Billboard Hot 100 : 10/17/2015

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Bey is just closing the loop by doing a song with Naughty Boy as a throwback to her own Naughty Girl. Clever Cueen.

[felipe]

Oct 1, 2015 8:31:42 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

Oct 1, 2015 6:04:00 GMT -5 felipe said:

But what does that mean exactly? It's a single and radio is allowed to play it if they want to, right? Or do you mean the label has to pay to get the song played?

It means the song is getting no push to radio. There has been no adds date and the song has not been officially sent to stations. Any airplay that it's receiving is purely off of curiosity spins. I get that it's Beyoncé, and she is a staple on radio, but it's not even a hyped up song from her. It's from a movie soundtrack, produced by a currently one hit wonder, it didn't make much of a dent on digital sales or streaming, and it just doesn't sound like anything radio would really be all for outside of Urban AC, where I'm sure a good chunk of that airplay is coming from.

OK, but exactly does it mean "the song is getting no push to radio"? Do labels "secretly" pay radio stations to play their songs? Or do they just ask politely? Is that what a "push to radio" means?

From what I understood (and I mught be wrong), ther's usually no money involved, and you can set an adds date or whatever but, at the end of the day, it all comes down to whether radio wants to play that given song or not.

[areyoureadytojump]

People will never ever understand how radio works. I get tired of explaining it.

[House Lannister]

Sept 29, 2015 20:40:58 GMT -5 felipe said:

Sept 29, 2015 9:03:35 GMT -5 Daniel Collins said:

NAUGHTY BOY - Runnin (Lose It All) f/Beyonce: 2.567 (+ 0.027)

Why isn't radio playing this? Is it because of Beyoncé?

I think the fact that it's getting any airplay at all is due to Beyonce.  It's fairly early in the process, give it time.

[wavey.]

Oct 1, 2015 9:11:11 GMT -5 areyoureadytojump said:

People will never ever understand how radio works. I get tired of explaining it.

..but how does it work?

[Enigma.]

I also think that majority of hits will be played without adds date anyway. Adds date is useful for later in the album campaigns but of course a highly anticipated song by let's say Taylor Swift will be played nevertheless.

So saying that a song isn't a single if it has a video and it's selling ok just based on RADIO ADDS DATE is pretty weird. It is one factor of course but some songs won't ever get the adds date anyway.

EDIT: If we are talking about radio singles (which is a little strange thing these days, this is not 2002) then of course but then it also means that airplay is the only measure of success.

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

Oct 1, 2015 9:11:11 GMT -5 areyoureadytojump said:

People will never ever understand how radio works. I get tired of explaining it.

It's also a favorite excuse for stans for why their fave's song flopped "It wasn't sent to radio so it doesn't count anyway"

[Au$tin]

Oct 1, 2015 6:43:02 GMT -5 Enigma. said:

Naughty BOy doesn't have other songs out right now so yes I'd say Runnin' is very much a "radio single"

That's not how that works, though. And don't put quotations around radio single. It's not a made-up word that I just came up with. It's a phrase that has been industry standard for literally decades. It really offends me, a person that is building all of these concepts together to create a profession out of it, that someone would take what I say regarding the music industry and throw it aside as if I was just coming up from some bullshit excuse as to why my "faves aren't doing well." I don't even like this song. A radio single is what we see as a full-fledged single as it's getting the full push and single treatment from all angles. It differs greatly from, say, a promo single, which is a single that likely won't be performed anywhere outside of tours, likely won't have a music video (though some promo singles do get music videos), and aren't being pushed to radio (though some promo singles have taken off on radio without a direct push).

Oct 1, 2015 9:05:12 GMT -5 felipe said:

Oct 1, 2015 8:31:42 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

It means the song is getting no push to radio. There has been no adds date and the song has not been officially sent to stations. Any airplay that it's receiving is purely off of curiosity spins. I get that it's Beyoncé, and she is a staple on radio, but it's not even a hyped up song from her. It's from a movie soundtrack, produced by a currently one hit wonder, it didn't make much of a dent on digital sales or streaming, and it just doesn't sound like anything radio would really be all for outside of Urban AC, where I'm sure a good chunk of that airplay is coming from.

OK, but exactly does it mean "the song is getting no push to radio"? Do labels "secretly" pay radio stations to play their songs? Or do they just ask politely? Is that what a "push to radio" means?

From what I understood (and I mught be wrong), ther's usually no money involved, and you can set an adds date or whatever but, at the end of the day, it all comes down to whether radio wants to play that given song or not.

Radio stations can set their own playlists, so technically nothing is stopping them from adding anything. Hell, they could have been playing Taylor Swift's "Wildest Dreams" from day one of 1989's release, for example, yet it's only now getting massive amount of airplay. The main part of being "pushed to radio" is to have an adds date, which is seen as the recommended date set by the labels for stations to start playing the song. It's seen as the point where promotion for the song will begin, thus meaning more of your listeners are likely to know it. Familiarity is what radio stations go for, and this is how they are structured. What keeps radio stations from adding songs out of thin air is simply that. They don't want to add something their listeners don't really know for fear of losing them. They rely on listeners to keep their numbers up so they can charge more for advertisement space. (This is how television works as well.) This also explains why songs gradually grow on radio rather that suddenly becoming the most played song of the week right from the very start of the song's run. Essentially, the adds date signifies to radio that this song is going to be the next one to gain audience attention, and this is when we plan to start promoting it.

As far as the payola question. Well, that's more radio politics than music business. Payola does unfortunately exist (and runs rampant in the country radio industry...), but for the most part, all it does is help get the song some attention it may not have otherwise gotten. Especially in the pop world. Payola can only get the song so far before stations drop it. If I have Lady Gaga belching the alphabet as a song and use payola to get it attention, it'll get to like #20-ish on pop before tumbling out of the chart because listeners simply don't want to hear it. Likewise, if I have Unknown Artist X singing the catchiest song you'll ever hear in your life, I could use payola to help push the song to like #35 or so, and from there, it'll gain enough familiarity to take off on its own. Currently, this is becoming less and less "secret" through things such as deals with stations to play certain new releases once an hour for its first day of release (like "On My Mind") or getting newer artists on part of the On the Verge campaign (like "Love Myself").

Labels will also send out songs that they want to be played on radio stations through e-mail or CDs.

Oct 1, 2015 14:28:06 GMT -5 Enigma. said:

I also think that majority of hits will be played without adds date anyway. Adds date is useful for later in the album campaigns but of course a highly anticipated song by let's say Taylor Swift will be played nevertheless.

So saying that a song isn't a single if it has a video and it's selling ok just based on RADIO ADDS DATE is pretty weird. It is one factor of course but some songs won't ever get the adds date anyway.

EDIT: If we are talking about radio singles (which is a little strange thing these days, this is not 2002) then of course but then it also means that airplay is the only measure of success.

You're talking about lead singles from big artists. In that sense, adds date are strictly formality and mean nothing. Of course big name artists are going to get added without adds dates. That stems back to the familiarity thing. The big name artist is familiar to most of the station's listeners, thus there's no fear in adding it right off the bat.

I'm not saying it's not a single. It is a single. It just has not been given a proper push to radio, so the likelihood of radio playing it is low. Radio single and promo single are words describing singles. That's why they have the word "SINGLE" in them. Yay!

No, that's not what that means at all. No one is saying that in the slightest. (I don't even understand how you came to that ridiculous conclusion.) A song can become a hit without major radio backing. (See: "Harlem Shake") However, it IS one of the three main components of the chart, and it is a lot harder for something to become a hit without it. It is still a major way people discover music.

[badrobot]

^PREACH!

Thank you for nailing it, Au$tin.

[felipe]

Thanks for the answer Au$tin. I get some of your points, but I still have a few questions.

1. Does an adds date really make that much of a difference? As in October 1: "Beyoncé is in a new song by Naughty Boy, but our listeners might not like it" x October 20 "That Beyoncé/Naughty Boy song finally has an adds date, so I guess we should start playing it." Is that how it goes?

2. Sia is sort of a major act. So why would her label release her lead single and not send it for adds immediately knowing that radio will only start playing it when they do?

3. Is payola legally prohibited in the US? Why is it? If radio stations are privately owned, why can't they receive money to advertise certain songs? Don't get get money to advertise everything else?

[Au$tin]

Oct 1, 2015 21:30:56 GMT -5 felipe said:

Thanks for the answer Au$tin. I get some of your points, but I still have a few questions.

1. Does an adds date really make that much of a difference? As in October 1: "Beyoncé is in a new song by Naughty Boy, but our listeners might not like it" x October 20 "That Beyoncé/Naughty Boy song finally has an adds date, so I guess we should start playing it." Is that how it goes?

