Isn't the streaming age the opposite, more people listen to music now and contribute towards the charts than ever before? Back in the day Westlife, Girls Aloud etc could get top 10 after top 10 singles because they had a dedicated fanbase who purchased every single they released. It wasn't what the general wider public were listening too and some of the chart runs were small, but the charts were made for fanbase acts to succeed.

 

And as much as I loathe Westlife and their gamey release week practices, how I wish it was back to something like that, because at least the fanbase acts mattered to a different portion of people each week. You might have Westlife challenging for the top one week but that'd be alongside Eminem, Sugababes, Arctic Monkeys, Usher, Evanescence, the latest DJ party hit from Europe, all appealing to vastly different audiences and the variety makes it more like a battle, makes it matter more who wins out. Now it's an exercise in which bland radio-filler will be top against a sea of other bland radio fillers and there simply is no reason for people to care. Though I'll say, to his credit, Stormzy of all people is moving things in the right direction again. And that's, like T Boy said, the charts are now so controlled by one demographic who probably are putting the 'coolest' (read: inoffensive so no one goes 'what is this shit? your music taste sucks', I should start doing that for inoffensive songs) songs on as background noise and that's all counting.

 

The amalgamation of the charts into people's listening habits, this demographic who skews towards streaming, completely removes this sort of interesting genre battle where you'll probably love one song in the race to the top of the charts but hate the other and the loss of that loses a lot of entertainment value from the charts as an entity.

We both loathe Westlife Iz!!! :wub:

I don't think this will ever happen on such a large scale again. If a lot of people listen to a song, regardless of the situation, it should be counted. The streaming representation in the album chart is already very low compared to other countries so I don't think there will be too much interference with the album chart~

That's what people were saying about 25 ... :/

What about when Justin Bieber releases a new album? Or Ed's fourth album? There will be more times when entire albums make the chart, perhaps not on the massive scale that the current Ed album is (and he's at his career peak now, I can't see his next album outdoing this) but still something worth debating.

And as much as I loathe Westlife and their gamey release week practices, how I wish it was back to something like that, because at least the fanbase acts mattered to a different portion of people each week. You might have Westlife challenging for the top one week but that'd be alongside Eminem, Sugababes, Arctic Monkeys, Usher, Evanescence, the latest DJ party hit from Europe, all appealing to vastly different audiences and the variety makes it more like a battle, makes it matter more who wins out. Now it's an exercise in which bland radio-filler will be top against a sea of other bland radio fillers and there simply is no reason for people to care. Though I'll say, to his credit, Stormzy of all people is moving things in the right direction again. And that's, like T Boy said, the charts are now so controlled by one demographic who probably are putting the 'coolest' (read: inoffensive so no one goes 'what is this shit? your music taste sucks', I should start doing that for inoffensive songs) songs on as background noise and that's all counting.

 

The amalgamation of the charts into people's listening habits, this demographic who skews towards streaming, completely removes this sort of interesting genre battle where you'll probably love one song in the race to the top of the charts but hate the other and the loss of that loses a lot of entertainment value from the charts as an entity.

 

We can all judge things with rose tinted glasses. Little Mix are not the same demogrpahic as Stormzy and Rag'n'Bone man, Sia, Drake, Ed, Adele, Rihanna, I wouldn't even know what genre to put Clean Bandit in.

 

The only thing streaming has done is slow down the chart, which I think is easily solved by just putting a cap on streams from each person that can count towards the chart. Once a person has streamed a song so many times their streams stop counting towards the chart. It would keep things moving more.

 

I'm 28 my bf is 37 we both stream most of our music (wish I was a teenager).

I love Arctic Monkeys but if their debut album filled the charts back in early 2006 because everyone was listening to it, I'd have been annoyed. In fact, I remember their follow up being one of the first times that multiple album tracks charted within the top 100. If they'd clogged up the top 40, again I'd have been annoyed.

the charts are now so controlled by one demographic who probably are putting the 'coolest' (read: inoffensive so no one goes 'what is this shit? your music taste sucks', I should start doing that for inoffensive songs) songs on as background noise and that's all counting

 

Well speaking from a dance perspective, Love On Me by Galantis wasn't that 'cool' or bland sounding it was more lively a dance track than most. Same with Stormzy's 'Cold'. Dance tracks like that are a minority in dance in the charts now though, even on the iTunes chart. I think it's Radio 1's fault too for putting so many beige future bass and tropical house songs on in the daytime while leaving the more interesting dance to night time shows like Dance Anthems.

Edited March 4, 20178 yr by The Wise Sultan

LOL love how you actually gave him a point by explaining how people are indeed acting like sheep.

 

And in the age of Internet, the lack of time is such a lazy and stupid excuse, everything is free out there and ready for people to enjoy.

're not having time: one makes time if one is passionate about music. So yes that's a poor excuse. I basically do 2 jobs for the price of 1, and care for 2 elderly ailing parents AND keep in touch with friends and go to the cinema. Still find time to check out New music though....

 

Ed Sheehan is the thinking teenage girls one direction. A bit more folksy substance but a bit bland and soppy with occasional good pop songs. Adele appeals to all ages in a traditional quality Mor fashion.

Ed Sheeran is no different to Adele, Dido, James Blunt, Norah Jones, Coldplay, Keane etc. and all the huge album sellers of the 21st Century - it's not vintage classics the odd standout aside, they make accessible music appealing to all age ranges that very few would utterly object to hearing in the background that can easily be played on the radio and found online, this has ALWAYS been what is needed to make it big and it's not really snobbish to say his music appeals to people that don't like music (and/or don't have the time to look for new music) - if anything, it's a strength! The big hits in the Spotify era have been the same honestly, all the songs on the main Spotify playlists seem to be designed for playing in the background, party soundtracks etc., I get their appeal and why people like them, but for me, it's just unexciting music and it's why I stopped listening to the charts and looked for new music elsewhere. I still check every so often but even then, I tend to forget it's even on.

 

Re: the chart's current status, I can't see what they could do to prevent things like this without making it look unrepresentative of the public's buying/listening habits but I agree it's not healthy for the industry if no new artists are breaking in, I DO feel like more of an effort should be made by the OCC and the broadcasters of the chart to promote newer music outside of the top 40, the bubbling under chart the OCC do should definitely be given airtime, yes go through the chart as always, but wouldn't it make more sense to have more time given to new up and coming music that could go on to connect with the public than playing an all Ed Sheeran top 5 in full for the tenth week in a row?

Edited March 4, 20178 yr by Chez Wombat

Ain't it cheaper buying the album instead of streaming it

Not when you can listen on Spotify for FREE... :lol:

 

I don't mind them being in THIS chart individually, I just think they should tweak the rules for the official charts. I like the "if a certain percentage of the album is listened to, it should count to the albums chart" rule.

This is why, I insist, there should be a rule that if a user streamed more than a certain percentage of tracks per album all those tracks should only count to the album chart.

 

 

Yes that sounds fair to me.

The singles + Eraser are by far the strongest songs on Sheeran's album. I don't think it'll occupy the whole top ten on Friday

What a hot mess the UK singles chart has become so rapidly - I hope he does get the Top 16 as it will force the OCC to do something, can you imagine if he had released a 32 track album or something?! :lol:

Ed Sheeran is no different to Adele, Dido, James Blunt, Norah Jones, Coldplay, Keane etc. and all the huge album sellers of the 21st Century - it's not vintage classics the odd standout aside, they make accessible music appealing to all age ranges that very few would utterly object to hearing in the background that can easily be played on the radio and found online, this has ALWAYS been what is needed to make it big and it's not really snobbish to say his music appeals to people that don't like music (and/or don't have the time to look for new music) - if anything, it's a strength! The big hits in the Spotify era have been the same honestly, all the songs on the main Spotify playlists seem to be designed for playing in the background, party soundtracks etc., I get their appeal and why people like them, but for me, it's just unexciting music and it's why I stopped listening to the charts and looked for new music elsewhere. I still check every so often but even then, I tend to forget it's even on.

 

Aren't party soundtracks usually supposed to be more lively dance songs though, rather than the more chilled tropical house or future bass which is more for background listening?

