4 hours ago, Dircadirca said:

I think the prevalence of older hit songs is a smokescreen for the real issue here: the rapid collapse of the very notion of the 'top 40 music fan'. It's a self-sustaining ecosystem that invites regular curiosities and regulates longevity through a self-contained audience that latches onto everything around the same time. What we've got at the moment is a look into a world where this isn't quite the same anymore. You still get those hits, but an audience that doesn't keep up as attentively as before, so a 16 week #1 article can be met with online comments completely unaware it existed, and in the process, giving it a new lease on life as it extends its potential audience to this day. The big stars are still big, but largely sustained on their big audiences who serve in a more isolated form of that top 40 fan, and also in a manner where the cult of the star matters more than the credentials of the song itself (eg Taylor Swift sustaining longevity through the exposure of a song being at the top of her Spotify artist page).

But here's the catch! We do still have that eager breed of music fan, evolved from the top 40 fan or otherwise that are still listening to new music and latching onto it in the same way. In fact, part of the problem is that they're all doing it at the same time and that's why most new songs peak on the first day. I could imagine a new chart system that works under the manner of this kind of listener (there's an Alternative chart I see posted online every now and then which seems to fit the bill), but they'll be blistered away by the sheer noise of the most popular artists. Artists like Taylor Swift, Billie Eilish etc are at a point where their entire discographies are incapable of dipping below a certain level of daily streams, and that's a level that most artists will never hit on their best day. The more exclusionary systems you create, the further you run towards just making something akin to an artist chart, where the latest single by a noteworthy artist becomes glued to the top end of the chart only until it's the newest member of the excluded club.

I always recommend looking at the ARIA New Music chart for an idea of how this plays out. It's an extreme example where everything drops off after 4 months (and there's a 3 track limit), but you're already witnessing that future in action. Olivia Rodrigo's songs are glued to the top 10 and just too far ahead to ever really fall out until their allotted time is up. The chart goes down to a Drake song at #20 which I doubt is even one of the top 100 biggest songs right now overall. The enormous gaps these exclusions create mean that there's hardly any movement week to week. Effectively you'd just be creating a chart that's as 'boring' as the one it's designed to fix, but without the credibility and intrigue that comes with actually being the most popular songs that week.

(Also not loving the excess of AI slop that keeps making the official chart only because ACR widens the opening. Given the suspect nature of a lot of that stuff's popularity, you're also inviting the possibility that real human activity, as dull as it might be, is replaced by a system where it's like Twitter and just bots talking to other bots)

This is a fantastically articulate post describing what the chart is becoming.

Rein Me In 1, Wonderwall 2 and 3 Lions at 3 today according to the OCC

https://www.officialcharts.com/chart-news/england-world-cup-songs-2026-wonderwall-three-lions-footballs-coming-home/

They are really pushing the wonderwall and Three lions narrative , not giving us any data though so

I’m enjoying the success of ‘Rein Me In’ but if any song dethrones it, I would be happy for it to be ‘Wonderwall’ - a song that deserves to be Number 1! I’m glad it’s overtaken ‘Three Lions’ - but ‘Three Lions’ will get a crucial Wednesday boost, and I also assume is doing better than ‘Wonderwall’ on Amazon.

So even if in reality, ‘Wonderwall’ does better over the course of the week, it may fall foul, of the lack of Spotify data on Thursday.

Oasis need to do a physical dump for Wonderwall

But at least RMI is listenable

I love Wonderwall as a song but honestly I can't stand the Oasis guys!

So rude about other artists and just come across like awful people.

Hopefully it falls away fast I'd rather Three Lions got to number 1 over them!

5 minutes ago, Mr. C. Joel said:

I love Wonderwall as a song but honestly I can't stand the Oasis guys!

So rude about other artists and just come across like awful people.

Hopefully it falls away fast I'd rather Three Lions got to number 1 over them!

Talking of rude artists, Sam Fender was rude the way he said "take that Marti Pellow" on the OCC site on Friday. I’m surprised Marti didn’t hit out at Sam over that snide comment

36 minutes ago, Mr. C. Joel said:

I love Wonderwall as a song but honestly I can't stand the Oasis guys!

So rude about other artists and just come across like awful people.

Hopefully it falls away fast I'd rather Three Lions got to number 1 over them!

This is the main reason I just can't get behind them, the Gallaghers are genuinely some of the most insufferable people to get famous.

37 minutes ago, Hadji said:

Talking of rude artists, Sam Fender was rude the way he said "take that Marti Pellow" on the OCC site on Friday. I’m surprised Marti didn’t hit out at Sam over that snide comment

Are you sure that wasn't just banter and said in Jest? I'm sure he wouldn't of meant it maliciously.

Edited Tuesday at 16:224 days by Mr. C. Joel

41 minutes ago, Hadji said:

Talking of rude artists, Sam Fender was rude the way he said "take that Marti Pellow" on the OCC site on Friday. I’m surprised Marti didn’t hit out at Sam over that snide comment

It was 100% a joke

How dare he we must cancel Sam fender for that already 😤😤😤

Quite obviously banter 😁

1 hour ago, Hadji said:

Talking of rude artists, Sam Fender was rude the way he said "take that Marti Pellow" on the OCC site on Friday. I’m surprised Marti didn’t hit out at Sam over that snide comment

Hey - I get you. It’s the kind of thing that would piss me off too - as due to my autism I take things seriously that are not meant to be taken seriously.

