse than plenty other songs at the time that were considered flops and which hardly anybody can recall anymore.
In spite of what I said about S Club 7's big anthems not being hits in the US, it seems like a lot of Americans actually do recognize plenty of their songs besides just "Never Had a Dream Come True." Like I said, my younger sister was into a lot of their international hits as a kid and exposed me to them while they were still fairly new, but it's evident that such sentiments extend beyond just her over here. Even though this group was technically a one-hit wonder in America, they were primarily recognized for their television series anyway, and while it obviously wasn't as big as Dawson's Creek or Lizzie McGuire or anything, it still made an impression on a fair number of early 2000s tweens in the US, regardless. I just performed the song above at a karaoke session earlier this week, and the people next to me running the DJ booth were able to sing along to it.
Actually, the disparity between S Club 7's lack of pop single success versus overall popularity was even more pronounced in Canada, where they didn't have a single hit song, yet their first album from 1999, S Club, went Double Platinum there and their 2000 followup, 7, was certified Platinum. It certainly goes to show that you don't necessarily need to dominate the airwaves to sell lots of albums, similar in a sort of way to purely album-oriented LPs like those pushed by the progressive rock bands of the '70s. Not that I intend to compare S Club 7 to King Crimson or Pink Floyd on an artistic level, obviously, but you get the idea.
SharksFan99 likes this
|
|
|
|
Post by longaotian on Jan 14, 2018 18:01:25 GMT 10
Also, remember songs which were not officially released in a country but still received a lot of AirPlay so were not reflected on the charts
|
|
|
|
Post by SharksFan99 on Jan 14, 2018 20:46:31 GMT 10
Nice idea for a thread #Infinity ! This is a topic I have thought about on numerous occasions, however I have never got around to creating it. "Come With Me Now" received quite a lot of airplay back in 2014, yet it only peaked at a measly #94 on the ARIA Chart. It's strange, because it was even used in station promos and other TV advertisements. I'm surprised at how well it performed in the US, given that it amazingly charted at #31 on the Billboard Hot 100. It was also very successful in Canada, with the song peaking at #7 on the Canadian Hot 100. I remember "Blurry" being a radio hit when I was 4 years old, despite the fact that it only managed to peak at #52 on the ARIA Chart. I'm really surprised that it didn't peak within the Top-50. It's a shame, because it's a fairly decent song and much better than "She Hates Me"; the latter having peaked at #9 on the ARIA Chart and stayed on the chart for 23 weeks. I guess Australia simply chose to embrace the "grungier"-sounding song. 
|
|
|
|
Post by #Infinity on Jan 15, 2018 6:07:28 GMT 10
Like a lot of these songs, "The Dope Show" is yet another track with piss poor chart performance in the US, yet actually a pretty solid peak in the UK, at #12. It missed the Billboard Hot 100 and didn't even make it to the top 10 of either the Mainstream Rock chart, nor the Modern Rock Tracks chart. You could argue Marilyn Manson simply wasn't the type of band easy to promote in a stuck-up mass market, but this song's decent performance in Australia and the UK really points to how misrepresentative the American charts were at reflecting their popularity, considering they were obviously just as famous there and weren't like some obscure Britpop group or anything. It's worth noting that "The Dope Show" is featured on Weird Al's "Polka Power!," and that it's the only song in the playlist that didn't do extremely well on at least one of the charts there.
To be fair, I certainly wasn't hoping for this to perform well on the charts in any way, for pretty obvious reasons, but considering this song's music video has over 400 million views on YouTube and everybody following the pop industry knows about it, you'd certainly think it would peak higher in America that #59, a level comparable to newly-dubbed has-beens whose songs disappear just like that. This song didn't even do well in the UK, reaching only #37, although "Swish Swish" actually made it to #19 there. Ironically, France was one of the only countries where it was a legitimate smash hit, and they're typically the hardest market for imported music crack, arguably even more so than the US.
