This is a BAD idea.

No, no, no, no, no.....

Am I right in thinking this 'new' concept would allow people to constantly view youtube vids, each time counting as a 'sale' towards the chart??!

I know people complain about the charts not accuratey reflecting what people are listening to, but they're close enough aren't they!?!! Afterall the UK top 40 has always been a chart compiled on what music people are BUYING! theres a big diffrence between liking a record so much you would part with your money, and just clicking on a free video on some website!!

 

The top 40 should stay as it is.

 

 

I think this post says it all.

 

It's like they are throwing the kitchen sink with all the trimmings. Very bad idea.

you're so right, the charts should reflect what people are actually paying for. Not on what they are getting for free!!!! :puke2: Then with that logic they should also count illegal and free downloads into the charts, right??

it's a silly idea really.

Exactly. You can't just pick and choose <_<

 

This new idea, if it comes into effect, would be on a par with the Big Top 40's brilliant idea of using airplay stats for 40-11 and not the top ten. :blink:

Then Bad Romance would be #1 for like, forever. :puke2:

Awful idea.

I think its good and bad- it will certainly reflect popularity, but I feel they will be more pop/RnB biased, and the less well known bands with good songs may be ignored

 

I hope they dont add airplay- as the chart will turn into hit40uk! :lol:

It sounds to me like Radio 1's chart show listening figures are so $h!te that they're trying to come up with ways to "beat" the opposition and this is what they've come up with. Wouldn't it be ironic if they ditched the official sales chart and commercial radio got hold of it....

It sounds to me like Radio 1's chart show listening figures are so $h!te that they're trying to come up with ways to "beat" the opposition and this is what they've come up with. Wouldn't it be ironic if they ditched the official sales chart and commercial radio got hold of it....

 

They are. In this month's The Word magazine they did a piece on the BBC chart show stating how it only gets 1.6 to 1.7 million listeners every Sunday; around 3.5 times less than Chris Moyles' week day breakfast show gets.

 

In stark contrast, back in the 1980s when the chart moved to Sunday's for the first time a regular 7-8 million people tuned in, making it the most listened to show on the station.

 

Here's a better idea ... instead of getting rid of the current chart, which is near perfect, how about having a format to the show where a DJ hosting it gives accurate information regarding the acts and the songs on the charts; keeps tittle tattle gossip to a minimum; playing as many records as possible; and have a DJ host it who clearly does not show a blatant bias for or against records in the charts ...... just like the classic Mark Goodier/Bruno Brookes era.

 

Hardly rocket science is it. :lol:

Then Bad Romance would be #1 for like, forever. :puke2:

 

Yeah, if they did that, songs like Bad Romance and Meet Me Halfway would still be in like the top 10. And lots of album tracks would be charting much higher.

 

The thing is, people only buy a track once, but they can listen to their favourite tracks, for years after it's released. Wouldn't we have songs like I Gotta Feeling and Poker Face just being in the charts for an eternity.

 

Yeah, if they did that, songs like Bad Romance and Meet Me Halfway would still be in like the top 10. And lots of album tracks would be charting much higher.

 

The thing is, people only buy a track once, but they can listen to their favourite tracks, for years after it's released. Wouldn't we have songs like I Gotta Feeling and Poker Face just being in the charts for an eternity.

 

IMO it sounds like a bad joke.

 

There's also weighting issues - how much would an actual sale be worth, versus a song that's merely streamed?

OMG. Imagine all the Chav Anthems included if they include YT hits...

 

BUT, I kinda like the idea, maybe not YT hits, but Myspace, Yahoo, Spotify, and MSN definitely, where they can actually control the hits per week I guess - the charts are all about what's popular IMO, and just because people don't BUY a track, it doesn't mean it's not popular. Also, those who think songs like Poker Face and I Gotta Feeling will still be in the chart, that is where the US method can be used where a song falls off the chart automatically if it falls below the top 40/50 after so many weeks. I'm personally all for it. I also like the idea that album tracks can chart higher and popular Indie artists with lots of online hits can still chart and get themselves known without megasales that they wouldn't normally get.

OMG. Imagine all the Chav Anthems included if they include YT hits...

 

BUT, I kinda like the idea, maybe not YT hits, but Myspace, Yahoo, Spotify, and MSN definitely, where they can actually control the hits per week I guess - the charts are all about what's popular IMO, and just because people don't BUY a track, it doesn't mean it's not popular. Also, those who think songs like Poker Face and I Gotta Feeling will still be in the chart, that is where the US method can be used where a song falls off the chart automatically if it falls below the top 40/50 after so many weeks. I'm personally all for it. I also like the idea that album tracks can chart higher and popular Indie artists with lots of online hits can still chart and get themselves known without megasales that they wouldn't normally get.

I think there is a difference between SALES and POPULARITY charts. In the sales charts should never be involved Youtube, Myspace and other such sites and airplay neither because it would make the chart just a mess.

If people watch a song on Youtube, Myspace, MSN etc that doesn't mean automatically that it's a popular song. People are just curious. Cheating danger is also a lot higher. People could do campaigns to make songs chart by using these sites and watching songs without any purpose, so crap songs could chart as well. In fact even more often. ("Get these and that song to number 1", with a popularity chart these goals are much much easier to achieve only by watching a video a couple of times, without paying for it)

 

As I said before album tracks are allowed to chart now as well so I don't get the argument about album tracks. BTW another question about album tracks, if album tracks get more promo/popularity etc, what will be the sense to release singles anymore?

 

I also like the idea that album tracks can chart higher and popular Indie artists with lots of online hits can still chart and get themselves known without megasales that they wouldn't normally get.

So what if they chart without sales? That won't mean they will be more popular, maybe more known. That doesn't mean either their sales could be higher, so they can still sink into nowhere.

 

Of course my opinion is NOT against popularity charts (including Youtube, MSN Myspace whatevefr), but I'm against it to involve these sites into the sales chart! Popularity charts should be made separately.

There's also weighting issues - how much would an actual sale be worth, versus a song that's merely streamed?

That's what I thought, even if they added up the total internet hits for a song, and added on the week's sales for it, the sales would hardly count for anything :unsure:

They are. In this month's The Word magazine they did a piece on the BBC chart show stating how it only gets 1.6 to 1.7 million listeners every Sunday; around 3.5 times less than Chris Moyles' week day breakfast show gets.

 

In stark contrast, back in the 1980s when the chart moved to Sunday's for the first time a regular 7-8 million people tuned in, making it the most listened to show on the station.

 

Here's a better idea ... instead of getting rid of the current chart, which is near perfect, how about having a format to the show where a DJ hosting it gives accurate information regarding the acts and the songs on the charts; keeps tittle tattle gossip to a minimum; playing as many records as possible; and have a DJ host it who clearly does not show a blatant bias for or against records in the charts ...... just like the classic Mark Goodier/Bruno Brookes era.

 

Hardly rocket science is it. :lol:

 

Couldnt have said it better

 

If Reggie is still presenting this time next year, with the same old tired format and MOBO- biased playing- it will be around 600-700k listeners

is that "source' still reporting stuff to the 'currant' bun??

this 'idea' was floated about couple years ago via musicweek...

Then Bad Romance would be #1 for like, forever. :puke2:

 

I now love this idea :dance:

 

 

That's what I thought, even if they added up the total internet hits for a song, and added on the week's sales for it, the sales would hardly count for anything :unsure:

 

I expect they'd try and make sales & streaming each count for 50%, or maybe weight it a bit more towards sales, so that people don't get too angry/upset.