Poll, three months in to the streaming/sales chart, do you approve with how things are going or do you think it has messed up everything that was held sacred for years., or is it too early to tell.

Edited October 8, 201410 yr by smiffj

I think it is too early, I would wait 1 year, so until August 2015. I think labels still needs to accomodate to the new rules, to the presence of streaming in the chart.

BEHOLD: my terrible computer art skills/

 

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm82/TheMagicPosition86/streaming_zps1108f667.png

 

Red is tradiational download/physical sales

Black is streaming "Chart sales"

and Green is the new OCC combined "Chart sales" total.

 

Because traditional downloading is the 'held back' method, week 1 sales gives a huge peak which the track quickly falls away from. Unfortunately streaming does not work like that - it usually peaks in weeks 3-5 (for whatever reason), record companies for whatever reason seem to have wised up that both are very different and that there a simultaneous held back + download release leads to the combined run having a comparatively lower peak (compared to songs already charting) but a much slower drop off = boring 1 place drop each week. Now this may be because of iTunes throwing its weight around or whatever but it makes for a VERY dull Top 40 IMO.

 

You also get 'new entries' charting lower than expected and loads of predictable 'bloody steaming' venting going on.

 

Given time I expect more effort to be made to try and arrive at a greater combined peak, either by allowing streaming to take place 3-4 weeks before 'held back' release or by trying some method which I can't recall now, think they tried it in 2011 and then deliberately tried to sabotage it .. what was it called? I'm sure steve201 will remember..

 

Anyway, so I think it is too early to tell.

 

Radio is also to blame too for not supporting a wider array of songs and not moving on quickly after 6-8 weeks.

Too early to decide

it's not necessarily made the chart "better" from a subjective point of view (there've been some songs I would have liked to peak higher/go top 40), but I do approve of the change simply because it makes the chart a better reflection of popularity.

I'm not a fan of including streaming in the charts. Its not a "sale" in the sense that the track has not been purchased. What about people who listen to music on the radio? That's not included in streaming figures but the only difference is people aren't paying a subscription to listen to the radio. I don't see what streaming actually adds to the charts.

I'm not a fan of including streaming in the charts. Its not a "sale" in the sense that the track has not been purchased. What about people who listen to music on the radio? That's not included in streaming figures but the only difference is people aren't paying a subscription to listen to the radio. I don't see what streaming actually adds to the charts.

 

There's also the pretty glaring difference that people choose what they are listening to with streaming but don't when they listen to the radio...

I know it can be annoying for your favourite songs to miss out on a Top 5 or a Top 10 position, but if said song is just going to plummet down the charts, it's not really 'deserving' of a Top 5/10 position (or wherever it would have peaked on sales only). Also as mentioned, it represents what's popular much better than a chart based on sales only, so as sad as it is for you favourite song missing out on a better position, you'll just have to accept that it's just not as popular as you'd like it to be.

 

Besides, it's not as if songs are missing out on sales. In fact, they're getting extra ones thanks to streaming. So surely it's not all bad for a song to get a lower peak but better sales than if it would on the previous format for the charts.