2. Sia is sort of a major act. So why would her label release her lead single and not send it for adds immediately knowing that radio will only start playing it when they do?

3. Is payola legally prohibited in the US? Why is it? If radio stations are privately owned, why can't they receive money to advertise certain songs? Don't get get money to advertise everything else?

1. Yes. In the case of this specific song, radio knows that it didn't have much hype and obviously lukewarm response given its lackluster performance in digital sales. However, if it were to have and adds date, they would see that and basically think "Hmm... It seems the label wants to push it. Maybe it will do something after all," and get stations curious enough to add it. (Though, by all means, adds dates do not guarantee a song having success.) I do find it strange there has been no push to radio for it, though. It doesn't really sound like a hit to me, but I'm sure it could garner some lukewarm response from rhythmic, dance, and top 40. Enough to make it a small hit at least.

2. I frankly don't know the answer here. Seems like a big mistake on her label's part. Prior to the digital age, this might make sense as they were ready to release the song, but not ready to start promo for it, but in 2015, where obviously news about new releases spreads like crazy and people can instantly purchase the song, it doesn't make any sense. The hype for its initial release is dying off, yet still no push to radio? Sia is a decent sized name, but she certainly is not big enough to immediately take radio's attention with a new release yet, so I don't understand what her label is doing. They did the same thing with "Elastic Heart," though, by giving its radio push several months after its video's release. Strange as hell.

3. Yes and no. It's all about how they go about it. Payola is now pretty much disguised with things such as On the Verge or iHeartRadio deals. Hell even offering the station free tickets to giveaway to shows in exchange for upped rotation is pretty common. And all of those practices are completely legal as they're seen as promotional tools. I don't really know about under the table monetary exchanges given that that would be a hush hush as possible, so it's hard to know for certain just how much of a presence it has. (Though, take a look at the country chart, and you'll see how much it prevails there.) The reason it has such a negative connotation is simply because it fudges the numbers and makes certain songs appear to be more popular than they really are. Thankfully the digital age is really helping to combat that, and honestly, I don't think under the table secretive payola schemes are that common anymore. They do still exist, and sometimes in negative form (as any Kelly Clarkson stan would point out for you, and I think Ciara as well), just not as much. I honestly have no problem with it if it's something like On the Verge or short term radio deals because I see those as a promotional tool just like a televised performance.

[THINKIN BOUT YOU]

Damn.. Just realized if Wildest Dreams has a "normal" streaming for a super star, then it can go as high as #2..

[brucelover]

"Runnin'" is a HUGE flop considering this is Beyonce's first pop friendly post SELF TITLED release. And she sings half the track, leading it, so it does sort of count. And it's good and catchy. But #90?! My God. The surprise release, combined with a video for every track and making the whole thing album-only (which often gets overlooked when discussing it) for those two weeks really, really helped sales.

There is something very odd about the amount of media attention she gets and her album selling and touring consistency, and her total inability to get hits these days. "Drunk in Love" was only a moderate hit in the States (1.4m copies vs 5m+ for the real smashes of the fall like Roar and Royals) which benefitted immensely from an extended Jay-Z cameo and it bombed internationally, everything else flopped. Nothing from 4 was a real hit.

If they're going to launch her next album traditionally I feel we may be in for some less-than-expected numbers.

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

Oct 2, 2015 2:28:19 GMT -5 brucelover said:

"Runnin'" is a HUGE flop considering this is Beyonce's first pop friendly post SELF TITLED release. And she sings half the track, leading it, so it does sort of count. And it's good and catchy. But #90?! My God. The surprise release, combined with a video for every track and making the whole thing album-only (which often gets overlooked when discussing it) for those two weeks really, really helped sales.

There is something very odd about the amount of media attention she gets and her album selling and touring consistency, and her total inability to get hits these days. "Drunk in Love" was only a moderate hit in the States (1.4m copies vs 5m+ for the real smashes of the fall like Roar and Royals) which benefitted immensely from an extended Jay-Z cameo and it bombed internationally, everything else flopped. Nothing from 4 was a real hit.

If they're going to launch her next album traditionally I feel we may be in for some less-than-expected numbers.

They intentionally went around pop radio as a means of success after how 4 performed with a traditional strategy. And I would hardly say Drunk in Love was only a "moderate hit". It would have been #1 if not for how massive Dark Horse/Happy were, and it's cultural impact is undeniable.

