BuzzJack
Entertainment Discussion

Welcome, guest! Log in or register. (click here for help)

Latest Site News
> 
 
Post reply to this threadCreate a new thread
> Accelerated Chart Ratio
Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum
vidcapper
post 6th December 2017, 07:17 AM
Post #1
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

Has the experiment failed?

One of its purposes was to stop songs hanging around for ages, but all it seems to do is drop them a few places, after which they continue to hang around at a lower level.

While this does help newer songs a bit, it also lets lesser songs attain positions they don't really deserve, and along with ACR, drag down sales overall.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Bjork
post 6th December 2017, 07:25 AM
Post #2
Group icon
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 November 2015
Posts: 33,291
User: 22,665

disagree, has not failed, serves its purpose as a cap so that streams don't count til the infinite and beyond when someone has already streamed shape of you 769 times, it's not ideal, a cap would be better but kinda works

not sure why you say songs achieve positions they don't deserve, it's the other way around, shape of you doesn't deserve to be top 40 now cos no one is streaming for the first time this week but for the 1437th time

so even if not ideal, it serves the purpose

and <i think it has worked, we got many more newies than before and the chart is more dynamic (and more fair)
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
FleetSeb
post 6th December 2017, 09:38 AM
Post #3
Group icon
BuzzJack Enthusiast
Joined: 13 December 2012
Posts: 756
User: 17,989

By a cap would you be saying that once someone has listened to a song 150 times it should no longer count?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post 6th December 2017, 10:46 AM
Post #4
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364

QUOTE(FleetSeb @ Dec 6 2017, 09:38 AM) *
By a cap would you be saying that once someone has listened to a song 150 times it should no longer count?


Realistically, who listens to a song that many times - and how many songs are likely to be listened to that many times?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Doctor Blind
post 6th December 2017, 10:48 AM
Post #5
Group icon
#38BBE0 otherwise known as 'sky blue'
Joined: 27 October 2008
Posts: 16,173
User: 7,561

I don't think you could argue that it has failed, the desired effect was to allow more entries in the 31-40 range that would otherwise have missed and to prevent songs hanging around in the Top 10 forever. In that respect it has worked very well.

QUOTE(Bjork @ Dec 6 2017, 07:25 AM) *
not sure why you say songs achieve positions they don't deserve, it's the other way around, shape of you doesn't deserve to be top 40 now cos no one is streaming for the first time this week but for the 1437th time


I see what you mean here but I don't actually agree with this logic. In the physical era for instance you could buy as many copies as you want often weeks apart or when different versions/formats were released so the enduring appeal of a record - for instance “Relax” by Frankie Goes To Hollywood is registered by the chart. Besides Ed is still Top 40 with “Shape Of You” anyway, and how then do you explain the logic of the Christmas songs reappearing every year? This for won't be the first time that people have streamed these tracks and yet they are given a huge advantage over a current single just because it has been out for 10 weeks or more and happens to have had a few weeks of consecutive falls in sales (relative to the market).
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
GTH
post 6th December 2017, 11:05 AM
Post #6
Group icon
Gareth T H
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 2,501
User: 10,597

I do think it has worked. There will never be a perfect system to manage how people stream and consume music for charts, but I think it does help things move more in the top 40. It would be better if it was a more gradual increase in the ratio as I know has been mentioned many times before, but I guess just have the one extra ratio keeps things a bit simpler in an already complicated (and confusing) chart system.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Brer
post 6th December 2017, 11:22 AM
Post #7
Group icon
is my brain across your walls?
Joined: 14 February 2009
Posts: 115,091
User: 8,300

There are some quirks and annoyances as to be expected from such arbitrary restrictions but on the whole I guess it's doing a good job of making the top 40/100 less clogged up with the same old hits. It does make the chart show more interesting to tune into (for the first half an hour or so at least).
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
JosephBoone
post 6th December 2017, 11:43 AM
Post #8
Group icon
you never forget your first time...
Pronouns: he/him
Joined: 19 April 2011
Posts: 121,803
User: 13,530

It's far from perfect but overall I've enjoyed the charts much more since ACR came about. It's so refreshing to see a greater amount of new entries in the top 40, as well as other artists achieving their first top 10/top 40.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
FleetSeb
post 6th December 2017, 11:47 AM
Post #9
Group icon
BuzzJack Enthusiast
Joined: 13 December 2012
Posts: 756
User: 17,989

QUOTE(vidsanta @ Dec 6 2017, 10:46 AM) *
Realistically, who listens to a song that many times - and how many songs are likely to be listened to that many times?


Well exactly, I don't think many people listen to a song more than 100 times let alone 150. The proportion of people that do must be relatively minor and so have a negligible effect on the chart.

It's not people listening to Shape of You 150 times that kept it up, it's millions of people listening to it say 5 times a week for 10 weeks that keeps it up there.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
365
post 6th December 2017, 11:48 AM
Post #10
Group icon
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 11 October 2013
Posts: 31,028
User: 19,931

Charts have seen a change for the better. But there are some annoyances Like songs rising out of nowhere; Random performance/sudden death of a musician/christmas' natural progress is hugely hindered.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
AcerBen
post 6th December 2017, 07:12 PM
Post #11
Group icon
BuzzJack Gold Member
Joined: 18 May 2007
Posts: 3,628
User: 3,429

I'd rather it was there than wasn't, but a lot more needs to be done to fix the chart
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Tangela
post 6th December 2017, 08:51 PM
Post #12
Group icon
Tangelic
Joined: 30 September 2016
Posts: 6,689
User: 23,643

I'm not a fan of how it works - it should be more stagnated - but the fact I'm saying that rather than that it shouldn't be there at all says something.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
TheSnake
post 6th December 2017, 09:01 PM
Post #13
Group icon
Say that hiss with your chest, and...
Joined: 24 May 2016
Posts: 18,472
User: 23,308

The problem is as downloads decrease in number so as not to justify such an influence in the chart as they have at the minute with the ratio what will happen? Will the chart go back to being as slow as it was in 2016 eventually, which I assume will happen?

This post has been edited by Snow❄Diploughmat: 6th December 2017, 09:04 PM
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post


Post reply to this threadCreate a new thread

1 user(s) reading this thread
+ 1 guest(s) and 0 anonymous user(s)


 

Time is now: 26th April 2024, 09:47 PM