 |
  |
| OCC chart rule changes - artist cap and ACR, MW article / OCC chart rules in OP |
| Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum |
 26th June 2017, 08:41 AM
Post
#21
|
|
 🔥🚀🔥
Joined: 30 August 2010
Posts: 74,573 User: 11,746 
               |
QUOTE(Joe. @ Jun 26 2017, 09:32 AM)  I'm a bit confused by this. What happens when an artist releases a 4th single? Or if a album track is doing well and then becomes a single afterwards. Presumably the 4th single won't be eligible to chart until it overtakes one of the artists' first three singles then. Castle on the Hill could potentially drop from the top 50 to outside the top 200 if What Do I Know overtakes, say. |
 |
 
|
|
26th June 2017, 08:42 AM
Post
#22
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 11 October 2013
Posts: 31,028 User: 19,931
   |
QUOTE(danG @ Jun 26 2017, 09:41 AM) Presumably the 4th single won't be eligible to chart until it overtakes one of the artists' first three singles then. Castle on the Hill could potentially drop from the top 50 to outside the top 200 if What Do I Know overtakes, say. Oh, it's an "at the same time" thing? So it's not like an artist can't release 4 singles from one campaign? |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 08:45 AM
Post
#23
|
|
|
🔥🚀🔥
Joined: 30 August 2010
Posts: 74,573 User: 11,746
|
that's how I'm reading it anyway. I doubt the OCC would want to discourage artists from releasing 4 singles from an album, it's just that they won't all be able to chart at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 08:49 AM
Post
#24
|
|
 Buy yourself a car, and a house in Devon
Joined: 6 May 2016
Posts: 23,892 User: 23,247
     |
Loving the second rule! I've always hoped that some sort of 'percentage decrease' rule would be put in place but never thought it was possible.
|
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 08:53 AM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Buy yourself a car, and a house in Devon
Joined: 6 May 2016
Posts: 23,892 User: 23,247
|
Although one quick question- by 'declined' does it mean declined in sales or declined in chart position?
|
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 09:04 AM
Post
#26
|
|
|
BuzzJack Gold Member
Joined: 18 May 2007
Posts: 3,628 User: 3,429
|
I would rather they came up with something more sophisticated than rule 2, but it's a good start. I wasn't expecting them to do anything like that!
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 26 2017, 08:36 AM) But what happens if it's sales subsequently increase again? I expect it'll need to increase by a certain percentage before they release the cap |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 09:22 AM
Post
#27
|
|
|
BuzzJack Gold Member
Joined: 18 May 2007
Posts: 3,628 User: 3,429
|
So by my calculations, from this week's Top 40 we'd have these capped:
15 Clean Bandit 17 Ed Sheeran (Shape Of You) 18 Jason Derulo 22 J Hus 25 Ed Sheeran (Galway Girl) 26 Chainsmokers (unless its One Love Manchester boost gave it a temporary reprieve) 27 Cheat Codes 29 Martin Jensen 32 Ed Sheeran (Castle On The Hill) 34 Bruno Mars 35 Calvin Harris (Slide) 37 Zedd & Alessia Cara 39 Kygo & Selena Gomez 40 Rag'N'Bone Man I suppose anything top 25 would still have a shot of holding on to top 40? And most of these would get promoted to top 40 41 Lil Uzi Vert 44 Hailee Steinfeld 45 Kygo & Ellie Goulding 46 Jax Jones & Demi Lovato 48 Martin Garrix & Troye Sivan 49 Olly Murs & Louisa Johnson 50 Katy Perry & Nicki Minaj 51 Post Malone & Quavo I suppose some weeks we could see songs sub-top 60 getting through to the top 40. Ed Sheeran would only lose 2 songs off the chart altogether this week and Little Mix would lose 1, can't spot anyone else who's got more than 3 in the top 100. |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 09:23 AM
Post
#28
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 November 2015
Posts: 33,255 User: 22,665
  |
so in the case of Drake's one dance, they would have applied the cap after week 10 even if the song was at #1 (guess sales were decreasing)