[velaxti]

Oct 2, 2015 2:28:19 GMT -5 brucelover said:

it bombed internationally

Drunk In Love was the:

72nd/77th biggest song of the year in Belgium
93rd biggest song of the year in Canada
47th biggest song of the year in France
86th biggest song of the year in Sweden
39th biggest song of the year in the UK
35th biggest song of the year in the US

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_in_British_music_charts#Biggest_singles

Would you say Loyal, Chandelier, Say Something bombed in the UK? Probably not... Drunk In Love was actually more successful than some #1s in the UK. You have to remember globally XO was the lead single, then Drunk In Love afterwards. However, Drunk In Love was charting quite well in most countries while XO was the single, and then kept on going when it was actually a single. This lead to a "low" peak but a long chart run in most countries.

[jenglisbe]

Oct 1, 2015 8:31:42 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

Oct 1, 2015 6:04:00 GMT -5 felipe said:

But what does that mean exactly? It's a single and radio is allowed to play it if they want to, right? Or do you mean the label has to pay to get the song played?

It means the song is getting no push to radio. There has been no adds date and the song has not been officially sent to stations. Any airplay that it's receiving is purely off of curiosity spins. I get that it's Beyoncé, and she is a staple on radio, but it's not even a hyped up song from her. It's from a movie soundtrack, produced by a currently one hit wonder, it didn't make much of a dent on digital sales or streaming, and it just doesn't sound like anything radio would really be all for outside of Urban AC, where I'm sure a good chunk of that airplay is coming from.

Do songs really need to be "sent" to radio anymore? It's not like radio can't easily access a song it wants to play.

Who is buying "Wildest Dreams" at this point? Its sales are impressive considering it's a fifth single and the album has sold as much as it has already.

[areyoureadytojump]

^Yes. Radio stations just don't play what they want to play.

It's decisions made by their corporate bosses and labels.

[Dylan :)]

Alive was sent for adds. It got 30 on pop this week.

[Kworb]

Sales estimates

1. The Hills 110,000
2. Hotline Bling 105,000
3. What Do You Mean? 91,000
4. Wildest Dreams 90,000
5. Stitches 78,000
6. Locked Away 78,000
7. 679 73,000
8. Downtown 72,000
9. Can't Feel My Face 61,000
10. Ex's & Oh's 59,000
11. Writing's On The Wall 53,000
12. Watch Me 53,000
13. Alive 47,000
14. Drag Me Down 44,000
15. Marvin Gaye 44,000
16. Like I'm Gonna Lose You 43,000
17. Victorious 42,000
18. Strip It Down 42,000
19. On My Mind 41,000
20. Good For You 40,000
21. Cheerleader 40,000
22. Die A Happy Man 39,000
23. Renegades 38,000
24. Jumpman 38,000

kworb.net/cc

[handydandy]

Stitches must finally go top 10 next week!

[KeepDeanWeird]

Oct 2, 2015 11:54:25 GMT -5 Kworb said:

Sales estimates

1. The Hills 110,000
2. Hotline Bling 105,000
3. What Do You Mean? 91,000
4. Wildest Dreams 90,000
5. Stitches 78,000
6. Locked Away 78,000
7. 679 73,000
8. Downtown 72,000
9. Can't Feel My Face 61,000
10. Ex's & Oh's 59,000
11. Writing's On The Wall 53,000
12. Watch Me 53,000
13. Alive 47,000
14. Drag Me Down 44,000
15. Marvin Gaye 44,000
16. Like I'm Gonna Lose You 43,000
17. Victorious 42,000
18. Strip It Down 42,000
19. On My Mind 41,000
20. Good For You 40,000
21. Cheerleader 40,000
22. Die A Happy Man 39,000
23. Renegades 38,000
24. Jumpman 38,000

kworb.net/cc

Now that iTunes Music is no longer free, I wonder if we'll see a slight spike in sales during the coming weeks. It also will be interesting to see what percentage of users they will convert to paid and which artists will suffer streaming drops now that it's paid.

[Au$tin]

Oct 2, 2015 8:31:27 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Oct 1, 2015 8:31:42 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

It means the song is getting no push to radio. There has been no adds date and the song has not been officially sent to stations. Any airplay that it's receiving is purely off of curiosity spins. I get that it's Beyoncé, and she is a staple on radio, but it's not even a hyped up song from her. It's from a movie soundtrack, produced by a currently one hit wonder, it didn't make much of a dent on digital sales or streaming, and it just doesn't sound like anything radio would really be all for outside of Urban AC, where I'm sure a good chunk of that airplay is coming from.

Do songs really need to be "sent" to radio anymore? It's not like radio can't easily access a song it wants to play.

Who is buying "Wildest Dreams" at this point? Its sales are impressive considering it's a fifth single and the album has sold as much as it has already.

This:

Oct 1, 2015 16:16:40 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

Oct 1, 2015 9:05:12 GMT -5 felipe said:

OK, but exactly does it mean "the song is getting no push to radio"? Do labels "secretly" pay radio stations to play their songs? Or do they just ask politely? Is that what a "push to radio" means?

From what I understood (and I mught be wrong), ther's usually no money involved, and you can set an adds date or whatever but, at the end of the day, it all comes down to whether radio wants to play that given song or not.

Radio stations can set their own playlists, so technically nothing is stopping them from adding anything. Hell, they could have been playing Taylor Swift's "Wildest Dreams" from day one of 1989's release, for example, yet it's only now getting massive amount of airplay. The main part of being "pushed to radio" is to have an adds date, which is seen as the recommended date set by the labels for stations to start playing the song. It's seen as the point where promotion for the song will begin, thus meaning more of your listeners are likely to know it. Familiarity is what radio stations go for, and this is how they are structured. What keeps radio stations from adding songs out of thin air is simply that. They don't want to add something their listeners don't really know for fear of losing them. They rely on listeners to keep their numbers up so they can charge more for advertisement space. (This is how television works as well.) This also explains why songs gradually grow on radio rather that suddenly becoming the most played song of the week right from the very start of the song's run. Essentially, the adds date signifies to radio that this song is going to be the next one to gain audience attention, and this is when we plan to start promoting it.

As far as the payola question. Well, that's more radio politics than music business. Payola does unfortunately exist (and runs rampant in the country radio industry...), but for the most part, all it does is help get the song some attention it may not have otherwise gotten. Especially in the pop world. Payola can only get the song so far before stations drop it. If I have Lady Gaga belching the alphabet as a song and use payola to get it attention, it'll get to like #20-ish on pop before tumbling out of the chart because listeners simply don't want to hear it. Likewise, if I have Unknown Artist X singing the catchiest song you'll ever hear in your life, I could use payola to help push the song to like #35 or so, and from there, it'll gain enough familiarity to take off on its own. Currently, this is becoming less and less "secret" through things such as deals with stations to play certain new releases once an hour for its first day of release (like "On My Mind") or getting newer artists on part of the On the Verge campaign (like "Love Myself").

Labels will also send out songs that they want to be played on radio stations through e-mail or CDs.

[Au$tin]

Oct 2, 2015 13:44:47 GMT -5 KeepDeanWeird said:

Now that iTunes Music is no longer free, I wonder if we'll see a slight spike in sales during the coming weeks. It also will be interesting to see what percentage of users they will convert to paid and which artists will suffer streaming drops now that it's paid.

Should just be Taylor Swift since she's only on Apple Music and not Spotify. Any users on Apple Music that don't want to pay for it still have Spotify.

[yuh yuh]

Since I started liking STitches, I want it to top 10. It's sure that one of these: Good For You or Cheerleader falls out. I really hope it's Cheerleader..

[handydandy]

Oct 2, 2015 14:15:58 GMT -5 yuh yuh said:

Since I started liking STitches, I want it to top 10. It's sure that one of these: Good For You or Cheerleader falls out. I really hope it's Cheerleader..



agree its gotta be Cheerleader and maybe Good For You both fall enough and Stitches will hit #9 this week!

[KeepDeanWeird]

Oct 2, 2015 14:11:21 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

Oct 2, 2015 13:44:47 GMT -5 KeepDeanWeird said:

Now that iTunes Music is no longer free, I wonder if we'll see a slight spike in sales during the coming weeks. It also will be interesting to see what percentage of users they will convert to paid and which artists will suffer streaming drops now that it's paid.

Should just be Taylor Swift since she's only on Apple Music and not Spotify. Any users on Apple Music that don't want to pay for it still have Spotify.

