|
||||||||
Chart Rules Tweaked (At Last!) |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,552
|
Chart Rules Tweaked (At Last!)
After a dull chart year with only 11 no1's they are tweaking the streaming rules so that 150 streams equals 1 sale, instead of 100.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-38364237 remains to be seen what effect this has, but it can only be a positive change surely? so many good songs that have been solid hits in any other era have missed the top 10 or even 20 due to the deadlock of songs like One Dance lingering around for months on end. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 717
|
It doesn't go far enough, 200 or 300 streams think Germany use 180 streams and thy are reviewing theirs every 3 months.
Not to bothered about songs missing top 20 , more songs that are missing top 40. Their has been acts that have had iTunes top 10 hits and not made the top 40 this year. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 6,560
|
i dont think streams should count at all.
give them a separate chart. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
|
Quote:
i dont think streams should count at all.
give them a separate chart. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,738
|
It's a shame this wasn't considered a year ago after the farce with Justin Bieber hogging the UK top 3 in one week. That set more alarm bells ringing than Drake's 15 week reign at #1.
It's also a shame that Can't Stop The Feeling! and This Girl will always be referred to as UK #2's but for me, they are two of the years best singles. When you consider streaming was added to the charts in 2014, it's taken them nearly two years to adjust the ratio. Does this mean the ratio will increase to 200:1 in roughly two years time (January 2019)? If so, then I dread to think how few UK #1 singles we will have in 2018. As more people switch to Spotify, the slower the charts are going to become. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 717
|
Quote:
Digital downloads are declining loads. Who's to say the chart wouldn't be as volatile should it just be sales?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bexleyheath, SE London
Posts: 17,408
|
Talk about shutting the stable door after the horse has already bolted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,288
|
This is their admission that they screwed up. Given that, I think there's a case for saying that every chart since since streaming has been taken into account is invalid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,377
|
I'm old school. You went into a shop and bought a single. Or later, a CD single. You had something to show for your money. Then that went and digital downloads were all the rage. You paid your money and some bytes got sent to your computer. Not anything like as much fun. I've never downloaded a single, or indeed anything else, for that matter. If I like a few songs by an artist I'll buy the album on CD. At least you can still get them.
Now it's streaming. It remains a complete mystery to me. You don't even own the music, you seem to just rent each song play by play. It's like going to a library, taking out a book, then taking it back the next day and then taking it out again, and so on. You've got the book all the time, but you never own it. But each time you renew the book, it somehow counts for the chart. It's as if I had bought The Grommets new single on CD, and took it home and played it ten times in the first week, but my mate, who's a much bigger fan of the band, bought his and played it a hundred times in a week. So his CD single counts ten times as much for the charts as mine? And every time he plays it, it keeps counting? ![]() Basically I'm now too old to know or care about the chart anyway, or how they compile it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 717
|
Thing is streaming is bad for the chart but its amazing for the music fan. I used to spend about £30-50 a week on music now I spend about £12, basically I stream Spotify and buy about one album a week.
Streaming gives you 95% of all music that has every been produced and you can listen to it whenever you want. But true you don't own it but if you want to own something you still can on CD. Now you can listen to every new release, every new album and go back and listen to back catalogues of acts/bands you would never of had the money to do. Streaming is amazing. I have been streaming one way or another since 2008 with the new legal Napster and then Spotify. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Offenburg, Germany
Posts: 1,344
|
Quote:
I'm old school. You went into a shop and bought a single. Or later, a CD single. You had something to show for your money. Then that went and digital downloads were all the rage. You paid your money and some bytes got sent to your computer. Not anything like as much fun. I've never downloaded a single, or indeed anything else, for that matter. If I like a few songs by an artist I'll buy the album on CD. At least you can still get them.
Now it's streaming. It remains a complete mystery to me. You don't even own the music, you seem to just rent each song play by play. It's like going to a library, taking out a book, then taking it back the next day and then taking it out again, and so on. You've got the book all the time, but you never own it. But each time you renew the book, it somehow counts for the chart. It's as if I had bought The Grommets new single on CD, and took it home and played it ten times in the first week, but my mate, who's a much bigger fan of the band, bought his and played it a hundred times in a week. So his CD single counts ten times as much for the charts as mine? And every time he plays it, it keeps counting? ![]() Basically I'm now too old to know or care about the chart anyway, or how they compile it. The charts originally were based on the sale of sheet music, so it's akin to keeping the charts based purely on the sale of sheet-music and ignoring all the sales of records |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,738
|
Quote:
This is their admission that they screwed up. Given that, I think there's a case for saying that every chart since since streaming has been taken into account is invalid.
