jyllinge wrote:its better than Was It Worth It? #24 and he announced an european tour in january 2007. Thats the highlights!
Given the fact that Was it worth it? was exactly the same version as the one on the multi-selling Discography, that #24 is not half as bad as the result of Numb.
Some lessons:
- Never mutilate a great song to get more radio airplay; if it needs to be cut down SO radically, isn't probably not single material
- Write your own songs, you don't need Diane Warren
- Put something valuable on your cd's, rather than a live version of West End Girls; out on Concrete, one week later.
The song would have charted at 23, edit or not. It's quite simple really, Numb (whatever edit) was not a single.
dVTB wrote:Given the fact that Was it worth it? was exactly the same version as the one on the multi-selling Discography, that #24 is not half as bad as the result of Numb.
I don't get that. Numb's done shit but it's one higher than Was it worth it? so how can it be worse than Was it worth it??
dVTB wrote:Given the fact that Was it worth it? was exactly the same version as the one on the multi-selling Discography, that #24 is not half as bad as the result of Numb.
I don't get that. Numb's done shit but it's one higher than Was it worth it? so how can it be worse than Was it worth it??
Take the CIRCUMSTANCES into consideration! As I wrote: Was it worth it? was exactly the same version as track 18 on Discography, which was out BEFORE Was it worth it? was released. So everybody already had Was it worth it?, and there was no real need to buy the cd-single.
The bad thing about it is that now some people will justify the supposed bad quality of the song because of its low charting. Like with "Was it worth it?" or "New York city boy", good songs that didn't chart well but are dynamited by many fans (while worse songs like "Before" are idolatred by some of them because it was a success).
"Numb" would probably have worked as a single some years ago, when general public still knew about PSB, and a song so un-PSB would have attracted their attention. Nowadays, it looks like they should stick to please their fans.
dVTB wrote:Take the CIRCUMSTANCES into consideration! As I wrote: Was it worth it? was exactly the same version as track 18 on Discography, which was out BEFORE Was it worth it? was released. So everybody already had Was it worth it?, and there was no real need to buy the cd-single.
Alright, I didn't know Discography was out before Was it worth it?
When you look at like that, then yes, Was it worth it? did better than Numb. BUT, when you just look at the charts, Numb has done better.
It's all irrelevant anyway, anything outside the Top 20 isn't a hit IMO.
I'm still glad Numb was released as a third single. None of the other slower songs would have been a good choice except for Luna Park maybe.
Lleonard Pler wrote:The bad thing about it is that now some people will justify the supposed bad quality of the song because of its low charting. Like with "Was it worth it?" or "New York city boy", good songs that didn't chart well but are dynamited by many fans (while worse songs like "Before" are idolatred by some of them because it was a success).
.
Unfortunately the songs you name were really crap, particularly New York City Boy. Was It Worth it? has never been a highlight in Boys' career and it was rather a last-minute song to complete the two-new-song rule for a hits album. Besides, New York city boy charted better than Minimal...
As for your idea that people adore Before because of its high charting, even they should be aware of the fact that Before charted number 7 not because it was a brilliant song but it was the leading single from a long-awaited album after a record which is considered by many as the Boys' best...
The CELL by Stephen King instantly hit number 1 in New York Times Bookseller Lists selling well over 200 thousand copies in three weeks. This affirms my opinion: People really need an occassional good horror read...
dVTB wrote:Given the fact that Was it worth it? was exactly the same version as the one on the multi-selling Discography, that #24 is not half as bad as the result of Numb.
I don't get that. Numb's done shit but it's one higher than Was it worth it? so how can it be worse than Was it worth it??
Take the CIRCUMSTANCES into consideration! As I wrote: Was it worth it? was exactly the same version as track 18 on Discography, which was out BEFORE Was it worth it? was released. So everybody already had Was it worth it?, and there was no real need to buy the cd-single.
Numb was released in a different edit.
Lets get real here. Was It Worth It was released 15 years ago when PSB were still a massive chart act. Also, Numb is the third single off an album. Most people that buy PSB singles will have the album, so editing the song made sense anyway. There was no way the a full version of Numb would have done any better. It was a poor single choice. Simple as that really. It's not the end of the world.
Also, there were no downloads available back in 1991. Downloads are killing any chance PSB have of consistently hitting the top 10. I'd put my house on it that Numb would have been easily a top 20 hit but for downloads.
poor single choice? the single choice doesn't really matter. any other third single would have charted as low. besides, i don't really care. as long as i love the music i'm not too concerned about the charts. people need to simmer down.
