Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Leon
Not sure why people are crying about the charts. Ed has moved like 700k albums. He's going to be invading the chart. Independent artists are still charting high or topping charts regularly these days, so the opportunity is there for anyone nowadays. That was never the case before.
I always felt the factor of how much an album is being played by people should be signified too aside from just copies sold. I mean there wasn't all the outcry when the likes of Taylor Swift, Bieber or Beyoncé were having songs from albums all over the top 40. .
|
The problem is though that it's only albums that are being
streamed that'll see that impact, the article Smithy posted was really interesting and it pointed out that generally it's younger people streaming and older people buying, so artists that appeal more to older people might be being listened to over and over again but not seeing that impact their chart placings in the same way someone younger streaming a particular album over and over again will. It's a big generalisation but I think there's truth in it and it will mean the charts aren't fairly representative because of it.
I think there's always been a lot of different ways people listen to music but the whole point in the charts is to show sales... so including streaming makes no sense to me, 150 streams
doesn't equal a sale, they're completely different things, I can't help think that the inclusion of it is just to pander to the radio 1 target audience to increase interest in the charts but it'll just end up (already has?) backfiring.