Considering how much of an earth-shattering legend this song is, you'd have to assume it was a #1 hit back when it came out...right? Well, nope, it performed only as well as "Blowing Kisses in the Wind" by Paula Abdul and fared worse on the Hot 100 than Bryan Adams' "Can't Stop This Thing We Started," Atlantic Starr's "Masterpiece," and even Mr. Big's "To Be with You," a #1 song by a hair metal band that was popular at the same time. Even though #6 is still a great peak for any single, far higher than any other proper grunge song in the US, it still obviously just doesn't add up. A part of me wondered if part of the issue was just that non-white audiences were generally not as receptive to grunge, so the media representation of grunge was just really skewed towards white kids from the MTV Generation, but again, if even whitbread pop rock like Mr. Big and Bryan Adams could outperform Nirvana at their height of popularity, then it merely points to how jarringly flawed the American charts have been since roughly the '90s.
|
|
|
|
Post by SharksFan99 on Jan 15, 2018 7:59:46 GMT 10
Considering how much of an earth-shattering legend this song is, you'd have to assume it was a #1 hit back when it came out...right? Well, nope, it performed only as well as "Blowing Kisses in the Wind" by Paula Abdul and fared worse on the Hot 100 than Bryan Adams' "Can't Stop This Thing We Started," Atlantic Starr's "Masterpiece," and even Mr. Big's "To Be with You," a #1 song by a hair metal band that was popular at the same time. Even though #6 is still a great peak for any single, far higher than any other proper grunge song in the US, it still obviously just doesn't add up. A part of me wondered if part of the issue was just that non-white audiences were generally not as receptive to grunge, so the media representation of grunge was just really skewed towards white kids from the MTV Generation, but again, if even whitbread pop rock like Mr. Big and Bryan Adams could outperform Nirvana at their height of popularity, then it merely points to how jarringly flawed the American charts have been since roughly the '90s. "Smells Like Teen Spirit" is a good example. Although, you could probably list any Grunge song as an example of this thread. For instance, "Black Hole Sun" by Soundgarden was one of the biggest hits of 1994 and i'm sure most people would recognize it if they heard it, yet it never charted on the Billboard Hot 100. It's surprising that Grunge never had a much bigger presence on the charts, given how popular and influential it was. Although, like you mentioned, I guess it's indicative of the questionable nature of the American charts, at least since the 1990s. That's interesting to hear. At least you are able to sing. I can't sing at all, even if I had wanted to. 
|
|
|
|
Post by longaotian on Jan 15, 2018 8:47:21 GMT 10
Considering how much of an earth-shattering legend this song is, you'd have to assume it was a #1 hit back when it came out...right? Well, nope, it performed only as well as "Blowing Kisses in the Wind" by Paula Abdul and fared worse on the Hot 100 than Bryan Adams' "Can't Stop This Thing We Started," Atlantic Starr's "Masterpiece," and even Mr. Big's "To Be with You," a #1 song by a hair metal band that was popular at the same time. Even though #6 is still a great peak for any single, far higher than any other proper grunge song in the US, it still obviously just doesn't add up. A part of me wondered if part of the issue was just that non-white audiences were generally not as receptive to grunge, so the media representation of grunge was just really skewed towards white kids from the MTV Generation, but again, if even whitbread pop rock like Mr. Big and Bryan Adams could outperform Nirvana at their height of popularity, then it merely points to how jarringly flawed the American charts have been since roughly the '90s. "Smells Like Teen Spirit" is a good example. Although, you could probably list any Grunge song as an example of this thread. For instance, "Black Hole Sun" by Soundgarden was one of the biggest hits of 1994 and i'm sure most people would recognize it if they heard it, yet it never charted on the Billboard Hot 100. It's surprising that Grunge never had a much bigger presence on the charts, given how popular and influential it was. Although, like you mentioned, I guess it's indicative of the questionable nature of the American charts, at least since the 1990s. See this is one of the exact reasons I don't like the 1990s for music. The decent stuff that actually did come out of the decade hardly had any chart presence while those that did take up the chart were actually pretty bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by SharksFan99 on Jan 15, 2018 9:17:34 GMT 10
"Smells Like Teen Spirit" is a good example. Although, you could probably list any Grunge song as an example of this thread. For instance, "Black Hole Sun" by Soundgarden was one of the biggest hits of 1994 and i'm sure most people would recognize it if they heard it, yet it never charted on the Billboard Hot 100. It's surprising that Grunge never had a much bigger presence on the charts, given how popular and influential it was. Although, like you mentioned, I guess it's indicative of the questionable nature of the American charts, at least since the 1990s. See this is one of the exact reasons I don't like the 1990s for music. The decent stuff that actually did come out of the decade hardly had any chart presence while those that did take up the chart were actually pretty bad. What '90s songs do you like?
