in this weeks top 40 singles chart there is only 1 new entry and in the top 100 there are only 3 others
http://www.officialcharts.com/charts/singles-chart/

and judging by this weeks new single releases next week chart isnt going to be much better.
http://www.officialcharts.com/new-releases/

its been this way for some time now, with rules around downloading / streaming coming into effect and with some artists choosing not to have an official single at all and just concentrating on the album.

i think there needs to be a major rethink by the charts company and the music industry.

all the fun has been taken out of the weekly singles chart.

I think all major artists should release at least 2 singles BEFORE the album is released.

And the streaming to sales ratio rebalanced in favour of sales.

It's slow moving. One other issue really is that either a) artists aren't releasing as many singles, or b) new music isn't being promoted as well as it could be.

Now I don't think that's the fault of streaming. If anything, streaming should make it easier for under-the-radar artists to promote their music through being featured on a playlist, rather than having to go through several gatekeepers and DJs' personal taste to get onto the radio.

I think there's not enough music TV shows or shows that feature a musical guest, that would promote a new single. I mean, what is there at the minute? Graham Norton and talk shows of that ilk, the Lottery, sometimes, and Jools Holland when he has a series on. What else is there?

Another thing to think about is who's about in pop at the minute and who's taking a break. For the last year at least, there hasn't really been much of a case of pop juggernauts conflicting with each other, like there was earlier in the 2010s when e.g. Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, Calvin Harris and Rihanna would all be releasing albums and singles at the same time in competition with each other. Last year's July-Aug and December were dominated by Justin Bieber, October-November by Adele, Jan-Feb this year Rihanna released, and now April-May its been Drake on the singles and Beyonce on the albums. There's been no big releases competing directly with each other, really.

Maybe as we come into the summer it will get more crowded at the top as more artists decide to have a summer 'comeback'.

A single these days is a digital file that is invisible. No one's getting excited for that. No more CD singles with cool artwork and exclusive songs or 7" or 12" vinyl singles so not surprising it's the same stuff in the charts.

Streaming has ruined the singles chart as it has made artists lazy in trying to sell singles. As u said the focus is now on albums. A variety of acts r now shut out of competition simply because they're not of the current 'in' genre. Also, streaming is heavily affected by advertising - if labels r willing to pay for certain songs to get pushed they'll get pushed (although u could say that about radio too). Agree on the TV shows, there is bugger all now for artists to perform on.

This Drake One Dance spell at No.1 is a prime example of streaming ruining charts. Only 23000 copies were actually bought of that song last week yet it's No.1?! What a farce!!

Could not agree more! If you look at sales only, One Dance is actually #5 this week; Timberlake has been #1 since his new song came out. That Sigma/Take That song bombed out of the official Top 40 this week, but in the Sales chart that song is #18. The three new songs that didn't make the official Top 40 I think all of them made the Sales chart.

Streaming should influence radio stations and their playlists, but should be banned from any influence on the charts. Only songs for which people have actually parted money should ever be included.

But people part money to stream. They are effectively buying music as the artists are being paid money for those streams.

JT only sold 35k pure sales, not a huge amount more. Still a pitiful figure for a #1 on the sales chart which shows how poor sales are.

You have to remember the singles chart was actually more dead in 2006 than it is now yes it was fast moving and there was more variety but the number one could sell as low as 8000 copies.

As for lack of singles there isn't over 1000 singles get released every week many acts release a different song each week up to the release of their album but the huge number of people you need to stream your song has slowed the chart right down as people keep listening to the same songs and it will get slower still as streaming gets more and more popular.

Gone are the days of a new band getting a top 40 hit with about 1000 sales and then building a career now most bands only exist in the album charts too every decreasing album sales .

Personally I thought 2013 had the balance spot on with the genuinely popular songs getting 4-5 weeks at #1, with a few other songs getting a week or two.

Also I thought 2014 was FAR worse. Almost every #1 in 2014 was available to pre-order for up to 3 months before its official release. This led to a guaranteed new #1 every week for about six months - the majority of those songs instantly forgettable and haven't been heard since...well, 2014 ironically.

I thought 2015 had a decent start to the year but what has puzzled me is just how much the charts changed AFTER they moved the chart to a Friday.

By emphasising so much on this "New Music Friday" I thought that songs would still enjoy a full 7 days of sales/streaming to make its impact and enter high up the chart on Fridays.

As streaming (especially Spotify data) has started to make up the bulk of the chart "sales" every week, it's led to a rapid slowing down of the chart. It's not just the top 10 that's now affected. There is so little movement that most weeks the #40 will be a song that's dropped one or two places.

As others have said, the whole UK chart lost its spark with the younger generation years ago. The chart goes on but I don't think many teenagers really care about charts in the same way they did when I was a teenager in the 90s.