Personally I don't think there should be a cap and they should come up with a way of distinguishing proper album streams vs. random track streams. I think thats the big issue. When Drake or Kendrick Lamar clog the single charts with their album tracks, no one is buying those songs on iTunes and most streams come from people streaming the album in full or most of it, so those tracks shouldn't be in the singles charts... but then the Ed situation is totally different, people were indeed buying those songs individually on iTunes so why exclude them from the charts when people are genuinely buying them? This post has been edited by Bjork: 26th June 2017, 09:36 AM |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 09:34 AM
Post
#29
|
|
|
BuzzJack Climber
Joined: 29 May 2009
Posts: 77 User: 8,938
  |
QUOTE(Bjork @ Jun 26 2017, 09:23 AM) so in the case of Drake's one dance, they would have applied the cap after week 10 even if the song was at #1 (guess sales were decreasing) I personally think the #1 rule is silly but I guess Spotify can't distinguish when someone streams an album in full vs. some random tracks. Pretty sure it means 4 tracks simultaneously not 4th single. I think spotify can do that. it's not difficult thing for them when they can track how long people listen to the tracks, or how many are from free or paid. they're information company, those things are very easy. But charts don't interested in that simply because that will kill most of SEA. (like Billboard/RIAA lol) also OCC's SEA rule already killed the hit single driven SEA number unlike Billboard, so they don't need it. |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 09:34 AM
Post
#30
|
|
|
BuzzJack Gold Member
Joined: 18 May 2007
Posts: 3,628 User: 3,429
|
QUOTE(Bjork @ Jun 26 2017, 09:23 AM) so in the case of Drake's one dance, they would have applied the cap after week 10 even if the song was at #1 (guess sales were decreasing) I personally think the #1 rule is silly but I guess Spotify can't distinguish when someone streams an album in full vs. some random tracks. Pretty sure it means 4 tracks simultaneously not 4th single. Perhaps we'll see there's a rule that doesn't apply the cap until it leaves the top 5 or something |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 09:47 AM
Post
#31
|
|
|
They've had the very Tunnocks, Mary
Joined: 13 March 2011
Posts: 5,509 User: 13,208
 |
Hmmm. I had a feeling a rule like this would be forthcoming after 'Dividegate' as I've now called it. This isn't the smartest move, granted - in fact it's up there with the whole 'chart on download only before week of physical release/disappear from chart once physical stocks have depleted' rule of 2006.
This is the trouble with earlier rules the OCC implemented such as the one that any download sale or stream counted towards the chart, regardless of if there was a physical equivalent. Once you open the floodgates so to speak, there is very little you can do to control it. You can try, but with difficulty. As has been pointed out above I'm not sure why it's logistically impossible for streams of an album to not be kept seperate from the singles chart when it's clear you've got a mammoth seller like Ed Sheeran's or Drake's on your hands which is quite patently being listened to as an album. Also, it puts record companies in an awkward position where they've got an act whose first single or first two singles off a new album are clear cut, but the third or even the second one maybe aren't so much until fans start buying and listening to the album and cherry picking their favourite and giving their feedback. Deciding automatically what the third single is potentially means some artists don't get to release a single that has potential and genuine chart power behind it, rather than a standard 'third single off the album, treading water' scenario. Just to take an example from thin air, Labrinth and Emeli Sande's single 'Beneath Your Beautiful' was the fifth single off his first album. If the 'nominate three singles' rule had been in place in 2012, that wouldn't have gone on to be the massive number one hit it became. I have a feeling we'll have about a year of this rule being in place, then they'll make some further tweaks until it's something that works for both the industry and fans. For the time being though, it's tolerable but not ideal. |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 10:00 AM
Post
#32
|
|
|
BuzzJack Gold Member
Joined: 18 May 2007
Posts: 3,628 User: 3,429
|
From what Robbie's saying he's read though it's just going to be the three top sellers, no nominating by labels?