|
|
|
|
Post by #Infinity on Jan 15, 2018 13:26:11 GMT 10
Considering how much of an earth-shattering legend this song is, you'd have to assume it was a #1 hit back when it came out...right? Well, nope, it performed only as well as "Blowing Kisses in the Wind" by Paula Abdul and fared worse on the Hot 100 than Bryan Adams' "Can't Stop This Thing We Started," Atlantic Starr's "Masterpiece," and even Mr. Big's "To Be with You," a #1 song by a hair metal band that was popular at the same time. Even though #6 is still a great peak for any single, far higher than any other proper grunge song in the US, it still obviously just doesn't add up. A part of me wondered if part of the issue was just that non-white audiences were generally not as receptive to grunge, so the media representation of grunge was just really skewed towards white kids from the MTV Generation, but again, if even whitbread pop rock like Mr. Big and Bryan Adams could outperform Nirvana at their height of popularity, then it merely points to how jarringly flawed the American charts have been since roughly the '90s. "Smells Like Teen Spirit" is a good example. Although, you could probably list any Grunge song as an example of this thread. For instance, "Black Hole Sun" by Soundgarden was one of the biggest hits of 1994 and i'm sure most people would recognize it if they heard it, yet it never charted on the Billboard Hot 100. Actually, the story is much more complicated with “Black Hole Sun.” Like a lot of rock songs released in the mid-90s, “Black Hole Sun’s” absence on the Billboard Hot 100 is entirely attributable to Billboard’s bullshit rules at the time, which completely disqualified songs from appearing on the Hot 100 simply because their release as a single didn’t match certain arbitrary guidelines. As a result, songs like “When I Come Around,” “Don’t Speak,” “Lovefool,” “I Could Fall in Love,” “Lightning Crashes,” “Plush,” “Zombie” (UPDATE: R.I.P., Dolores O'Riordan), “You Oughta Know,” “Buddy Holly,” and “Champagne Supernova” are all completely absent on the Hot 100, despite doing excellently on airplay charts such as the Mainstream Top 40 and Radio Songs charts. As for “Black Hole Sun,” it reached #24 on the Radio Songs chart and an impressive #9 on the Mainstream Top 40, so it was certainly not a lightweight hit when it came out. Perhaps a bigger example of grunge being poorly represented on the charts would be the tracks from Pearl Jam’s Ten. That record was popular at the apex of the grunge movement and is easily regarded to be Pearl Jam’s definitive album. Despite this, none of its songs made a splash on the Hot 100, nor the Radio Songs chart. “Jeremy” did fairly well on the Modern Rock Tracks and Mainstream Rock Tracks charts, while “Even Flow” was huge on the Mainstream Rock Tracks chart, but the lack of real hit singles from Ten still seems absurd, especially when you consider there were still quite a few hair metal songs at the same time, in 1992, that were big chart successes, like Def Leppard’s “Let’s Get Rocked,” FireHouse’s “When I Look into Your Eyes,” and the dull #1 ballad “How Do You Talk to an Angel,” which is maybe not full-on hair metal, but still has a vaguely ‘80s flavour to it. I can understand Guns N’ Roses’ “November Rain” outperforming most grunge songs in 1992, but why all the generic hair metal songs that nobody remembers anymore? Even Poison’s “Stand” did better on the charts than its grunge rivals, and it came out in early 1993. At least grunge was far outperforming hair metal on the Billboard 200, which measures album sales. It’s pretty obvious to me the Hot 100 has been fairly crappy since the ‘90s, especially compared to the UK Singles Chart, which generally allows a far larger number of songs of a far more diverse range of genres (Iron Maiden, for example, have buttloads of huge hit songs over there). In the United States, on the other hand, the charts are incredibly skewed towards the contemporary r&b genre, a distressing amount of it barely remembered whatsoever, even if it made the top 20 and landed on the Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles chart. To be fair, it seems like African Americans are still pretty likely to remember some of these r&b songs, such as “Freek’n You,” “Pony,” “Bump n’ Grind,” and “Freak Me,” but like come on, were these tracks seriously that much more consistently popular than all the “Come As You Are’s,” “Everlong’s,” and “Just a Girl’s” of the decade? It just doesn’t add up, especially considering how much worse contemporary r&b usually did on the Radio Songs and Mainstream Top 40 charts compared to their dominance over the Billboard Hot 100. I figure r&b is more likely to cross over to white audiences than rock crosses over to black audiences, but why else would rock music perform so much better in Australia and the UK, even though those countries also have sizable urban music followings, as well?To be fair, I’m far better at dancing with the music than actually singing it, but it’s still a ton of fun for me, regardless!
