3 minutes ago, JosephStyles said:

Entirely possible but she was famously snubbed from Radio 1 for years, much like Kylie and other artists that are deemed to be past it. Many make it to Radio 2 of course but it's all in the hands of the stations themselves as to which songs get the opportunity to break through. It's not like streaming where Hot Hits UK exists, but if a song makes a big enough impact, it breaks through on its own! There's no option for that on radio.

That’s the point- they’re not getting the chance to break through based on not being included in the most popular playlists. All in all, if the chart is to reflect popularity as closely as it can, it needs to include all ways music is consumed.

2 hours ago, reissus123 said:

I’m talking about audience data not actual number of plays. Only music paid for - so no data used from free users then?

 

I never said it was a solution. It’s another way people consume music. Have you looked at the airplay chart recently- there’s far more variety and movement! Skip a song > change the station.

Yes no data from free users

18 hours ago, WhoOdyssey said:

IMO it doesn’t help that they don’t classify a lot of actual charting rock songs as “rock”. They’ll have Fall Out Boy’s very pop Uma Thurman, but not Dexter and The Moonrocks or Yungblud.

I’d open it up to a Rock/Alternative chart, and include the likes of Dominic Fike, Fontaines D.C., Sam Fender, Noah Kahan, etc.

I’m surprised a Country Singles Chart hasn’t been launched yet too.

I'd agree with all them except Noah Kahan. I think he 's more Folk-y.

5 hours ago, ___∆___ said:

Thats literally never going to happen - imagine the amount of data, time and cost to track millions of users play counts and then subtracting any plays after 1 to submit to the OCC.

There is zero benefit for the streaming companies to even attempt to do that.

I don't think it would be that hard. All this is pretty much automated by the streaming service anyway. Unique tracks per user per week seems like an easy sort criteria.

23 minutes ago, Scone1 said:

Yes no data from free users

Which means artists won't make music available for free users on those platforms and that will decimate the ad revenue the platforms get

Edited yesterday at 17:421 day by Paramore

I'm not really for any of the changes I've seen in here tbh. I don't like the idea of a one click and you're done curiosity stream being all that counts, and I don't really like the idea of radio counting.

I (as has been documented many times) really dislike ACR, purely because it's not a level playing field.

My preferred method, which I feel would work the best is the low lifetime streams cap method (I haven't really been convinced otherwise by @Dircadirca's evidence [which is fair, we can all have our own viewpoints, and I could be very wrong in my hunch either way!], some of the data presented from lastfm etc almost makes me more convinced that a cap would be the way forward - songs released more recently would reach their 'sale' much more quickly than older songs for more people, so therefore drop out of the chart naturally and quickly, older songs might need to be excluded unless they see a significant spike maybe - indicating new discoveries (or a lower cap for songs that were available pre-streaming?), but what I've observed from people I know in real life [not lastfm listeners, who are more likely to seek out new music, I find] is their gravitation towards the same selection of tracks over and over and over again for an extended period!).

But we've all discussed this one ad-infinitum by this point! I think we're long past any hope of speeding up the chart notably, or finding out if that method works! I have no idea what OCC will realistically do...

Edited yesterday at 17:461 day by Juranamo

3 minutes ago, Paramore said:

I'd agree with all them except Noah Kahan. I think he 's more Folk-y.

I don't think it would be that hard. All this is pretty much automated by the streaming service anyway. Unique tracks per user per week seems like an easy sort criteria.

Which means artists won't make music available for free users on those platforms and that will decimate the ad revenue the platforms get

I think they will make the music available to encourage people to pay , its a Hen and Egg situation

1 minute ago, Scone1 said:

I think they will make the music available to encourage people to pay , its a Hen and Egg situation

I think it would result in big artists making their tracks paid exclusives for maybe the whole pre-ACR period and then the week it is due to be tracked for ACR, opening it up to free users to get a boost.

On the topic of radio, I had a look on the Airplay Top 40, and to be fair there are some more interesting songs in there. However those songs are also ones which aren't doing anything in the lower reaches of the Top 100 either, and so the amount of impact those songs will feel in the chart would be quite low, whereas other songs in the airplay chart (most of which are quite old) would be pushed up.

I've just created a very basic mock-up of what the Top 40 might look like with airplay included (by doing 100-1 points for the current Top 100 and adding in 40-1 points for the Airplay Top 40):

1: Shakira and Burna Boy - Dai Dai

2: Olivia Rodrigo - stupid song

3: ANOTR feat. 54 Ultra - Talk to You

4: Taylor Swift - I Knew It, I Knew You

5: STELLA LEFTY - Boston

6: HUGEL, Imael Angel and Ultra Naté - Movin' to the Sun

7: Ariana Grande - hate that i made you love me

8: KATSEYE - Animal

9: sombr - Homewrecker

10: Alex Warren - Ordinary

11: Olivia Dean - Man I Need

12: Ella Langley - Choosin' Texas

13: SIENNA SPIRO - Great Expectation

14: Sam Fender and Olivia Dean - Rein Me In

15: Ariana Grande - petal

16: RAYE - WHERE IS MY HUSBAND!