But as everyone else has said, I’m sure it was meant as a joke, and not meant in a nasty way. I don’t know Sam but I’ve never got the impression that he is a rude/snide person.

I have always loved New Orders World In Motion is it no longer popular in England?

5 minutes ago, Yog1963 said:

I have always loved New Orders World In Motion is it no longer popular in England?

Not as popular. I guess it has aged, partly because it involves footballers who have not been part of the team in 30 years.

I hope OCC reset Mr Brightside as it would probably reach a new peak if it was reset

40 minutes ago, GreyAsh said:

Not as popular. I guess it has aged, partly because it involves footballers who have not been part of the team in 30 years.

I don’t think it’s really anything to do with the footballers, the team from 1996 is pretty old now too lol. More that 3 Lions has just caught the imagination more due to the lyrics whereas WIM is an England campaign for that World Cup in Italy with the Arivaderchi (sorry at the spelling) lyrics etc.

I like World in Motion more personally though, especially the John Barnes rap 😍

Edited Tuesday at 18:464 days by Steve201

8 hours ago, Dircadirca said:

I think the prevalence of older hit songs is a smokescreen for the real issue here: the rapid collapse of the very notion of the 'top 40 music fan'. It's a self-sustaining ecosystem that invites regular curiosities and regulates longevity through a self-contained audience that latches onto everything around the same time. What we've got at the moment is a look into a world where this isn't quite the same anymore. You still get those hits, but an audience that doesn't keep up as attentively as before, so a 16 week #1 article can be met with online comments completely unaware it existed, and in the process, giving it a new lease on life as it extends its potential audience to this day. The big stars are still big, but largely sustained on their big audiences who serve in a more isolated form of that top 40 fan, and also in a manner where the cult of the star matters more than the credentials of the song itself (eg Taylor Swift sustaining longevity through the exposure of a song being at the top of her Spotify artist page).

But here's the catch! We do still have that eager breed of music fan, evolved from the top 40 fan or otherwise that are still listening to new music and latching onto it in the same way. In fact, part of the problem is that they're all doing it at the same time and that's why most new songs peak on the first day. I could imagine a new chart system that works under the manner of this kind of listener (there's an Alternative chart I see posted online every now and then which seems to fit the bill), but they'll be blistered away by the sheer noise of the most popular artists. Artists like Taylor Swift, Billie Eilish etc are at a point where their entire discographies are incapable of dipping below a certain level of daily streams, and that's a level that most artists will never hit on their best day. The more exclusionary systems you create, the further you run towards just making something akin to an artist chart, where the latest single by a noteworthy artist becomes glued to the top end of the chart only until it's the newest member of the excluded club.

I always recommend looking at the ARIA New Music chart for an idea of how this plays out. It's an extreme example where everything drops off after 4 months (and there's a 3 track limit), but you're already witnessing that future in action. Olivia Rodrigo's songs are glued to the top 10 and just too far ahead to ever really fall out until their allotted time is up. The chart goes down to a Drake song at #20 which I doubt is even one of the top 100 biggest songs right now overall. The enormous gaps these exclusions create mean that there's hardly any movement week to week. Effectively you'd just be creating a chart that's as 'boring' as the one it's designed to fix, but without the credibility and intrigue that comes with actually being the most popular songs that week.

(Also not loving the excess of AI slop that keeps making the official chart only because ACR widens the opening. Given the suspect nature of a lot of that stuff's popularity, you're also inviting the possibility that real human activity, as dull as it might be, is replaced by a system where it's like Twitter and just bots talking to other bots)

This! Brilliant post. I fear the notion of the "top 40 fan" is dwindling to near-zero given what the top 40 has become. I'm about 90% less interested than I used to be. 100% already for November and December.

I still think that because streaming is accessible to almost everyone it also shows that people are not that invested in new music as we used to think. The certain demography still goes after what's hot and new but most people stay on their comfort zone and listen to their faves and "beige" music. Which is just natural. Is your father more likely to listen to Wonderwall or Olivia Rodrigo's latest?

Of course young people discovering old music is a factor too. A good song is a good song! I think us chart fans should be less obsessed with release dates or years because there probaly truly are millions of people who just heard Michael Jackson's discography beyond Billie Jean or Thriller, for instance, and charts should reflect that.

If people have a reason to listen to Wonderwall, who are we to say they should listen to NEW MUSIC instead.

Edited Wednesday at 05:484 days by Sour Candy

I have said this before but I don't think actual listening habits of people have changed much at all over the past few decades.

I think even in the download and physical eras, people listened to "older" music as much as they do now, but the only difference now is that every time they do it, it counts for the charts, whereas before it didn't and only new purchases counted.

Wonderwall was probably listened to more than the random 1-week download era #1s back in the day, but there was no way of tracking that so it wasn't reflected on the charts. It just seemed like Cover Drive(?) et al were more popular in those weeks because they had more downloads, when in fact they probably weren't based on what people were actually listening to.