SharksFan99 likes this
|
|
|
|
Post by SharksFan99 on Jan 15, 2018 22:24:31 GMT 10
It’s pretty obvious to me the Hot 100 has been fairly crappy since the ‘90s, especially compares to the UK Singles Chart, which generally allows a far larger number of songs of a far more diverse range of genres (Iron Maiden, for example, have buttloads of huge hit songs over there). In the United States, on the other hand, the charts are incredibly skewed towards the contemporary r&b genre, a distressing amount of it barely remembered whatsoever, even if it made the top 20 and landed on the Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles chart. To be fair, it seems like African Americans are still pretty likely to remember some of these r&b songs, such as “Freek’n You,” “Pony,” “Bump n’ Grind,” and “Freak Me,” but like come on, were these songs seriously that much more consistently popular than all the “Come As You Are’s,” “Everlong’s,” and “Just a Girl’s” of the decade? It just doesn’t add up, especially considering how much worse contemporary r&b usually did on the Radio Songs and Mainstream Top 40 charts compared to their dominance over the Billboard Hot 100. I figure r&b is more likely to cross over to white audiences than rock crosses over to black audiences, but why else would rock music perform so much better in Australia and the UK, even though those countries also have sizable urban music followings, as well? Sorry for my delayed response. I had actually typed up a response earlier in the day, but because I was on the Spirit of Tasmania (a ship), my internet connection dropped out and I unfortunately couldn't recover my post. It's almost 11:30pm here and i'm going to go to bed soon, so I will properly respond to your post tomorrow if that's ok. 
|
|
|
|
Post by SharksFan99 on Jan 16, 2018 15:04:12 GMT 10
It’s pretty obvious to me the Hot 100 has been fairly crappy since the ‘90s, especially compared to the UK Singles Chart, which generally allows a far larger number of songs of a far more diverse range of genres (Iron Maiden, for example, have buttloads of huge hit songs over there). In the United States, on the other hand, the charts are incredibly skewed towards the contemporary r&b genre, a distressing amount of it barely remembered whatsoever, even if it made the top 20 and landed on the Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles chart. To be fair, it seems like African Americans are still pretty likely to remember some of these r&b songs, such as “Freek’n You,” “Pony,” “Bump n’ Grind,” and “Freak Me,” but like come on, were these tracks seriously that much more consistently popular than all the “Come As You Are’s,” “Everlong’s,” and “Just a Girl’s” of the decade? It just doesn’t add up, especially considering how much worse contemporary r&b usually did on the Radio Songs and Mainstream Top 40 charts compared to their dominance over the Billboard Hot 100. I figure r&b is more likely to cross over to white audiences than rock crosses over to black audiences, but why else would rock music perform so much better in Australia and the UK, even though those countries also have sizable urban music followings, as well? That's a good point and I completely agree with you. I think there are several factors which determine the state of the Billboard Hot 100 and other Top-40 charts around the world. To be honest, I believe politics even play a part in factoring the Billboard Hot 100. America is more ethnically diverse than both the UK and Australia. If chart music was purely determined by CD sales/downloads, there would possibly be an uproar from the African American community and people from other cultural backgrounds over the smaller presence of contemporary r&B. Rock music was still the most consumed genre of music in the US until last year, even though rock has largely been absent from the mainstream this decade. Also, when you consider that White Americans are the racial majority in the country and research has shown that rock is very popular among Caucasian listeners, it's understandable why the Billboard Hot 100 charts are skewed towards stereotypical "non-white" music. It would only create civil unrest in such a scenario that it wasn't, especially given how empowered the general population is now. If you don't agree with something, you can easily share your views on social media and millions of people can potentially come across it. Could you imagine the unrest/retaliation that would be generated, if the mainstream music charts were skewed towards stereotypical "white" music? I think the main reason why the Billboard Hot 100 has been skewed towards contemporary r&B since the '90s (which is ironic, given hip-hop's rise in popularity in the Early '90s), is because it maintains order and peace. By skewing towards contemporary r&b, it creates the desired message that America is accepting and embracing of other cultural backgrounds. It's a power play. While it is a shame that the music charts are no longer a true accurate reflection of the most popular songs, it's understandable why the charts are the way they are and given the political unrest that already exists in the country, it is probably the best outcome for all concerned.