17: Zara Larsson - Midnight Sun

18: Prospa and Cloonee - Free Your Mind

19: Silva Bumpa - On 2nite

20: Calvin Harris and Clementine Douglas - Blessings

21: sombr - My Body Isn't Ready

22: Olivia Rodrigo - the cure

23: Ariana Grande - kiss me

24: SIENNA SPIRO - Material Lover

25: Oasis - Wonderwall

26: Malcolm Todd - Earrings

27: SIENNA SPIRO - Die on This Hill

28: Alyssa Grace - bloodstream

29: Harry Styles - Sign of the Times

30: Alex Warren - FEVER DREAM

31: Temper City - Self Aware

32: Tame Impala - Loser

33: Olivia Dean - So Easy (To Fall In Love)

34: Katy Perry - The One That Got Away

35: Harry Styles - American Girls

36: Michael Jackson - Billie Jean

37: ADÉLA - Ain't in LA

38: Audrey Hobert - Sue Me

39: Tame Impala - Dracula

40: Taylor Swift - The Fate of Ophelia

With a few exceptions (Boston, Animal and My Body Isn't Ready being the main ones), that's largely just pushing older songs back up the charts. Of course this isn't including any sort of ACR for radio which might affect some things but that's another complication.

The other thing to note is that the songs in the airplay chart that aren't in the official chart are pretty much all by established artists who no longer get chart hits, and so newer artists would almost universally be hindered by including airplay.

50 minutes ago, Paramore said:

I'd agree with all them except Noah Kahan. I think he 's more Folk-y.

It's all under the same banner I'd say though - and really I'd say Noah's most recent album is more Heartland rock/Americana than anything. It was very Sam Fender.

1 hour ago, Juranamo said:

I'm not really for any of the changes I've seen in here tbh. I don't like the idea of a one click and you're done curiosity stream being all that counts, and I don't really like the idea of radio counting.

I (as has been documented many times) really dislike ACR, purely because it's not a level playing field.

My preferred method, which I feel would work the best is the low lifetime streams cap method (I haven't really been convinced otherwise by @Dircadirca's evidence [which is fair, we can all have our own viewpoints, and I could be very wrong in my hunch either way!], some of the data presented from lastfm etc almost makes me more convinced that a cap would be the way forward - songs released more recently would reach their 'sale' much more quickly than older songs for more people, so therefore drop out of the chart naturally and quickly, older songs might need to be excluded unless they see a significant spike maybe - indicating new discoveries (or a lower cap for songs that were available pre-streaming?), but what I've observed from people I know in real life [not lastfm listeners, who are more likely to seek out new music, I find] is their gravitation towards the same selection of tracks over and over and over again for an extended period!).

But we've all discussed this one ad-infinitum by this point! I think we're long past any hope of speeding up the chart notably, or finding out if that method works! I have no idea what OCC will realistically do...

I'll be honest yeah, it's hard for me to really be certain what the data is like, just going off extrapolations of data & hunches myself! What we'd want to do with it probably is largely affected by what we want to see on the chart, which is admittedly why I'm always quick to discourage a lot of rash ideas because I feel like based on what's been suggested, the end result probably makes the chart worse for that person! A bit like when we all might just conveniently overlook favourable playlisting/algorithms boosting our favourites, the naked reality would expose that truth in a way that can't be ignored. Or otherwise my strong feeling is still that it doesn't really move the needle in many distinct ways. Life if the OCC put in a streaming cap vs. life if they didn't, and it's the same picture both times.

In many senses this all comes down to a debate on whether or not we think new music deserves a leg up purely for the fact that it's new, and how willing we are to suspend disbelief for it on the chart. Like, I feel like Spotify's trending charts capture this kind of fast pace/no lingering nature, but do any of us want to treat it like the real thing? Probably not because it's just too confusing, hard to understand, and doesn't correlate with our realistic expectations of what should be charting where. It leaves the only paths as chaos for the sake of chaos, or objective blandness (which I'll admit is interesting in its own way but that's just me). A matter of whether there is merit to tinkering with the chart to replicate its form of the past, or to leave it to continue to climb to new extremes for better or worse.

The only thing I would probably change is changing it back to a 50 percent increase to get off ACR

and songs over 3 years only being allowed 1 reset per lifetime rather than every single time they get a boost for whatever reason cough cough wonderwall cough cough

2 hours ago, 777666jason said:

The only thing I would probably change is changing it back to a 50 percent increase to get off ACR

This I do agree with - it's too easy for songs which are already streaming in decent numbers to get a reset, still go nowhere near a new peak, and then take forever to return to ACR. If they applied the rule as soon as songs were due to re-enter the Top 75/100 as a result of the reset, rather than only the Top 40/50 as now, they would probably capture more of the genuine resurgences than they do now.