Chart Commentary by James Masturbatesfrequentlyson:
23 Pet Shop Boys - Numb
And so Numb becomes the first single by the boys since 1991 to fail to reach the top twenty. Well I never! When I spoke to Neil at a recent party he not only refused to give me ten pence for a cup of tea but also ignored my advice about going hip-hop. I won't say I told you so but ya boo sucks you're down the dumper now and say hello to Erasure whilst you're there.
Janet Street-Porter wrote:Chart Commentary by James Masturbatesfrequentlyson:
23 Pet Shop Boys - Numb
And so Numb becomes the first single by the boys since 1991 to fail to reach the top twenty. Well I never! When I spoke to Neil at a recent party he not only refused to give me ten pence for a cup of tea but also ignored my advice about going hip-hop. I won't say I told you so but ya boo sucks you're down the dumper now and say hello to Erasure whilst you're there.
The CELL by Stephen King instantly hit number 1 in New York Times Bookseller Lists selling well over 200 thousand copies in three weeks. This affirms my opinion: People really need an occassional good horror read...
Lleonard Pler wrote:The bad thing about it is that now some people will justify the supposed bad quality of the song because of its low charting. Like with "Was it worth it?" or "New York city boy", good songs that didn't chart well but are dynamited by many fans (while worse songs like "Before" are idolatred by some of them because it was a success).
.
Unfortunately the songs you name were really crap, particularly New York City Boy. Was It Worth it? has never been a highlight in Boys' career and it was rather a last-minute song to complete the two-new-song rule for a hits album. Besides, New York city boy charted better than Minimal...
As for your idea that people adore Before because of its high charting, even they should be aware of the fact that Before charted number 7 not because it was a brilliant song but it was the leading single from a long-awaited album after a record which is considered by many as the Boys' best...
I agree with the Undertaker; Numb was a poor single choice. No, it PROVED to be a poor single choice, even. Numb is not a bad song, but it needs to be listened the way it was meant to be: the album version on Fundamental. I'm not saying the ALBUM version would have done better if it had been a single, I only say the radio edit didn't do the song any good.
New York city boy didn't do that bad. It made #14, even 1 place better than the lead single from that album. And also better than the 2nd singles from Release and Fundamental.
Before only charthing high based on people looking forward to the new album sounds a bit silly, actually. Why would people buy a song they don't like? Before made a satisfactory #7 and is actually a great song; only many PSB fans underappreciate it, but that's not my problem.
I just reckon that editing songs as drastically as Numb goes against the PSB ethos; they've started betraying their principles in a way that not even the odd charity single or live album could do.
The radio mix of Numb is a loop - it's what you would hear on a radio ad for an album.
Neil used to say how PSB singles were big events; now they're of little more interest than seeing which part of the song will be hacked off this time.
Last edited by Janet Street-Porter on Sun 22 Oct 2006, 6:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jyllinge wrote:its better than Was It Worth It? #24 and he announced an european tour in january 2007. Thats the highlights!
Given the fact that Was it worth it? was exactly the same version as the one on the multi-selling Discography, that #24 is not half as bad as the result of Numb.
Some lessons:
- Never mutilate a great song to get more radio airplay; if it needs to be cut down SO radically, isn't probably not single material
- Write your own songs, you don't need Diane Warren
- Put something valuable on your cd's, rather than a live version of West End Girls; out on Concrete, one week later.
I think the main lesson is this: Don't release songs that are neither good nor commercial as singles.
To: DVTB: Why is it silly? Noone here particularly likes I am with Stupid but it made a great number 8 in the charts although many of us think it is a low point in the album. If it wasn't first single and wasn't for the excitement of the upcoming new album/ new tour etc, it wouldn't even be in top 15.
The CELL by Stephen King instantly hit number 1 in New York Times Bookseller Lists selling well over 200 thousand copies in three weeks. This affirms my opinion: People really need an occassional good horror read...
dVTB wrote:
New York city boy didn't do that bad. It made #14, even 1 place better than the lead single from that album. And also better than the 2nd singles from Release and Fundamental.
New York city boy was released before the album, so you can't compare it to post-album second singles like I Get Along and Minimal. The real comparison points are Go West and Se A Vida E, which fared considerably better. New York city boy was planned as the big pre-album hit after the taster first single, so it can be considered a failure in my opinion.
