[Denver]

The Official Charts Company is bringing in new rules for its singles chart, in a bid to encourage diversity and new artists to the Top 100.

So, does this mean the end of the likes of Ed Sheeran and Drake's chart dominance? Well, yes, actually.

The new rules include a cap on the number of tracks by any one artist that can feature in the Top 100. So, from this Friday, July 30, only the three most popular tracks by a lead artist will be eligible for the Official Singles Chart.

Yep, the days of Ed Sheeran having sixteen songs in the singles chart Top 20 are officially over.

In addition to the cap, the streams to sales ratio will be cut in an attempt to "accelerate" the disappearance of long-reigning tracks from the Official Singles Chart.

After a song has racked up at least 10 weeks in the chart and has declined in sales for three, its streaming ratio will be cut from 150:1 to 300:1, so actual sales become more worthwhile.

Talking to Music Week, the chief executive of the Official Charts Company, Martin Talbot, insisted the rule changes were about "supporting new music".

"This is not a chart for album tracks; we want to remain the Official Singles Chart, for singles," he explained.

Martin also added: "It's tougher than ever for new music and developing artists to break through, and this is us doing our bit... This is about injecting energy back into the chart."

The first chart under the new rules will be revealed on Friday, July 7. The move has been approved by both major and independent record labels, retailers, digital music services and BBC Radio 1 alike, so expect to hear a very different kind of rundown in the future.

But we're not so sure Ed and Drake will be all that pleased. Sorry, lads.

http://www.digitalspy.com/music/news...-40-dominance/

[Glenn.]

[reece(:]

Here for that

[T*]

[Ross.]

Louisa Johnson's presence on the charts is COMING!

[Black Dagger]

It is a start. Anything to help Saara Aalto crack top 100 when she releases her stuff x

[Wizard.]

The Ed Sheeran shade

[Marsh.]

Steps to finally be given that number 1?

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Ross.

Louisa Johnson's presence on the charts is COMING!

#39 incoming

[Jack_]

This is stupid, if several tracks were ever to make it into the top 100/40 on their own merit that should be reflected

And imposing restrictions on a song once it's already charted is counterproductive, the rules should be consistent throughout. All that needed to happen was for the streaming weighting to be significantly reduced full stop, or preferably removed altogether (the point of the chart traditionally after all was to reflect the most bought songs of the week). These new rules are even worse tbh

[Denver]

Originally Posted by Jack_

This is stupid, if several tracks were ever to make it into the top 100/40 on their own merit that should be reflected

And imposing restrictions on a song once it's already charted is counterproductive, the rules should be consistent throughout. All that needed to happen was for the streaming weighting to be significantly reduced full stop, or preferably removed altogether (the point of the chart traditionally after all was to reflect the most bought songs of the week). These new rules are even worse tbh

Most of Ed Sheerans songs would not got top 40 on sales so yes they should limit the amount of songs an artist can have

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Adam.

Most of Ed Sheerans songs would not got top 40 on sales so yes they should limit the amount of songs an artist can have

*sigh*

Another instance where I have to reiterate my post to someone.

'On their own merit' and my call for the streaming weighting to be significantly reduced/removed altogether does not in any way imply I believe Ed Sheeran's songs would make the top 40 on sales alone. In fact it suggests the opposite. I want the monopoly of one artist's songs to be reduced, but it should be done by rescinding the rules that were implemented in the first place that caused this mess.

My point was that if an artist was to ever genuinely (under traditional sales means) get a handful of songs in the top 40, they shouldn't be discounted just because. The change needs to occur from the bottom up by altering the rules of how songs chart - not simply restricting the number of songs that can chart after the fact. That makes an even bigger mockery of what it is supposed to be about.

[T*]

Originally Posted by Jack_

*sigh*

Another instance where I have to reiterate my post to someone.

'On their own merit' and my call for the streaming weighting to be significantly reduced/removed altogether does not in any way imply I believe Ed Sheeran's songs would make the top 40 on sales alone. In fact it suggests the opposite. I want the monopoly of one artist's songs to be reduced, but it should be done by rescinding the rules that were implemented in the first place that caused this mess.

My point was that if an artist was to ever genuinely (under traditional sales means) get a handful of songs in the top 40, they shouldn't be discounted just because. The change needs to occur from the bottom up by altering the rules of how songs chart - not simply restricting the number of songs that can chart after the fact. That makes an even bigger mockery of what it is supposed to be about.

It might be better if they allow more than 3 singles to enter the chart on their own merit but reject album tracks

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by T*

It might be better if they allow more than 3 singles to enter the chart on their own merit but reject album tracks

I still disagree with that in principle though because if an album track is really that popular - and sells well enough to make the cut - it should be reflected.

All they need to do is just revert to the old rules, a chart is supposed to reflect the most bought/streamed songs of the week, I feel like making all these restrictions just takes it even further away from the concept of what a chart is and makes it more of a mockery than the streaming rules did a couple of years ago.

[Denver]

Album track are not released as singles though

[lewis111]

I think it should be more than just 3 tbh
Like the Chainsmokers, as much as I despise them, will almost certainly have had about 5 SINGLES in the top 100 at someone point in the last few months at the same time

And for instances line Michael Jacksons death were he genuinely did take up lime half of the top 40 based on sales out of people paying respect

[lewis111]

Also think streaming ratio should just be made 300:1 cause making it after 10 weeks is gonna see some really random shifts in chat positions

[Crimson Dynamo]

The "chart" still is a thing?

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Adam.

Album track are not released as singles though

Yes, and the vast majority of the time under the old rules they didn't chart.

But if they are downloaded enough to make the cut - then so be it. To deny them a placing makes a mockery of what the chart is supposed to reflect (a bit like how the 'post count' on here isn't accurate and so therefore pointless).

[Cal.]

Brilliant

[Greg!]

A step in the right direction
The time when almost all of the top 20 was Ed Trashan songs were dark days for human kind.

[cliffxen]

Originally Posted by Ross.

Louisa Johnson's presence on the charts is COMING!

yesssss

[Shaun]

Good. It's a singles chart.

[Gstar]

So, from this Friday, July 30

Are we just gonna ignore this

[lewis111]

Originally Posted by lewis111

Also think streaming ratio should just be made 300:1 cause making it after 10 weeks is gonna see some really random shifts in chat positions

See Wild Thoughts dropping from #4 to out of the top 15 along with Unforgattble - but even if they get one more sale than last week they will be back into the top 5
Kinda weird