The chart was first revealed on a Tuesday on Radio 1 and they would play a few songs from it. But there was always a two hour show on a Sunday which used to go out on Radio 2's FM bandwidth as Radio 1 never went FM till around 1990 I think. They used to play the full top 20 and selected tracks from 40-21. When the show went to three hours the top 40 was played in its entirety. I was taping the chart in the days when Vienna was held off the top spot by shuddup ya face and remember it like yesterday...

Also when the chart was shown on top of the pops on a Thursday evening it was already over a week old as the Tuesday chart from two days before had already changed all the positions. They couldn't get round this as they needed time to book artists for the show.

That annoyed me so much that Radio 1 didnt get an FM band for so long, There was no real excuse for it, yes 2, 3,4 had it from their previous incarnations but they coudl have given it to 1 straight away when it launched as they gave FM slots to other commercial stations later on so why did One have to wait so long..

Radio 1 was available on FM in London and the South East from 1987. Radio 1's FM roll out across the Country started in 1988 but I think the Top 40 carried on being broadcasted on Radio 2's FM network until 1990.

Also Adele has managed to make the Top 40 with an album track that isn't available on streaming services. If streaming wasn't included in the charts Adele would have had 4 songs in the Top 40 not just 2.

boredom! too much corporate input, too much hype, its all about fitting one of about 3 molds.

of course if an exciting new movement comes along it might well re-ignite my interest.

i am still aware of whats around, every so often a good pop song will get my approval - i like the current little mix singles (which goes against my better judgement).

The charts only reflect what music is selling the most at the present time. Instead of blaming the way people buy their music why not blame the music itself for being so rubbish, or blame the record labels for pushing crap artists into the mainstream.

The charts has always had its fair share of chaff but having an artist (or Justin Bieber) filling the charts with album tracks means potentially you could end up with a Top 40 with only four hugely popular acts in it. Surely it would be better to have a track designated as a current single and therefore singles chart eligble and album tracks logged as 1/10th of an album sale or something like that.

I wouldn't mind if it was a fair playing field and all artists of all ages or genres actually got the airplay and promotion needed by radio channels. They now have a HUGE bearing on who's charting more than ever due to how influential the radio is on streaming 'sales'

Oh, and that's something I don't fully agree on... How does 100 streams equate to a sale? Who came up with that figure? :S

if only that was true. They stopped being sales charts this year once streaming was included

If people buy that song it's because they like it. They don't have to wait for a record company to decide whether to put out a physical reissue so I'd say that it better represents what the people want when they get to choose from a far, far wider range of music than just what is being actively pushed.

The fact that Beiber currently has 3 singles in the top 5, answers your question.

The singles charts haven't been relevant for 20 years now.

....... but the question is..

were they ever relevant? because as long as i can remember (back to the 60's) the singles charts have been derided and treated as insignificant. i cant ever remember them being treated seriously, especially in the 70's and 80's when rigging was rife.

Maybe not in terms of musical quality but they were definitely more significant in the past culturally, examples such as Frankie Goes to Hollywood going straight to number one after the Radio 1 banning of Relax in '84 and the Blur/Oasis head to head battle in 95 spring to mind. Some of the pop videos of the 80's were huge talking points at the time and it was all bolstered by a greater degree of interest in the music charts back then.

......and then came the internet

They used to be a reflection of teenage rebellion.

Now just playgroud squabbles.

cant argue with that

but try as i may, i still come back to watermans crowd. as i see it, his production company made manufactured pop acceptable on a scale it was never seen before. true there was manufactured pop before SAW but they created the template still used today. nearly 30 years later and theres a whole generation thats grown up with manufactured music, and accepts it as 'the norm'.

i moan at being old... but it has its benefits - i witnessed the evolution of british pop music, i enjoyed (either indulging in or as a spectator) the rise and fall of exciting new movements.


well it comes to something when dads dress in the same clothes and like the same music as 'da kidz' do.... lol, 'dads' into pop was rare in the 60's and 70's, now the over 35's are almost as into pop as 'da kidz'.

so i guess with the acceptance of manufactured pop and us old buggers still being pop music fans, the young have nothing to rebel against! old buggers have taken away the territory that used to be the preserve mainly of the young.