And how would you count an album stream? When you listen to all songs in order from start to finish? I doubt many people do that anyway. This post has been edited by AcerBen: 26th June 2017, 10:02 AM |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 10:04 AM
Post
#33
|
|
|
BuzzJack Idol
Joined: 8 December 2010
Posts: 50,978 User: 12,472
 |
QUOTE(Robbie @ Jun 26 2017, 09:12 AM) 1. a cap on the number of tracks by an artist that can feature in the Top 100. Only the three most popular tracks by a lead artist will now be eligible for the charts although songs on which an artist is a featured artist will not count towards that total. So this still doesn't answer my previous query of what happens if the three most popular tracks change on a week by week basis. Not sure I totally like the sound of the second rule either. Besides, no dount total salea will remain at 1:100 anyway. |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 10:10 AM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Buy yourself a car, and a house in Devon
Joined: 6 May 2016
Posts: 23,892 User: 23,247
|
Although this will result in chart runs like 8-6-5-3-3-3-2-3-4-5-28-29-30... which is definitely a little odd
|
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 10:11 AM
Post
#35
|
|
|
BuzzJack Platinum Member
Pronouns: He/Him
Joined: 28 July 2013 Posts: 5,076 User: 19,614
   |
I don't know all the raw numbers so this isn't 100% accurate, but if the rule is that only an artist's 3 biggest songs count each week, and that the 150>300 rule is permanent, the Sheeran situation would have played out like this:
Week 1: Shape/Castle debut on the charts, as per normal Week 7: How Would You Feel debuts at #2 Week 9: Divide's release impacts, Galway debuts at #2, How Would You Feel vanishes and the rest of the album tracks don't chart Week 13: Shape/Castle having had 3 weeks of declines post-album release both are penalised. Shape drops from #1 to out of the top 10, while Castle disappears completely, to be replaced by Perfect which debuts just outside the top 10. Galway also reaches #1 this week Week 19: Galway now up to its 11th week and having declined those 3 previous weeks, gets the penalty and drops down out of the top 40, potentially replaced by What Do I Know Week 23: Perfect now up to its 11th week and having declined those 3 previous weeks, gets the penalty and is removed from the chart, replaced by whichever of Galway/What Do I Know wasn't already back in the chart (Week 25 is present) Week 29/33: What Do I Know potentially has suffered 3 weeks of declines and is booted out of the chart, replaced by either Happier or Castle, depending on which is higher at that point This pattern continues as long as there are yet-to-debut Sheeran tracks high enough to reach the chart, and of course there's any chance that an order change could cause even more re-entry/disappearance I have always maintained that this specific scenario is an extreme perfect storm that I can scarcely imagine being repeated to the very degree, but this particular kerfuffle is all quite amusing to me. This post has been edited by Dircadirca: 26th June 2017, 10:21 AM |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 10:17 AM
Post
#36
|
|
|
Infamy Infamy they all got it in for me
Joined: 5 March 2006
Posts: 129,134 User: 2
   |
So... if a track was still #1 on its 10th week, and starts decreasing, does it mean the week after it will drop to for example #9, that feels so wrong as nothing will ever beat Bryan Adams record. When the track has potential to stay at #1 for a few weeks longer.
|
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 10:18 AM
Post
#37
|
|
|
🔥🚀🔥
Joined: 30 August 2010
Posts: 74,573 User: 11,746
|
for Eurovision fans, if the rule was implemented earlier (ignoring the percentage rule) then Lucie Jones would have charted at #64, Salvador Sobral at #78 and Blanche at #89 (she officially missed the top 100, thanks to Harry Styles and J Hus album tracks).
|
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 10:20 AM
Post
#38
|
|
|
BuzzJack Gold Member
Joined: 18 May 2007
Posts: 3,628 User: 3,429
|
QUOTE(PeteFromLeeds @ Jun 26 2017, 10:10 AM) Although this will result in chart runs like 8-6-5-3-3-3-2-3-4-5-28-29-30... which is definitely a little odd I don't think it'll be as dramatic as that. A song at #5 might get 10,000 downloads and 30,000 worth of streams, so with the cap that'd bring it down from a total of 40,000 to 25,000 so more like 5-17 or something. It'll get worse as download sales continue to decline though. I think they ought to only implement the rule outside the top 10 as well. |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 10:21 AM
Post
#39
|
|
|
🔥🚀🔥
Joined: 30 August 2010
Posts: 74,573 User: 11,746
|
QUOTE(Mart!n @ Jun 26 2017, 11:17 AM) So... if a track was still #1 on its 10th week, and its starts decreasing, does it mean the week after it will drop to for example #9, that feels so wrong as nothing will ever beat Bryan Adams record. When the track has potential to stay at #1 for a few weeks longer. But potentially it would have to decrease its chart position for three weeks on the go (we still haven't had confirmation if it's decrease in sales or position) Looking at Shape of You, the percentage decrease would only take effect in the bolded period. 1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-2-1-2-3-4-5-7-9-10-11-17->24 |
|
|
|
|
26th June 2017, 10:23 AM
Post
#40
|
|
|
Infamy Infamy they all got it in for me
Joined: 5 March 2006
Posts: 129,134 User: 2
|
QUOTE(Robbie @ Jun 26 2017, 09:40 AM) 2. Once a track has been on the chart for at least 10 weeks and has declined for three consecutive weeks its streaming to sales ratio will change from 150:1 to 300:1 in an attempt to accelerate its disappearance from the chart This sounds like a April fool joke 3 months too late |
|
|
|
|
| Time is now: 25th April 2024, 08:40 PM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
