For me, currently I'm stuck in the middle until I get to grips with the new rules, but I'm probably leaning towards option A, as more acts can enter the Top 40 singles chart, instead of having 1 or 2 entries a week. My only problem with it, Bryan Adams record reign at #1 will be hard to break :(

For me, currently I'm stuck in the middle until I get to grips with the new rules, but I'm probably leaning towards option A, as more acts can enter the Top 40 singles chart, instead of having 1 or 2 entries a week. My only problem with it, Bryan Adams record reign at #1 will be hard to break :(

It was hard to break anyway. If Drake and Ed Sheeran couldn't do it, I don't think anyone can. I'm personally glad that we won't be having songs spend upwards of 15 weeks at #1 anyway.

I'm glad no one will be able to top Bryan Adams, because it's a lot easier to do extended runs with streams so it wouldn't really mean anything.

It was hard to break anyway. If Drake and Ed Sheeran couldn't do it, I don't think anyone can. I'm personally glad that we won't be having songs spend upwards of 15 weeks at #1 anyway.

 

 

True... it would get boring after awhile, One Dance was a tad too much in the end.

Went for stuck in the middle.

 

Sure, it helps smaller acts hit the top 40. Chasing Highs for example. Although it's down to just pure manipulation. Many songs below it probably sold more but are getting punished for it.

I'm in the middle. It's definitely better in terms of boosting newer songs like Sigala, ALMA, Post Malone & Hailee & I love that it makes the movement faster as everyone wants that.

 

The ACR thing I'm not sure on though, it was necessary for the album tracks stuff & im enjoying the clutter being freshened up too but for me I'm not keen on it resulting in large drops even for songs like Shape of You, I didn't really like it the way it was but the 11-23 drop just seems so odd after all that time & it makes the chart look not so genuine & despite it keeping chart listeners interested for the newer music getting a better advantage it just feels like the chart from a natural standpoint has lost what made it special to start with. I know streaming & lack of movement doesn't keep people interested either though... its a hard one.

Edited July 8, 20178 yr by Rob S~

It's more fun to follow, but it stings that it's essentially a made up chart now that doesn't do what it says on the tin. So I'm in the middle.

I was a bit baffled by it about a week or two ago. But I think what our good chart watching friend James Masterton said on the matter is spot on: http://www.masterton.co.uk/2017/06/the-great-chart-shake-up/

Well for me on a personal level it's for the better as it makes the Friday Chart Shows more interesting which is the only Chart-related aspect I have any interest in these days. I don't agree with the change on every other level though.

I do think that mammoth drop for Castle is ridiculous. Kinda highlights the negative side of these rules. It's obvious to anymore reading those charts that comment on the OCC site that there's manipulation involved & doesn't improve the chart anymore than it did before except for people wanting fresh new entries increasing & better movement to remove the stagnation. It kinda looks like a sales chart (aside from Post & Lil Uzi) more than anything.

It's too early to say. We've only seen one chart going from one rule format to another - give it a few weeks and we'll see how the chart will really be moving.

Better! The chart show yesterday felt so much better because we got a couple of new entries that wouldn't have made it otherwise. It's important for new music to be represented better in the charts and this is exactly what the ACR rule is all about, so it's doing a great job so far imo.

 

The three-per-artist thing hasn't really come into effect too much yet, we'll see what that's like when someone like Justin Bieber releases an album :lol:

I hope it is a better change than before. I'd like to see more new music chart higher, but time will tell.

A hundred times better than the old level playing field streaming ratio! More fresh music.

My issue with the ongoing changes are that outside of listening to music, my next favourite thing is monitoring all kinds of records. Whether these are sales based, or most weeks spent inside certain positions etc.

 

If they continue to attack streams in this way I would like to see them split the records into Old Era and New Era. I love seeing all kinds of records broken and these changes further cement every current record in place. Everyone loves seeing a World Record or Olympic Record beaten, and whilst the rush is much less in music it's still great when it happens.

 

We will never see any standing Record, Sales or Weeks based, broken under the new rules and I doubt this'll be the end of the attack on streaming. Anyway that's my piece, I'll stop going on about it now. It was what it is. There are many other ways to promote the freshness of new music but hey ho.

