Multipli accounts? Using their mates? Who knows? But it sure gets on my tits!

That's crap. I'm sorry. You must be a big fan or really a fanatic to ask your mates to buy the song for you once again, or to create second or third accounts to buy a song 2-3 times. :wacko:

 

In fact in the physical era you had more chance to buy a CD single multiple times, you just put 10 or 15 pieces in your basket. It was much easier!

That's crap. I'm sorry. You must be a big fan or really a fanatic to ask your mates to buy the song for you once again, or to create second or third accounts to buy a song 2-3 times. :wacko:

 

In fact in the physical era you had more chance to buy a CD single multiple times, you just put 10 or 15 pieces in your basket. It was much easier!

But that was easily spotted. Anyway I don't know about iTunes, but I've bought the same things, more than once on Amazon, loads of times, because you tend to lose them, if you change PCs etc.

I agree the charts are democratic these days - what people buy gets in the chart - just about end of.

 

So what if songs hang around for ages - the market is very healthy and what business is it of yours if someone wishes to buy an Adele song this week. They sure aren't doing it to 'get on your tits' they are doing it because THEY LIKE IT.

 

<_>

But that was easily spotted. Anyway I don't know about iTunes, but I've bought the same things, more than once on Amazon, loads of times, because you tend to lose them, if you change PCs etc.

I'm almost sure there is a rule in the charts, if you buy too many copies from the same song, your sales won't count. It is easy to check because you're registered with an IP address or Credit card.

 

I can remember it happened that a track or single was either DSQ or some sales were not counted because of multiple copies. I don't know though which song(s). Maybe a McFly song?

 

But that was easily spotted.

Sure, an OCC officer was in every CD shop to check who buys how many copies... :heehee: and the cashier couldn't be bothered either imo

For a time it seemed Radio 1 completely stopped caring about the chart, they'd spend more of the time chatting about random shite than talking about the actual chart but recently not only does the chart show seem to be more focused on the actual charts (playing every song in the top 40 and whatnot) but I also hear a lot more ads for the chart show than I used to a few months ago.

 

Exactly! It's unfair to say that the chart show and the music in the chart is rubbish when the chart show has massively improved/upped its game in the past six months and the music in the chart reflects what people are buying and downloading! -_-

Exactly! It's unfair to say that the chart show and the music in the chart is rubbish when the chart show has massively improved/upped its game in the past six months and the music in the chart reflects what people are buying and downloading! -_-

The recent change in the chart show has improved the first two hours. With 30 songs to fit in in that time there isn't much time left for all the waffle which annoys so many people here. Sadly there's now an awful lot of waffle in the final hour.

I'm almost sure there is a rule in the charts, if you buy too many copies from the same song, your sales won't count. It is easy to check because you're registered with an IP address or Credit card.

 

I can remember it happened that a track or single was either DSQ or some sales were not counted because of multiple copies. I don't know though which song(s). Maybe a McFly song?

Sure, an OCC officer was in every CD shop to check who buys how many copies... :heehee: and the cashier couldn't be bothered either imo

With 45s, it was quite easily spotted because BMRB could easily see, it was happening. A team of people were paid (by another) to go to various shops & buy the same record. A record may not have been spotted straight away, but it would have been thrown out on the 2nd week, without doubt. This was notorious in the 70s (mainly with Melody Maker). With a TV show made to document it.

 

Anyway, what's to stop people, buying from 5 or 6 different download sites?

With 45s, it was quite easily spotted because BMRB could easily see, it was happening. A team of people were paid (by another) to go to various shops & buy the same record. A record may not have been spotted straight away, but it would have been thrown out on the 2nd week, without doubt. This was notorious in the 70s (mainly with Melody Maker). With a TV show made to document it.

 

Anyway, what's to stop people, buying from 5 or 6 different download sites?

Now you're making a point about the charts being representative of what people buy, but you've posted a whole thread where around 30% of weekly sales were never recorded- a bit ironic surely? :o

Anyway, what's to stop people, buying from 5 or 6 different download sites?

 

The fact that that would be a pointless waste of money?

Okay, most of this has gone over my head. :lol:

 

But the chart being so slow-moving annoys me. Why did the charts move faster in the 80's than they do now? I assume it's to do with radio stations overplaying songs so much now compared to back then? And downloads too of course.