|
|
|
|
Post by #Infinity on Jan 16, 2018 17:09:27 GMT 10
It’s pretty obvious to me the Hot 100 has been fairly crappy since the ‘90s, especially compared to the UK Singles Chart, which generally allows a far larger number of songs of a far more diverse range of genres (Iron Maiden, for example, have buttloads of huge hit songs over there). In the United States, on the other hand, the charts are incredibly skewed towards the contemporary r&b genre, a distressing amount of it barely remembered whatsoever, even if it made the top 20 and landed on the Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles chart. To be fair, it seems like African Americans are still pretty likely to remember some of these r&b songs, such as “Freek’n You,” “Pony,” “Bump n’ Grind,” and “Freak Me,” but like come on, were these tracks seriously that much more consistently popular than all the “Come As You Are’s,” “Everlong’s,” and “Just a Girl’s” of the decade? It just doesn’t add up, especially considering how much worse contemporary r&b usually did on the Radio Songs and Mainstream Top 40 charts compared to their dominance over the Billboard Hot 100. I figure r&b is more likely to cross over to white audiences than rock crosses over to black audiences, but why else would rock music perform so much better in Australia and the UK, even though those countries also have sizable urban music followings, as well? That's a good point and I completely agree with you. I think there are several factors which determine the state of the Billboard Hot 100 and other Top-40 charts around the world. To be honest, I believe politics even play a part in factoring the Billboard Hot 100. America is more ethnically diverse than both the UK and Australia. If chart music was purely determined by CD sales/downloads, there would possibly be an uproar from the African American community and people from other cultural backgrounds over the smaller presence of contemporary r&B. Rock music was still the most consumed genre of music in the US until last year, even though rock has largely been absent from the mainstream this decade. I would actually say it's completely the other way around – rock songs have tended to perform much better on airplay charts, whereas r&b and urban music does better in singles sales. My major guess as to why contemporary r&b did so well in the '90s is that its main forms of consumption were at a distinct advantage over other genres of music, namely that r&b sex jams were designed to be played at home or at a hotel at a specific time, meaning you'd need to go out and buy the single to appreciate it, whereas rock songs could simply be accessed and appreciated in far broader contexts, especially with technology and business structures evolving compared to the '80s and earlier. Well, either all that, or Billboard was just unfairly biased in weighing the impact each respective sub chart had on the Hot 100.Is the recent spike of white rappers in the mainstream really that controversial? I mean, I really don't want to overemphasize the cultural separatism between "white" rock music and "black" r&b music, since it's pretty obvious there's a lot of crossover appeal between the two. It's more just that whatever Billboard did to its charts upon entering the '90s really overcomplicated the American charts in a way they never were before, to the point that the Hot 100 became largely a representation of only a narrow demographic. It's not just a racial thing, because like I said, hair metal bands like FireHouse and Poison were still significantly outperforming grunge bands like Pearl Jam and Nirvana even in 1992 and early 1993, when grunge was supposedly an utter phenomenon and hair metal was suddenly seen as extremely uncool.Frankly, black music has done excellently on the charts since the advent of Motown in the 1960s and has never fallen out of favour since. That said, it seems really obvious that acts like Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder, The Supremes, Kool & The Gang, and the Jackson 5 were far more impactful and definitive to their respective decades' culture in general than Silk, Dru Hill, Xscape, and Blackstreet were to the '90s, even though the latter groups were pretty much just as successful according to the Hot 100. When people think of the '90s, they may be likely to recall 2Pac, Biggie, Nirvana, Mariah Carey, Alanis Morissette, and other artists like that, but many other artists basically vanished into obscurity after their peaks, not necessarily leaving any larger impact than "Sabotage" or "Would?" did at the same time.
