P&J stats 2004 (reissued with bonus tracks)

Wow - 270 voters didn't submit singles ballots!

Glenn, you are pretty amazing for doing this. Thanks.

771 ballots with 10 album votes
4 with 9
3 with 8
2 with 7
6 with 6
3 with 5
2 with 4
2 blank

474 ballots with 10 singles votes
3 with 9
8 with 8
7 with 7
6 with 6
6 with 5
10 with 4
4 with 3
3 with 2
272 blank

464 ballots with all 20 slots filled

albums 9.4
singles raw 3.8
singles by artist 9.6
(singles delta) 5.8
composite 8.5

not too bad!

Maybe its just me...

Or, you know, it's endemic of the album-centric mindset of "rock critics", and it's a hokey stand against the homogenization of FM radio (which has been moot for a long while, and will made more moot, or mooter, once satellite radio takes off, and is made moot outside of all of this simply with the VV specifying, as Matthew noted, that ANY SONG IS ELIGIBLE), and it's fear of pop music and/or the blanding of Amurrica and/or hip-hop (for any number of reasons - content, bigotry, etc.) and/or country (same) and/or having a stick up one's bum.

I don't know if Scott Woods or Phil Dellio (the 2 non-album nominators) had this in mind w/ their ballots, or if this is what Joshua Clover meant w/ his non-album album nominations, but I'd like to think they did, just because I'm all for a good nose-thumbing.

haha "best note, chord or single noise category"

actually that would be a good idea except for the trying to describe in words where it came bit

I can't talk for everybody but in my case it has nothing to do with any of those reasons. It is simply how I enjoy my music (pop, rock, hip hop, metal, country, wahtever it is). As Chuck mentions, it doesn't make any sense to vote for songs that have no value without their context (being the album).

Meaning that songs that songs that work well within their context but don't without have no place on the singles chart.

The fact that over 34% of the VV electorate punted the singles section of the poll, though, is a bit disquieting. Unless Chuck did actually get to those folks ahead of time and gave them the DO NOT VOTE order (detailed above). For my money, I agree w/ Chuck - having a singles ballot that mirrors one's album ballot seems statistically impossible (unless you're trying to make a point or your pants are on fire) and aesthetically blech, and if you don't care enough to engage music on that level, then don't bother fronting.

However, I'd say that if you, Music Critic Extraordinary, are actually doing your job to the fullest of your ability (even if you're a part-timer), then you're going to invaribly somehow come across SOME SONG from the current year that's not going to be on one of your Top Ten albums that you'd absolutely die for. And I dare say there might be a way to prove that as true w/ maths. But I'm not the one w/ the QED.

[xpostage]

It's pretty interesting to see the differences. My hunch that SMiLE would win the non-singles vote was right.

SMiLE trades places w/Kanye at no. 1 (Kanye drops to 2)
Green Day and Franz Ferdinand switch from 4th & 5th
Modest Mouse, U2, TV on the Radio, Wilco all jump (TVOTR into the top 10 from no. 12)
The Arcade Fire drops from 6 to 10

Rose 30 or more places: Elvis Costello & the Imposters (54th to 24th); Tinariwen (71st to 29th--biggest leap overall in the top 40); Steve Earle (62nd to 30th); Jolie Holland (67th to 37th).

Rose 20-29 places: Youssou N'Dour (34th to 14th); Prince (50th to 31st); Eminem (63rd to 39th).

Rose 10-19 places: Tom Waits (29th to 11th); Elliott Smith (22nd to 12th); PJ Harvey (33rd to 20th); Buddy Miller (58th to 27th); Iron & Wine (48th to 35th).

Drops of five or more places: The Streets (7th to 15th); Nellie McKay (14th to 19th); Danger Mouse (10th to 21st); Madvillain (11th to 26th); Interpol (19th to 28th); the Killers (27th to 32nd); the Fiery Furnaces (17th to 34th); the Hold Steady (31st to 40th); Sonic Youth (37th to 80th); Big & Rich (39th to 81st); Usher (35th to 81st); Morrissey (36th to 90th); Ghostface (32nd to 103rd); Dizzee Rascal (24th to 124th); M.I.A. & Diplo (23rd to 151st).