We can all judge things with rose tinted glasses. Little Mix are not the same demogrpahic as Stormzy and Rag'n'Bone man, Sia, Drake, Ed, Adele, Rihanna, I wouldn't even know what genre to put Clean Bandit in.

 

The only thing streaming has done is slow down the chart, which I think is easily solved by just putting a cap on streams from each person that can count towards the chart. Once a person has streamed a song so many times their streams stop counting towards the chart. It would keep things moving more.

 

I'm 28 my bf is 37 we both stream most of our music (wish I was a teenager).

 

Listing off a bunch of 00s acts and waxing about 00s nostalgia wasn't the point of my post. Well, it was a little of a point of my post but... look at the difference between my list and your list. My list is a quick reeling off of some of the 00s superstars. Maybe 20% of the list of acts who could reasonably be expected to get a big hit in the charts back then - and as basically any new act could get a chance with a week's push behind it, even less of the total. They're all incredibly diverse, their songs don't sound the same. Your list, by contrast, contains probably a majority of the list of acts who could get a big hit in the charts today. It's much harder for a new act to push through and only if they sound like one of those people will they get a chance. They're also a lot less diverse, there's no rock, there's barely any 'pure pop', fringes of genres have no chance to even score a rare crossover track anymore. Some outliers aside it's a mush of RnB-tinged-house-adult-contemporary, and they all influence each other to the point where there is a lot of overlap and there's going to be few people who love one and hate the other.

 

And this paints me as even more elitist but I've come this far, they just aren't as innovative. Clean Bandit (and now Stormzy, I keep forgetting how much of a moment Big For Your Boots has been as a landmark song for grime, even now I'd say that's a future classic) are the only ones who I'd say are genuinely innovative and even they are suffering as the focus on them as one of the few chart acts who can get a hit forces them to make more chart-friendly accessible music. Most of what I listed, some were the 00s counterparts, true, but others, Eminem, Arctic Monkeys, had songs with talking points, songs that made people care, songs that inspired news articles about their content, about their controversy. The only news articles today's chart hits are inspiring is when they just won't go away. Streaming has moved Chez' list of the adult contemporary radio fillers (about half of your list) into the mainstream of the charts completely blocking out anything else instead of just taking up some spaces like they used to do. And it's relegating interesting music that once would have gained some recognition through a week of hype and sales to just talk and hearsay and that's not healthy for music remaining interesting if these are the superstars of today.

Aren't party soundtracks usually supposed to be more lively dance songs though, rather than the more chilled tropical house or future bass which is more for background listening?

 

Well from my (limited) experience of house parties, background music usually suffices, not like anyone hears it anyway over the noise :P anyway it's the sort of dance that even if it is lively is just dull tropical house fusions, or The Chainsmokers, most of their songs pretty much define 'dull background party music' that Spotify playlists lap up so it's no surprise that they are the forefront of dance atm.

Edited March 4, 20178 yr by Chez Wombat

're not having time: one makes time if one is passionate about music. So yes that's a poor excuse.

 

But that's the point - lots of people, probably most people, aren't particularly interested in music. It's not compulsory.

Well from my (limited) experience of house parties, background music usually suffices, not like anyone hears it anyway over the noise :P anyway it's the sort of dance that even if it is lively is just dull tropical house fusions, or The Chainsmokers, most of their songs pretty much define 'dull background party music' that Spotify playlists lap up so it's no surprise that they are the forefront of dance atm.

 

Thats sad the music at house parties isn't very ravey any more!

 

The problem is that Radio 1 doesn't daytime playlist many lively dance tracks. I wish Radio 1 daytime playlisted more of the Friday and Saturday night dance anthems stuff, it is a lot more lively and interesting than stuff like Scared To Be Lonely.

 

I've just listened to Ed's new album. I don't get the hate. Yes, it's very poppy and made to appeal to the mainstream audience. But at the same time, it's very listenable. I plan to listen more in the coming days.

 

I understand that many chart watchers don't want album tracks to chart on the singles chart, but at this point, every song on the album can be considered a single. And the biggest artists will continue putting their album tracks on the chart.