Taylor for certain, but I bet she picks up sales. It's too bad we never saw an iTunes Music chart (with numbers) like Spotify. I'd be very curious to see if they are similar or differ substantially.

[Deleted]

Guess that means Wildest Dreams has a good shot at top 5 if sales do in fact pick up for her now

[felipe]

What's the difference between Apple Music and Spotify besides Swift?

[THINKIN BOUT YOU]

Oct 1, 2015 9:11:11 GMT -5 areyoureadytojump said:

People will never ever understand how radio works. I get tired of explaining it.

Now I understand how it works. I'm better than a people haha!

[Daniel Collins]

Mediabase 10/03/15

1. THE WEEKND - The Hills: 172.780 (+ 1.966)
2. R. CITY - Locked Away f/Adam Levine: 157.032 (+ 0.563)
3. THE WEEKND - Can't Feel My Face: 151.276 (- 0.481)
4. ED SHEERAN - Photograph: 130.198 (- 0.824)
5. TAYLOR SWIFT - Wildest Dreams: 122.263 (+ 4.249) ▲
6. SELENA GOMEZ - Good For You f/A$AP Rocky: 118.934 (- 2.664) ▼
7. JUSTIN BIEBER - What Do You Mean?: 117.853 (+ 3.142)
8. MAJOR LAZER - Lean On f/MØ & DJ Snake: 102.320 (- 0.638)
9. DEMI LOVATO - Cool For The Summer: 89.412 (- 2.978)
10. WALK THE MOON - Shut Up And Dance: 87.631 (- 0.215)
11. X AMBASSADORS - Renegades: 86.120 (+ 0.722)
12. DRAKE - Hotline Bling: 83.866 (+ 2.624)
13. SHAWN MENDES - Stitches: 79.259 (+ 2.090) ▲
14. OMI - Cheerleader: 78.651 (- 1.077) ▼
15. FALL OUT BOY - Uma Thurman: 76.536 (- 2.231) ▼
16. RACHEL PLATTEN - Fight Song: 72.318 (- 0.630)
17. KENNY CHESNEY - Save It For A Rainy Day: 70.691 (+ 0.457)
18. JASON DERULO - Want To Want Me: 68.869 (- 0.010)
19. FETTY WAP - 679 f/Remy Boyz...: 66.862 (+ 0.496)
20. ELLE KING - Ex's and Oh's: 66.343 (+ 0.602) ▲

BRETT ELDREDGE - Lose My Mind: 66.193 (+ 0.395)
LUKE BRYAN - Strip It Down: 61.093 (+ 0.630)
MACKLEMORE & RYAN LEWIS - Downtown: 58.827 (+ 0.596)
FLORIDA-GEORGIA LINE - Anything Goes: 52.289 (+ 0.908)
ONE DIRECTION - Drag Me Down: 51.885 (+ 0.611)
CARRIE UNDERWOOD - Smoke Break: 49.185 (+ 0.355)
BLAKE SHELTON - Gonna: 41.616 (+ 0.412)
MEGHAN TRAINOR - Like I'm Gonna Lose You: 37.984 (+ 0.397)
CALVIN HARRIS + DISCIPLES - How Deep Is Your Love: 35.657
ELLIE GOULDING - On My Mind: 35.422 (+ 1.534)
NICK JONAS - Levels: 34.617 (+ 0.587)
MAJOR LAZER - Powerful f/Ellie Goulding: 22.193 (+ 0.085)
LIL WAYNE & CHARLIE PUTH - Nothing But Trouble: 21.692 (+ 0.098)
SELENA GOMEZ - Same Old Love: 19.701 (+ 0.715)
MAROON 5 - Feelings: 15.038 (+ 0.277)
RUDIMENTAL - Lay It All On Me f/Ed Sheeran: 9.966 (+ 0.703)
RACHEL PLATTEN - Stand By You: 8.301 (+ 0.116)
THOMAS RHETT - Die A Happy Man: 5.870 (+ 0.376)
DNCE - Cake By The Ocean: 5.462 (+ 0.255)
DEMI LOVATO - Confident: 4.940 (+ 0.452)
CHRIS BROWN - Zero: 4.028 (+ 0.577)
NAUGHTY BOY - Runnin (Lose It All) f/Beyonce: 2.916 (+ 0.028)
SIA - Alive: 2.258 (+ 0.207)
SAM SMITH - Writing's On The Wall: 1.463 (- 0.930)