Instead if creating a download chart in 2004 which at the time was pretty useless, they should've just allowed all download sales to count towards the UK singles chart. Instead, the OCC decided to create a download chart just so that Westlife could have the "honour" of having the first ever #1 on the UK download chart. Thankfully their download chart #1 didn't count towards the official chart, and if it had it probably would've only charted around #30 anyways (which is why I still reckon they created the download chart - just to give Westlife that crucially important #1 PMSL!!! ).In 2006, to try and please Woolworths (and all good music stores!!! ) the OCC decided to let singles on just download sales enter the UK chart one week before the CD single was released. Had they just allowed download sales into the chart in late 2004, the transition would've been seamless and those pointless Elvis Presley re-issues from early 2005 might've struggled to get to #1 as tracks like Galvanise, Boulevard Of Broken Dreams, What You Waiting For? and Numb/Encore might've had more success in the charts. The latter might've even become a top 10 single despite its longevity and continued success in the following years.Then there was 2014 which remains one of the worst years. By this point pre-orders were out of control which accounted for around 50% of the years most artificial #1 singles. Eight weeks to pre-order a single, then in its week of release goes to #1 mainly thanks to what it sold in the previous 8 weeks and probably sold a further 40% of its first week sales on week of release. The result? A new #1 on sales of 100k 60% of which weren't from that week. Then the following week its "true" sales plummet to 30k and drops 01-10 or whatever in the charts. For me, six months of one week wonders in 2014 was far worse than Drake's 15 week run at #1 this year. Personally, I thought adding Spotify data to the charts in 2014 was the best thing the OCC did. But they should've realised that the popularity of streaming services was only going to increase rapidly and that ratio of stream to digital sales would need to be adjusted quite frequently. Moving the chart to a Friday in July 2015. Apparently to bring everything in line with the rest of the world. New Music Friday was introduced around the same time. The biggest irony being that hardly any "new music" has entered the UK top 40 in 2016. Instead, 2016 has ended up being the most stagnant year for new entries inside the top 40. Had the OCC changed the streaming ratio to 150:1 a year ago, that might've had a significant effect on not just the turnover of UK #1s this year, but also helped a few more singles crack the top 10/top 40. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Fife
Posts: 13,810
|
What they should do is make it so the fifth time someone streams a song it counts as a sale. I was gonna say first but then how many times do people put a playlist on, give new songs a go and decide its not for them, but then maybe give it one more listen or two, you may not have bought it like you would a download. After you've streamed it for the fifth time it counts as a sale, but only once.
Maybe for the sake of songs re-entering the charts (especially at Christmas) it can be 'reset' after not listening to the song for 6 months. |
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,738
|
On Spotify, you only need to play the first 30 seconds of a song for that to count towards 1 sale.
They should change this to 1 minute or 1 minute 30 seconds although longer tracks might be disadvantaged by this change. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 650
|
Thorney wrote: Quote:
Streaming gives you 95% of all music that has every been produced and you can listen to it whenever you want. But true you don't own it but if you want to own something you still can on CD. Now you can listen to every new release, every new album and go back and listen to back catalogues of acts/bands you would never of had the money to do. Streaming is amazing. I have been streaming one way or another since 2008 with the new legal Napster and then Spotify.