I also think radio stations need to be a bit more on trend and speed up their playlists. Radio 1, for example, still have Drake's One Dance on their A list. Are they planning on keeping One Dance on the playlist until the week another song actually manages to outsell it? If that's the case, Drake could end up breaking some record for longest number of weeks spent on the Radio 1 A list. Radio 1 could've moved onto Too Good by now, and pushed that song more instead.

It's also interesting to note only a handful of singles have entered the UK chart inside the top 10 so far this year. Plus, for the first time ever more singles have entered the US Billboard Hot 100 at #1 compared to the UK chart where Zayn's PILLOWTALK remains the only song this year that entered at #1.

Another point too, many new singles get released on Fridays without a music video.

I think if more singles were released on Fridays, and the music video was released the same day, that would give the singles a massive boost as they would undoubtably get loads of video plays on The Box, MTV Hits, Chart Show TV, Now Music TV etc...

It says it all when Capital TV have to use clips from old music videos just so that they can play songs like One Dance and This Is What You Came For.

Oh, and TIDAL is a mess. If artists just released new music on Spotify, Apple Music and iTunes on Fridays, they would do better in the charts.

I do think counting streaming in the charts is a problem. Only kids and young adults probably stream, effectively ruling out music for anyone over 30 ever entering the singles chart again. It's very wrong.

No, it's much more difficult. Before, you could build up a small fanbase and make the top 40 selling 8,000 copies. Now, with fewer people downloading it's harder to get to that figure, and the threshold for making the top 40 is now more like 16,000 "chart sales" - which would be the equivalent of 1.6 million streams. It was a lot easier to sell 8,000 downloads than get 1.6 million streams.

On the flipside, it means if you make the top 40 you're probably reaching a wider audience and means the top 40 really are popular tracks.

But that's also part of why the chart has slowed down - it's so hard to make it in the first place, so only the biggest records get in there, and then stay there, as people keep listening to the same songs week after week.

The chart is more reflective of popularity (at least with those who download/stream) but completely useless as a promotional tool.

If they didn't include streaming in the chart, it would become more and more irrelevant as download sales are falling. It has to reflect how people consume music otherwise it's meaningless.

But if the charts only reflect what the young listen to, it's meaningless anyway.

A few years ago when Beyoncé released her album '4' she done an interview where she said that she no longer cared about singles and wanted to concentrate on albums and making bodies of work. She wasn't stupid. She could see that the singles charts were dying and that album's were where it was at.

The charts have always largely reflected what the young listen to. You just don't notice it when you are young. It just so happens that pop is 'in' at the minute and thats why genre (rock, indie, alt) stuff is not doing so well, just like in the late 90s and early 2000s. These things move in cycles.

Anyway not entirely. The Stone Roses had a top 20 hit last week.

But if I buy a track I could play it a hundred times a week or just once. The chart won't reflect that. Streaming gives precedence to consumers who listen repeatedly to a narrow range of music rather than enjoying a wider selection of what is available. Again, skewing the charts towards the juvenile market.

True, however it's important to remember the new streaming rules were introduced (100 streams = 1 sale), because the 1 sale generated from streams gives the same revenue to the record company as 1 download sale would. In that sense, it makes more sense as to why they make sense to be included.

However, it is difficult because it's a lot harder to get to the top of the chart, but once you are there, you can be stuck there for weeks or even months. I'm struggling to see how this can be altered. Other than record labels investing more into promotion on streaming websites.

What about streams from people who pay shouldn't they count more than free streams as we give £10+ to the industry every month , the equivalent of 10000 streams

Be interesting to see how the chart would look without the freeloaders

Yes but you don't actually 'own' the music like you do with CDs. You can only listen to them when online. I personally don't like streaming and I think including it in the charts is a bad idea. It means certain songs hang around for too long.

That's why I still buy CDs for my favourite artists one day streaming might just go and then what will you do , nothing stays forever on the internet.

Not true. You can download to them to your own device if you're a paying customer and listen offline. Effectively the same as buying it.

Only kids and young adults stream? What utter nonsense. Many people of all ages stream but many of us are going to stream different things so it isn't going to affect the charts.

When I was young (late 70s/80s) there were number one singles that were clearly not being bought by the young: Julio Iglesias, Lena Martell, Barbra Streisand, Kenny Rogers, Charlene, and endless top 10 and other chart hits by acts not popular with the young like Cliff, Barry Manilow, Dolly Parton, Tina Turner, Dionne Warwick, Lionel Ritchie...

Even in the singles charts of the late 80s and 90s you'd find acts that were huge but didn't appeal to the young: Sade, Simply Red, Celine Dion, Phil Collins, Luther Vandross, All that is now unthinkable. No one is allowed near the singles chart or radio airplay who is much over 30. Diversity has been bled out of the chart and radio in terms of genres, ages, stages of an artist's career. It's become like Logan's Run where you're got rid of after 29!

I used to follow the charts avidly but lost all interest once streaming was included. May have been the straw that broke the camel's back though.