The Streets and Green Day switch places (5th and 7th)
Danger Mouse and Madvillain rise two each
U2 and Modest Mouse fall two each

Rose five or more places: M.I.A./Diplo (23rd to 17th); Dizzee Rascal (24th to 19th); Scissor Sisters (26th to 21st); Ghostface (32nd to 23rd); Morrissey (36th to 31st); Junior Boys (41st to 33rd); De La Soul (55th to 37th--biggest overall jump in top 40); the Mountain Goats (45th to 39th).

Dropped five or more places: Joanna Newsom (25th to 20th); Elliott Smith (30th to 22nd); the Libertines (35th to 30th); PJ Harvey (38th to 33rd); Tom Waits (29th to 47th); Youssou N’Dour (34th to 50th).

that'd be a good top ten of any kind, actually.

Fiery Furnaces and Sonic Youth dropping so much for non-singles voters
Mountain Goats rising for singles voters

You may be right, but your data is inconclusive without a control group. I'm tempted to think that your conclusions are meaningful but taking any random 34% out of the total might change the results in an equally drastic way. Of course my attempt at being amusingly faux-scientific was upstaged by Sterling's use of the term "position delta" which flies way over my remedial-high-school-science-and-math head.

(for that matter, maybe it's just me, but i kinda think of de la soul as one of the most album-oriented/non-single-oriented hip-hop groups of all time! but then my de la soul opinions are always weird, maybe.)

Perhaps it is, but let's please not start a "no votes for singles" witchhunt again. There are at least some reasons to vote for albums but not singles that have nothing to do with the r-word Sterling invokes above.

Personally, I don't vote for singles because most of the records I critique and enjoy do not contain "singles" in any meaningful sense. At least one of the albums I voted for doesn't have discrete tracks, and few if any of the others have focus tracks that are designed to be played on the radio above other tracks. I don't particularly like the sound of vinyl, so I don't buy 7"s much. I rarely listen to popular music except in the car, but not because I have qualms about pop being "manufactured" or something, it just isn't really my favorite stuff. I could send in a list of my favorite pop songs of the year, but why? That has almost nothing to do with the stuff I write about.

Stop it right there. Not only do I not qualify as part timer (barely a hobby) but "Music Critic Extraordinaire" is an insulting understatement considering my abilities.

then you're going to invaribly somehow come across SOME SONG from the current year that's not going to be on one of your Top Ten albums that you'd absolutely die for. And I dare say there might be a way to prove that as true w/ maths.

I won't deny that some songs hit the bullseye, but that will most probably increase the value of the sum as only effect. I guess that if it was more than a hobby, and I had more time to actually review most of what I hear in the year, I would probably be able to catalog albums and songs in a more efficient manner. The fact is that I just don't bother with 'singles'...

the conclusion I'd draw here boils down to this: singles voters would seem to more actively seek out music, and they'd seem to be drawn to internet discourse more, be it blogs, downloading, reading online 'zines like Pitchfork and Stylus. that's where I see the singles-voter spikes for the Fiery Furnaces, Sonic Youth, and the Mountain Goats (among others) coming from. but control group or no control group, I think it's pretty undeniable that the far greater appeal for non-singles voters of Youssou N'Dour, Buddy Miller, Elvis Costello, PJ Harvey, Tinariwen, Steve Earle, and Prince means something--namely, that that voting bloc tends to prefer more traditionally-minded stuff. and no, that isn't name calling and it isn't hand-wringing (of the latter group, I like Youssou, PJ, and Prince, haven't heard Miller, Tinariwen, or Earle, and wasn't really into the Costello). it's pointing out a trend.

As a part-time part-timer, alls I know is that if I limited what I voted for to what I actually wrote about or put through the review wringer ... it's not like there's an actual divide between the "critic" and the "fan", as if there's a different hat you (UNIVERSAL YOU) need to be wearing in order to approve a piece of music versus just listening to the damn thing casually. But, then, that's a matter of methodology - milage varies, no doubt.

As far as being ill-informed, that's not an invalid perspective, EXCEPT (as is most often the case) when the ill-informed speak from a position of supposed authority about shit they know jack about. It'd be great if everyone made an effort to listen to just about everything under the sun, but not everyone's Chuck or RC or Matos or DJ Martian. And, of course, a poll in & of itself doesn't say whether so and so neglected to vote for X (or 10X) because of lack of knowledge or because of some twisted ass-backwards reasoning - the comments, on the other hand, can open up a big ol' can of Wabbit Season stinkass.

And I don't dispute that there are non-r0ck!st reasons for not nominating any singles. I just doubt that the now-oft-quoted 34% employed those reasons in deciding to not do the thing. (Me, I'm guessing a large portion of that third just didn't give a rat's ass about filling out an optional portion of a survey, but that's probably wishful thinking on my part.)

And this isn't a call for a blacklist and a lynch mob, at least from my end - this is just talking and thinking. If the torches and, um, pitchforks come out, please direct your stinkeyes and thoughts of ill will elsewhere.

[xpost, and I totally namedropped DJ Martian before Matos posted, I swear]

xpost

a quick glance through the stats chart doesn't really support this conclusion, though, does it? just visually (aka non-scientifically!) there are a lot more holes in the last four [singles raw, singles by artist, etc.] categories the further you travel down the list. it appears to thin out pretty significantly the farther you travel towards the bottom (1 --> 789). which would suggest to me that non-singles voters are indeed actively seeking out music, since fewer other people are voting for what they are seeking out, and this phenomenon would not be apparent in your generalizations above (since they're related to consensus). or am i misreading the data? (all this is based admittedly on a glance).

It's not, necessarily - I was referring to last year's absurd tokenism-no singles threads, which came complete with at least one list of names and asterisks to denote "no singles." I could see this thread becoming that. There were also some way overgeneralized posts dissing everyone who doesn't vote for singles as if we all do it for the same reason. These things you're critiquing are just lists. They have no real content. There is surely a point to be made that certain critics are rockist or otherwise think things that may not be desirable to you, but the fact that a few critics like Steve Earle and didn't vote for singles doesn't prove that.

For seven out of ten singles on my singles chart, I was the only voter. In another context, these tunes wouldn't be obscure at all - I'm sure that if you surveyed Groove, Debug, etc, you'd find numerous 2004 charts listing "Decompression," "Cardiology," etc., but within the context of P&J, they become oddities, about as statistically significant as a voter choosing, I don't know, one side of a power violence split 7" (if they still make power violence) and calling it a "single." My suspicion is that singles voters are as different among themselves as they are different from albums-only voters.

That's not to say, though, that I'm not fascinated by crunching the numbers as many ways as possible. I just like to complicate the equation.

It seems a bit disingenuous to pretend that the singles list is really a vote for "best song" and that any song is eligible. As far as I can tell there aren't any songs in the top 20 that weren't released as singles. Are there any in the top 40? Basically the selections have already been arbitrarily filtered by the labels. So as a music fan I don't have much use for the list of singles and it doesn't bother me in the slightest that some critics would choose not to participate.

The notion of a "single" is very nebulous these days - 7 inch, 10 inch, 12 inch, CD5, CD-R, emphasis tracks, videos, mainstream radio hits, college radio hits, songs that end up on a lot of mix cds, songs that pop up in advertisements, songs in tv shows, songs played live on talk shows, songs that pop up on mp3 blogs and artist/label websites, songs sold individually on iTunes et al - so much can be considered a "single" these days. There's no reason to be so specific about it, almost any song a person could pick would be valid. I think that Chuck Eddy has a great point about diluting things with too many album cuts, but you have a lot of leeway with the current rules.

"Heartbeat," although it is officially released in a couple weeks, I think.

I'm not saying I have any problem with the singles poll itself or the way it's set up. It just seems silly to me to criticize the critics who didn't participate and argue that they should have picked their 10 favorite songs from their 10 favorite albums. That type of voting just wouldn't make sense within the context of a poll which obviously ends up favoring actual singles.

If you want to be a stickler, you could always vote for that song in the next poll.