If you buy Premium Spotfiy you can download every track. I assume that means you keep a permanent copy on your PC/tablet or phone's hard drive. I'm still surprised Spotify run the free version as that must equal lost revenue - think of all the customers not choosing to upgrade to Premium - but I guess they know what they're doing. Spotify is arguably the most successful streaming site on the internet.Re streaming and the chart, you can't undo broadband/fibre optic speed so the format is here to stay. I think they should scrap the physical and download sales charts - the OCC runs those charts each week - and rename the TOP 40: The Official UK Streaming Chart. It can include physical and download 'sales' but the chart itself is rebranded as 'Streaming'. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
|
Quote:
Thorney wrote:
If you buy Premium Spotfiy you can download every track. I assume that means you keep a permanent copy on your PC/tablet or phone's hard drive. I'm still surprised Spotify runs the free version as that must been some lost revenue but I guess they know what they're doing! Re streaming and the chart, you can't undo broadband/fibre optic speed so it's the format is here to stay. I think they should scrap the physical and download sales charts - the OCC runs those charts each week - and rename the TOP 40: The Official UK Streaming Chart. It can include physical and download 'sales' but the chart itself is rebranded as 'Streaming'. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 650
|
I like the user interface design. Looks quite stylish! Oh well, can't please everyone.
![]() (But more to the point - and this is epic news - Digital Spy has a Christmas smilie!) ![]() Awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
|
Quote:
I like the userface design. Looks quite stylish! Oh well, can't please everyone.
![]() But more to the point - and this is epic news - Digital Spy has a Christmas smilie! ![]() Awesome. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 650
|
I use the laptop version of Spotify, not the mobile version. I quite like Google Play Music on my phone too but you have to pay to download the songs. Quite a lot of music on Google Play.
If the top 40 is a bit stagnant in 2017 the OCC may do further tweaking. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 650
|
Quote:
What's more, the influence of streams has increased as more users adopt it. When the Official Chart Company first started counting streaming in 2014, the number of streams delivered per week was 275 million. That figure has now swollen to 990 million, and is expected to pass 1 billion in the first weeks of next year.
990 million! Wow. A huge increase. It's weird to think if streaming replaced all physical and download 'single sales' you'd end up with a top 40 with no actual sales. Sure, you can argue 150 streams is one unit sold but it's an abstract concept. Listening to a song over and over again is not really the same as going out and buying one copy of it!Sooner or later all songs eligible for the chart will be streamed only? Who knows, this may happen before the end of this decade! |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lytham St Annes
Posts: 2,366
|
Maybe they should just call the singles chart the "UK playlist" and have done with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,058
|
Quote:
You can't keep it if you cancel your subscription. Spotify as a whole is still lossmaking. It is still the biggest streaming service of all. God knows why. The user interface on its app is just awful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 717
|
Quote:
Thorney wrote:
If you buy Premium Spotfiy you can download every track. I assume that means you keep a permanent copy on your PC/tablet or phone's hard drive. I'm still surprised Spotify run the free version as that must equal lost revenue - think of all the customers not choosing to upgrade to Premium - but I guess they know what they're doing. Spotify is arguably the most successful streaming site on the internet. . |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 717
|
Quote:
In what way? The user interface is one of the reasons why Spotify is so popular. Spotify also manage to have simple features that competitors still can't manage to add like crossfade and gapless playback.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,006
|
Quote:
I think there's a case for saying that every chart since since streaming has been taken into account is invalid.
Even including digital downloads alongside physical media- which altered things significantly with lower prices and allowed potentially *any* song in (rather than just those available as singles)- it was still based on sales. Streaming isn't... it's based on plays. And if (say) in the early 80s, chart success had been decided by how many times people played their singles after they got them home, you can bet some teenybopper playing the latest Wham track while fantasising about George Michael- no, she didn't know then- would definitely have skewed things in their favour and have resulted in a chart more like today's. In fact, Sarahsaurus pre-empted me on this:- Quote:
[Streaming is] as if I had bought The Grommets new single on CD, and took it home and played it ten times in the first week, but my mate [..] played it a hundred times in a week. So his CD single counts ten times as much for the charts as mine?
The fundamental problem is that if people's primary means of music consumption isn't by buying it (as it isn't really, these days), then a purely sales-based chart ceases to have the meaning it used to. Basically, there's no easy solution. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:53.




).
) the OCC decided to let singles on just download sales enter the UK chart one week before the CD single was released. Had they just allowed download sales into the chart in late 2004, the transition would've been seamless and those pointless Elvis Presley re-issues from early 2005 might've struggled to get to #1 as tracks like Galvanise, Boulevard Of Broken Dreams, What You Waiting For? and Numb/Encore might've had more success in the charts. The latter might've even become a top 10 single despite its longevity and continued success in the following years.

