Chart News: UK charts tweaked to decrease streaming's impact - Page 3

Superpower

UK: 250:1
USA: 500:1
This is how it should be

MarryTheMonster

I wish we would do the same here, streaming is making the charts and radio the same forever. Though more than 80% of music consumption in Norway is streaming so it is fair, but it's boring.

If not the singles chart, the albums chart needs a change.

Diarrhoea

Quote:

Originally posted by alexanderao

asdjsfjdhd WHAT

I know

I hate it too

getback

Blade

Quote:

Originally posted by Superpower

UK: 250:1
USA: 500:1
This is how it should be

Singles would literally never be certified multi-platinum anymore if we used 500:1

Successful songs these days are ending around 400k-500k sales in the U.S

alexanderao

All that the longevity that streaming promotes is causing is a more accurate representation of popularity on music charts.

If we just took the sales chart to measure popularity, we'd be really inaccurate. Because sales only measure the number of people that are discovering a song— NOT the number of total listens to that song.

Those are two completely different measures of popularity, and the latter is far more accurate than the former.

EDIT: And really, sales only measure the number of people discovering a song out of the number of people willing to buy music, and that figure is falling off a cliff, making it less and less representative of music consumers as a whole.

shelven

Quote:

Originally posted by alexanderao

EDIT: And really, sales only measure the number of people discovering a song out of the number of people willing to buy music, and that figure is falling off a cliff, making it less and less representative of music consumers as a whole.

This is an extremely important point that I don't see brought up very often in these streaming arguments.

When you constantly re-weight chart formulas to give sales more influence, you're not just giving a metric more influence on the chart; you're giving what is now a very small part of the music consuming population more influence on the chart. At that point, charts might as well just add a fourth metric where they hire focus groups and poll them on songs. These charts are supposed to represent the popularity of music across as much of the population as possible, and streaming accomplishes that FAR more than sales do right now.

Shelter

Quote:

Originally posted by alexanderao

All that the longevity that streaming promotes is causing is a more accurate representation of popularity on music charts.

If we just took the sales chart to measure popularity, we'd be really inaccurate. Because sales only measure the number of people that are discovering a song— NOT the number of total listens to that song.

Those are two completely different measures of popularity, and the latter is far more accurate than the former.

EDIT: And really, sales only measure the number of people discovering a song out of the number of people willing to buy music, and that figure is falling off a cliff, making it less and less representative of music consumers as a whole.

The same people listening over and over. Who cares about that?

Sales > streaming

alexanderao

Quote:

Originally posted by Shelter

The same people listening over and over. Who cares about that?

Sales > streaming

Well, you have to understand what the purpose of music charts are.

Here's how Billboard describes the Hot 100:

Quote:

This week's most popular songs across all genres

The key word here is "popular."

"Popular" ≠ "most discovered this week among the rapidly shrinking subsection of music consumers willing to purchase a song."

jpow

Quote:

Only 11 songs have reached number one this year, compared to 26 in 2015 and 42 in 2014.

isn't this because they nerfed preorders in the UK?

Popboi.

Quote:

Originally posted by jpow

isn't this because they nerfed preorders in the UK?

It's because sales are dead and the Spotify chart is really static.

Blade

Quote:

Originally posted by alexanderao

All that the longevity that streaming promotes is causing is a more accurate representation of popularity on music charts.

If we just took the sales chart to measure popularity, we'd be really inaccurate. Because sales only measure the number of people that are discovering a song— NOT the number of total listens to that song.

Those are two completely different measures of popularity, and the latter is far more accurate than the former.

EDIT: And really, sales only measure the number of people discovering a song out of the number of people willing to buy music, and that figure is falling off a cliff, making it less and less representative of music consumers as a whole.

When I want to discover music I stream new playlists, albums etc. When I actually like the song, I buy it. I don't know anyone who spends money on music just to discover it.

mdnazn

okay, how does this personally affect any of you

thedastardly

Quote:

Originally posted by mdnazn

okay, how does this personally affect any of you

It bothers the people who can't brag about their faves who don't do well in streaming...

Blade

Quote:

Originally posted by mdnazn

okay, how does this personally affect any of you

This is a pop music forum and some of us like following charts?.... girl c'mon you ain't new

alexanderao

Quote:

Originally posted by Blade

When I want to discover music I stream new playlists, albums etc. When I actually like the song, I buy it. I don't know anyone who spends money on music just to discover it.

I was inarticulate; let me try again.

It's fair to assume that most buyers of a song haven't been exposed to a song for a very long time. Being exposed to a song for months and months and only then buying it isn't very common, and that's why it's really rare to see songs selling well after they've been out for a while. That's also why we see songs jump up on iTunes (but not Spotify) after a promotional appearance– whereas sales can measure that influx of new listeners, streaming figures just depend on the overall popularity of the song, which doesn't change much from one performance on Good Morning America.

When someone buys a song, sales can't measure their habits with that song after that purchase. So when you look at weekly sales figures, not only are you solely seeing the number of people who are willing to buy it, but you're excluding everyone who already has that song on repeat (because they've either already bought it or are streaming it and won't buy it).

To me, that doesn't seem like a very accurate indicator of popularity.

getinthezone

yall are overreacting, the way its now is fine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...the_2010s#2016
just look at the #1s before 2015 lol, the way its now makes much more sense for a singles chart

brianc33616

Hopefully BB isn't far behind. I think (or at least hope) BB will adjust the formula after the post-Christmas sales spikes. By making 1k sales = 15k streams, that would more accurately reflect the ratio used by the RIAA. I would prefer 1k sales = 20k streams, because even with that formula streaming would account for 50% of the points by the end of 2017.

Also worth noting -- Country is the second biggest format behind Top 40. So the "popular" argument doesn't negate the need to strengthen sales and weaken streaming. If a Country song earns 50 million in weekly audience, sells 75k in a week, but only receives 5 M streams, that undermines what's really popular with a significant proportion of the population.

This is why FGLs HOLY stalled just inside the Top 15 on the Hot 100. The song had great sales, and even some crossover airplay. However, since the song couldn't get past the 30s on HSS, what should've been Top 10 single missed out on earning that distinction.

Then at the other end, and I'm not "picking" on Rihanna or Drake, you have Work. Even though the song's airplay was barley in Kworb's AI Top 75, its sales were already out of the Top 100 downloads, and even its ODS streaming had fallen out of the Top 50, the song kept charting on the Hot 100 simply because people kept watching the video.

So you have Work which charted forever on the Hot 100 based almost solely on one half of a metric, and HOLY with strong sales and good airplay, and good streaming for Country not able to get to the Top 10. Work and HOLY are the perfect examples of why streaming counts for too much of the Hot 100s formula.

Coklek92

How much streaming it takes to be equal with the price of a single on iTunes ($1.29)?

I think the ratio should be based on this one