The blogs have been a twitter (see what I did there?) all day because of the announcement by Billboard that the Glee cast had surpassed the Beatles on individual songs that have charted on the Billboard Hot 100. Between my Twitter feed, a quick conversation on the CliqueClack hot-line, and a long IM conversation with fellow Clacker Carla, you’d think that this accomplishment was as meaningful as my dog’s music tastes.
Here’s a snippet from our conversation:
Carla: If [the press release] says Glee has more hits than the Beatles that is true. But, it is comparing apples and oranges.
Ivey: It is saying that the Glee cast has more appearances in the Billboard Hot 100 than the Beatles.
Carla: And, while that is true. My point is that it is not the same thing or equivalent.
~~
Carla: No, the Glee Cast is different than every other person/group in that list, but the groupings is only one component of that I am talking about. It’s about who sings, how they are produced, and also the songs they are singing.
Ivey: So … take the Beach Boys as an example. Most times they sang as a group, but sometimes, the songs were solos. Some time this guy sang, and some times the other guy sang. Should they not be considered together then?
~~
Carla: It isn’t about a song or two that are covers. It is about ALL the songs being covers. And, covers of songs that were already on the top 100.
Ivey: So, I guess I should pay less for the covers then … It shouldn’t count that these artists and producers have found a way to be successful.
So, from Carla’s perspective, the fact that “Glee Cast” is actually a bunch of different artists that have collectively released music together, and the fact that they’ve basically cribbed some of the more popular songs of all times to record, discounts the success. And, when she told me to shut up and stop talking to her, and I really re-read what she said, I can’t fault her point of view.
However, the numbers don’t lie. If we could take those 75 singles, and break them down by particular artists, say Lea Michelle, or the completed New Directions group together, then you would still have a great deal of individual singles, especially when you factor in the fact that the music has been released in the last 18 months. And the fact that these are all covers of already popular songs? That’s not the reason these singles are being downloaded, but because these artists are singing them. And isn’t that, in this particular case, the only thing that is being measured?
I’m not sitting here saying that the cast of Glee are better musical artists than the Beatles, or anyone else on that list, for that matter. I just think that its an impressive feat for this group of people. What do you think?
Clacked by Ivey West 
on Oct 07, 2010 @ 13:00 EST5EDT
I have Carla’s back on this 100%. She’s my voice.
You are right Ivey, autotuned Covers of Number 1 Hits by several people ob a TV Show with a Large range of backgrounds within a timeframe of 18 months is just the same as decades of music by four guys from Liverpool.
Don’t you stop believing that. Hold on to that dream, man!
*snicker*
Seriously man, did the Billboards also count all the singles of the four after the group broke up? I bet 100 bucks they didn’t and that that all that is going in here is PR
*POST AUTHOR*
I must be doing such a miserable job explaining my point, because everyone, be it at CliqueClack, or IMs with friends, or in this post, completely doesn’t get my point.
“… is just the same of decades of music by four guys from Liverpool.” All I’ve said, in this post, and in every other discussion, is that 75 charted songs is impressive. I quote myself, “I’m not sitting here saying that the cast of Glee are better musical artists than the Beatles, or anyone else on that list, for that matter. I just think that its an impressive feat for this group of people. What do you think?”
And as far as PR goes, this was a press release from Billboard, not from Fox, Ryan Murphy, or the show. The people that have tracked music for years just stood up and said, “Hey, this is pretty cool.”
All I did was agree.
I understand what you are trying to say but when people rather buy so-so covers of great hits and people who compile charts have nothing better to do than devalue their own ratings by saying “volume is king” then something is wrong. I think it’s depressing that these versions of the songs are sold in this volume. I know it sounds backwards and negative but wouldn’t it be better if sales of sheet music and playback versions as well as for the originals were through the roof?
This sounds so much like “Over 300 million served” – no matter WHAT was served.
Or, to put it more concisely: how many “written & performed” do you think there are in any given Glee-CD Booklet?
I get you, Ivey, and there doesn’t have to be a ton of debate about it, because who’s it hurting that Glee has a lot of hits? The Beatles sure don’t care, and individuals can decide for themselves if Glee “deserves” it or not.
After reading all the other musical acts topping Billboard, Glee’s success isn’t as annoying. At least mediocre covers of good songs surpassed The Beatles instead of crappy original songs from [insert the majority of “artists” that dominate music sales currently].
*POST AUTHOR*
I know, right? Lil Wayne is in the same top ten.
*POST AUTHOR*
Deb: Thank you. That’s a very good point :)
Sebastian: Keep in mind that there’s also something that I’ve heard called the Glee affect, which has seen significant increases in sales of the original tracks corresponding to use in any given episode. How much? Don’t know, but it is an upside from the other point of view.
Great, that’s what I was looking for :-)
I guess you simply can’t measure “People entering Glee clup in highschools everywhere” in amount of “Brit Pop bands surpassed” ;-)
https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101012/ap_en_tv/us_people_gorillaz
As a follow up.