I can't believe people think it's a bad idea. I don't care about the charts anymore, my faves have long since fallen out of favour with the gp, but it's ridiculous to look at the charts nowadays and say "Ed Sheeran's bigger than MJ and Madonna!!". It's impossible to make a fair comparison between the sales and the streaming era. They need to either stick with the "Official Singles Chart" and have only record label nominated singles be eligible to chart or give up and rebrand it as the Hot 100. Preferably the former!

I don't mind the album rules so much, as they had to do something about the Ed Sheeran fiasco as that was just plain ridiculous. But I think they could have gone about it a slightly better way than they have done, preventing previous singles from charting just because they aren't in the top 3 bestsellers is a bit harsh.

 

But for the singles chart I just think these rules are stupid;

 

1) They are super confusing and makes following the chart even more difficult.

 

2) Don't make any sense at all as to why after 10 weeks (why 10 weeks not shorter timespan) a song should suddenly loose half of its streaming. Either have it 300:1 all the way or dont bother.

 

3) After all is said and done I really do not believe this is going to make a vast amount of difference. This week it has due to the amount of clutter that was eligible to be stripped of its streaming, but the next few weeks may see one or maybe two songs being penalised so really thats only going to allow maybe one or two extra songs to chart, but i suppose over time we will see.

 

I can see them altering these rules several times before they (and certain record labels) are happy with the result. Streaming really is a doubled edged sword of acting as a new sales platform but also as airplay due to people listening to the same song over and over again without any limit on how its added to the chart, allowing songs to rack up months and months within the top 40. However, trying to enforce an artificial chart run imho is just manipulation and isn't going to solve the problems streaming creates.

 

Hope this was the right topic to bump but anyway...

 

So after 2 months I'm a little more negative on the chart affect from acr really because of the ridiculously harsh drops for songs put on acr especially after 9 weeks. Looking at the runs for Feels among others, to me it just looks really strange, like the 4-18 & 3-16... not to forget Instruction & Crying In The Club slumping from the top 20 to out of the top 40 :mellow:

 

Now I know this is done to reduce the never ending stableness in the top 5/3/10 whatever but I just wish they'd have made things seem a little more natural (I know acr makes it not *THAT* genuine anyway). For example I wish somgs after 9 weeks or whatever could only have say a 5/6 place drop the next week instead of 10+ especially for big hits like Wild Thoughts and again Feels, kinda takes away from their descent down the chart at a respectable pace for me :( also if the #1 song gets moved to acr and drops I don't think they should let that happen as for me it really takes away from the most organic selling song of the week by its own merit. If the #1 is losing steam normally then by all means it can drop down as long as the song that replaces it is genuinely the most sold. I'm glad New Rules was a legitimate number 1 anyway so that's not a problem but yea for me it should always represent still, what the biggest selling track is that should be #1 each week & shouldn't be manipulated with by being put on ACR aside from my point earlier about it losing steam naturally. (Apologies lots of waffling lol)

 

I do love that acr has benefited things to move quicker though and I'm loving the extra than average new entries so that's not a problem for me at all. I love that benefit from it actually so more of that please!

 

I have seen people mention gruadual ratio change would be a sensible decision, songs can still be put on acr but not drop so harshly. For example imo I would have had Unforgettable slip 3-9-12-17-21-24. Basically reducing the massive drop from 13 to 6 in the first week, yea it'd still descent fast but not *THAT* fast 3-6 place drops per week would be fine after a first week drop of 6/7 or something.

 

Certainly needs to be altered again but just for the two things I've stated as I still want it to reflect legitimacy. There's lots of people on this Facebook chart group thing I'm on saying that they wished if it was to help improve the chart

, to still make it seem legitimate and not a irrelevant one because of its attempt to speed things up and reduce the long running tracks etc!

 

This coming off the back that I listened to last weeks chart and heard most of those big hits suddenly extremely low not long after being top 5 or 10 :P

 

Anyhow long winded ocd ramblings over :lol:

Edited September 22, 20177 yr by Rob S~

The fact they only fall fast if their sales are reduced for three weeks in a row is ok even if the slump seems a bit big. After all not all slump so quickly showing they are still doing ok for example Rita Ora or Ed with Shape of You!

The fact they only fall fast if their sales are reduced for three weeks in a row is ok even if the slump seems a bit big. After all not all slump so quickly showing they are still doing ok for example Rita Ora or Ed with Shape of You!

Rita's not on ACR, her management have avoided it with sneaky 59p reductions :lol: