[Canonical Ensemble]

She got all the wigs in the world.

[iamvladd]

Originally posted by Haus_of_Nicole

This is actually a very important record. It shows the power that a single performance can have. The VMAs' ratings are even that strong. Being a good performer is not important? It's certainly more important than records spurred by remixes and discounts, no?

Truest Tea

[supaspaz]

Originally posted by Haus_of_Nicole

This is actually a very important record. It shows the power that a single performance can have. The VMAs' ratings are even that strong. Being a good performer is not important? It's certainly more important than records spurred by remixes and discounts, no?

But it's still a somewhat arbitrary distinction. I mean, you have to put that performance in the context of the year that Adele has been having. If the 21 era wasn't already smashing records, would the VMA performance have been enough to send "Somebody Like You" to #1? It's hard to say (though I think Florence and the Machine's buzzy performance from 2010 can give us the answer to that).

[Cap10Planet]

Originally posted by Haus_of_Nicole

This is actually a very important record. It shows the power that a single performance can have. The VMAs' ratings are even that strong. Being a good performer is not important? It's certainly more important than records spurred by remixes and discounts, no?

Kiiii

[MrPeanut]

Originally posted by supaspaz

But it's still a somewhat arbitrary distinction. I mean, you have to put that performance in the context of the year that Adele has been having. If the 21 era wasn't already smashing records, would the VMA performance have been enough to send "Somebody Like You" to #1? It's hard to say (though I think Florence and the Machine's buzzy performance from 2010 can give us the answer to that).

That seems like the arbitrary distinction to me. That's like saying Katy wouldn't have tied MJ's record if people hadn't responded to her singles so well. Like, no ****?

[Cap10Planet]

Originally posted by supaspaz

But it's still a somewhat arbitrary distinction. I mean, you have to put that performance in the context of the year that Adele has been having. If the 21 era wasn't already smashing records, would the VMA performance have been enough to send "Somebody Like You" to #1? It's hard to say (though I think Florence and the Machine's buzzy performance from 2010 can give us the answer to that).

How many arbitrary distinctions have been noted about other artists by Billboard? It's not something hugely notable, but it's not like Billboard hasn't mentioned minor achievements, especially when artists were at the top of their games.

Originally posted by MrPeanut

That seems like the arbitrary distinction to me. That's like saying Katy wouldn't have tied MJ's record if people hadn't responded to her singles so well. Like, no ****?

This is true. lol

[Nicole]

Originally posted by supaspaz

But it's still a somewhat arbitrary distinction. I mean, you have to put that performance in the context of the year that Adele has been having. If the 21 era wasn't already smashing records, would the VMA performance have been enough to send "Somebody Like You" to #1? It's hard to say (though I think Florence and the Machine's buzzy performance from 2010 can give us the answer to that).

I know but most chart records can be looked at in the context of something bigger. If Katy hadn't had such a smash TD era with her first 4 singles, radio and buyers wouldn't have jumped as hard on her 5th one. Success breeds more success.

[Inter The Sonn]

Originally posted by Mister Martian

They just make up these things and call them records for headlines...

Okay!

[annashaus]

Yes, Adele.

[supaspaz]

Originally posted by MrPeanut

That seems like the arbitrary distinction to me. That's like saying Katy wouldn't have tied MJ's record if people hadn't responded to her singles so well. Like, no ****?

Well, now you're just talking in circles. My point was more about the momentum from someone's career contributing to their furthered success. Yes, this VMA performance helped spur "Someone Like You" to #1, but people were watching out for Adele already. It could have been any number of things, and this gave SLY the exposure it needed at that moment to explode. The fact that she happened to be sitting at #19 the week before was merely a coincidence. A week later and maybe the record wouldn't have been hers. To me, that's what makes this record so unimportant compared to, say, her unprecedented number of weeks near the top of the Billboard 200.

Originally posted by Cap10Planet

How many arbitrary distinctions have been noted about other artists by Billboard? It's not something hugely notable, but it's not like Billboard hasn't mentioned minor achievements, especially when artists were at the top of their games.

Billboard lives for arbitrary achievements—and as chart-watchers, we enjoy hearing about them. But it doesn't necessarily make them significant.

[GotMyBlueprint]

Originally posted by Knix

She was bound to break something.

Such little time too!
I expected the chair she's always on to go first

[iamvladd]

Originally posted by Knix

She was bound to break something.

Is that shade I smell?

[J a y]

Yes, Adele! Those flawless vocals are a force to be reckoned with

Adele Makes Hot 100 History

Kelly Clarkson
Get the latest Kelly Clarkson news and videos.

[supaspaz]

Originally posted by GotMyBlueprint

Such little time too!
I expected the chair she's always on to go first

Good lord. She sits on a chair for one video and it's all ATRL can talk about for the next six months. Only Adele.

[MrPeanut]

Originally posted by supaspaz

Well, now you're just talking in circles. My point was more about the momentum from someone's career contributing to their furthered success. Yes, this VMA performance helped spur "Someone Like You" to #1, but people were watching out for Adele already. It could have been any number of things, and this gave SLY the exposure it needed at that moment to explode. The fact that she happened to be sitting at #19 the week before was merely a coincidence. A week later and maybe the record wouldn't have been hers. To me, that's what makes this record so unimportant compared to, say, her unprecedented number of weeks near the top of the Billboard 200.

I don't disagree that there are other, more impressive records, but that didn't stop people from making a big deal each time the record for "Biggest Jump to #1" was broken over and over once digital sales started becoming a big thing. That record was broken like three times in the course of six weeks back in '08 and was even more arbitrary because it was basically dependent on the prior chart position with just airplay before the singles were put on sale. I'd just say this is more impressive because the jump was spurred by a single performance (which hadn't even been hyped) rather than a highly anticipated release week.

[Ra2]

Adele scores another #1, and with my favorite song too!

[iamvladd]

Originally posted by Haus_of_Jay

Yes, Adele! Those flawless vocals are a force to be reckoned with

[=NEX=]

Originally posted by supaspaz

But it's still a somewhat arbitrary distinction. I mean, you have to put that performance in the context of the year that Adele has been having. If the 21 era wasn't already smashing records, would the VMA performance have been enough to send "Somebody Like You" to #1? It's hard to say (though I think Florence and the Machine's buzzy performance from 2010 can give us the answer to that).

adele starting to smash hard only after her Brit Awards performance of someone like you.
so yes.

[babyboy44]

incredible !!!!

[futurelove92]

slaying