 

There's nothing we can do about it though. Nobody is saying we should complain to the OCC and make them change their rules, just that it's a shame. Sexy and I Know It is going to have one of the longest chart runs for a #5 hit of ALL-TIME because people are choosing to buy it so much and so spread out. Nothing we can do about it.

 

It doesn't deseve it though. I'm sure there were more iconic and popular #5 hits than that from the 80's and 90's, but the charts evidently moved faster back then.

Now you're making a point about the charts being representative of what people buy, but you've posted a whole thread where around 30% of weekly sales were never recorded- a bit ironic surely? :o

I think my main point here (without everything being twisted about) is like Robbie said before. The Top 40 Singles has become a niche in the lack of variation it throws up, which can be attributed by the type & age of the buyers. For instance, in those days of 30% missed shops etc, there was a big range of age groups buying top 30 singles. It's a sign of the times today, yes. The Album Chart on the other hand, has yet to be effected by it. I wait with anticipation to see our brilliant Eurovision entry, enter the top 3 on the Singles chart...It may do well in the Contest, but will it, be a big big hit? Not likely.

 

Yeah, the charts tell me that Miss Average 22 year old, likes Adele. But it doesn't tell me, what Mr 45 year old, or Mrs 53 year old would buy. I look back to a day in 1968 & it tells me that, Miss Average 22 year old, would be likely to buy The Beatles or The Monkees. Mr 45 year old is a Rolling Stones fan, while Mrs 53 year old is likely to be buying Cliff Richard & Des O' Connor. If I want to find that out today, I have to take in the album chart, because it's a better reflection. I'm a big Iron Maiden, Cliff, Bowie, Noel Gallagher, & Paul Weller fan & want to see that reflected on Radio. So, when's the complete Album Countdown going to be broadcast? The truth is, is it never will be, because there is no Radio Station catering for everybody's taste in music. Both the BBC & Independant Radio have much to answer for.

Edited March 24, 201213 yr by davetaylor

I think my main point here (without everything being twisted about) is like Robbie said before. The Top 40 Singles has become a niche in the lack of variation it throws up, which can be attributed by the type & age of the buyers. For instance, in those days of 30% missed shops etc, there was a big range of age groups buying top 30 singles. It's a sign of the times today, yes. The Album Chart on the other hand, has yet to be effected by it. I wait with anticipation to see our brilliant Eurovision entry, enter the top 3 on the Singles chart...It may do well in the Contest, but will it, be a big big hit? Not likely.

 

Yeah, the charts tell me that Miss Average 22 year old, likes Adele. But it doesn't tell me, what Mr 45 year old, or Mrs 53 year old would buy. I look back to a day in 1968 & it tells me that, Miss Average 22 year old, would be likely to buy The Beatles or The Monkees. Mr 45 year old is a Rolling Stones fan, while Mrs 53 year old is likely to be buying Cliff Richard & Des O' Connor. If I want to find that out today, I have to take in the album chart, because it's a better reflection. I'm a big Iron Maiden, Cliff, Bowie, Noel Gallagher, & Paul Weller fan & want to see that reflected on Radio. So, when's the complete Album Countdown going to be broadcast? The truth is, is it never will be, because there is no Radio Station catering for everybody's taste in music. Both the BBC & Independant Radio have much to answer for.

Yes but you can take that back even further even to the late 70s/ early 80s, were people 40+ buying punk/ new wave/ new romantic tracks in big bulk? I doubt it presonally- the singles chart has always been led by youth (as it was tradionally cheaper and therefore more accessible by those on limited income/ pocket money etc) whereas the album market was more adult led as they were more expensive so there's certainly an economic argument there.

 

Isn't this an argument as old as time though- Radio 1 even in the mid 90s was chart led and the demographic was very much under 40s. Indeed one could argue that the rise of Radio 2 in the course of the 00s was an example of filling this gap and getting things into the charts that would normally have not been possible in the 90s (Gordon Haskell springs to mind), also the rise of acts like Norah Jones/ Eva Cassidy and Katie Melua were led by more adult orientated stations.

 

It's not only the fault of the radio stations either, record labels are just signing the under 25 acts who obviously make music for thier peers, there's some merit in the argument that, with a few exceptions, it's almost impossible to get a top 10 hit if your in your 40s now so the singles charts are certainly ageist and have been for some 20 years or more