|
|
|
|
Post by #Infinity on Jan 17, 2018 5:11:41 GMT 10
Same story as usual: an alternative rock anthem that everybody knew when it came out, yet it mostly charted poorly in America, despite doing really well in the UK. To be fair, it at least did better on the charts than stuff like “Jeremy” and “Sabotage,” since it reached #1 on the Modern Rock Tracks chart, but seeing as the Hot 100 is supposedly the list everybody cares most about, it deserved far better than #76, seeing as it made it to the top 10 in Italy, Germany, and the UK.
|
|
|
|
Post by rainbow on Jan 20, 2018 14:55:27 GMT 10
Good idea for a thread!
I remember back in early 2017 when the song "iSpy" by Kyle was everywhere, but I don't remember it making the top billboards.
|
|
|
|
Post by SharksFan99 on Jan 24, 2018 0:24:41 GMT 10
In Australia, this is arguably the biggest example of this thread in chart history. "Chasing Cars" was a Top-10 in many countries around the world, yet it only peaked at a measly #53 here in Australia. Yet, despite this, it was one of the biggest hits of 2006 and it even topped the "Digital Downloads" chart for several weeks. The reason for this, was that ARIA did not allow the song to appear on the chart, due to the singles chart only being based on physical sales at the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by SharksFan99 on Feb 11, 2018 9:28:45 GMT 10
This song resulted in the band being nominated for the "Australian Artist of the Year" award and judging by the reception at 2:48 in this video, you'd think it was one of the biggest hits of the year. Quite impressive for a song that only peaked at #49 and stayed on the chart for just one week. Interestingly enough, "You Are Not My Friend" actually performed better on the charts in New Zealand than it did in Australia (it peaked at #44 over there). Although, I doubt it was as popular as it was in Australia, despite what the charts suggest. Powderfinger were one of the most popular rock bands of the 2000s here in Australia and this is one of their well-known songs. Yet, when it was released back in 1996, it only managed to peak at #39 and stay on the charts for just four weeks. This single is actually from their mainstream breakthrough album; Double Allergic. Despite it's position on the charts, it continues to receive regular airplay on radio. Same story as usual: an alternative rock anthem that everybody knew when it came out, yet it mostly charted poorly in America, despite doing really well in the UK. To be fair, it at least did better on the charts than stuff like “Jeremy” and “Sabotage,” since it reached #1 on the Modern Rock Tracks chart, but seeing as the Hot 100 is supposedly the list everybody cares most about, it deserved far better than #76, seeing as it made it to the top 10 in Italy, Germany, and the UK. Considering how popular the song was in the US, it's amazing to think that it didn't at least chart within the Top-50. It's strange, because the song likely would have received good CD/download sales. Good idea for a thread! I remember back in early 2017 when the song "iSpy" by Kyle was everywhere, but I don't remember it making the top billboards. I just googled the song and it apparently reached #4 on the Billboard Hot 100. It actually charted better in the US than it did on other Top-40 charts around the world.
|
|
