|
|
Post by theycallmedualian on Apr 25, 2024 13:24:01 GMT -5
I suggested it way back in this thread when the whole argument started about how songs would be “disqualified” from the chart in their first week of streaming release. No limitations after that. If a song holds well enough to “debut” at #1 thanks to streaming in its 2nd week, then there’s a very high chance that song isn’t just a flash and is on its way to big hit status. Of course you could also still have old songs that go viral get a one week only huge boost under that rule, but as I mentioned I’ve never tried to say billboard could or should stop flash in the pan successes happening entirely. Just stop what’s happened this decade and how it’s becoming the new norm. So Hiss wouldn’t be a top 10 hit under this? I’m not a Megan fan but cmon, that was unquestionably the biggest song its week. This week, featuring the 2nd biggest album release of all time and the biggest streaming week ever, would have Cruel Summer as the only Taylor song charting? That makes no sense That “system” is completely idiotic, because it doesn’t even address that user’s own gripe. His issue is that a song which is only on the top10 for 1 week is being called a hit despite having no longevity. Well ok the most you could do, is to get billboard and the rest of the world to change the definition or criteria for a hit, but as far as charts are concerned, these new songs have earned enough streams from millions of people to put it onto the top10 chart, therefore it will be on next week’s chart. This an unalterable factual reality. It’s not up for single person’s definition of a word to stop. |
|
badrobot
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,392
|
Post by badrobot on Apr 25, 2024 13:53:17 GMT -5
Not to fall right back in my endless loop with this argument, but yet another reason no one has convinced me my “qualifying week” idea is a bad one for the hot 100. Half of these “one week wonder” peaks only get there due to their track listing on an album bomb. It’s all so calculated annd inorganic. While I admire the goal here, there's a pretty big hole in this logic. Artists would just release songs sometime on Thursdays and their first "week" would be a few hours of activity Thursday, so effectively they'd still end up with the same result, minus only a sliver of sales/streams. I occasionally pitch this when these conversations come up, but I still feel like the best path is not to add more rules but to simplify them way the hell down and make the Hot 100 a "minutes listened" chart. You'd look at how many minutes a song was heard on radio, streaming, social media, etc. and just add that up. Doesn't matter if it's passive/active/whatever. This already takes place with TV shows, you can view charts of hours watched for shows on Netflix for example. |
|
jayhawk1117
2x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2013
Posts: 2,758 
|
Post by jayhawk1117 on Apr 25, 2024 13:56:44 GMT -5
The main reason it’s bad… it’s unnecessary. Despite all the gimmicks that CAN come into play, streaming is quite literally the most accurate and organic way to track popularity in 2024. And just negating the first week of streams just based on nothing but “vibes” is I N S A N E.
The Hot 100 is a reflection of ONE WEEK. If a song gets 80m streams one week debuts at 1 then 8m the next and plummets…. Who cares? The Year end chart will reflect that.
“It’s not a real number one”. Had the most streams that week… it’s giving most popular no?
All of Fortnite’s streams shouldn’t count this week but radio for all the charting songs should? Fortnight is literally breaking records… not number one though. TTPD is debuting to over 2.4m but none of the songs should chart… are we even being fr at this point?
And arbitrary rules to chart when it’s The most accurate it’s ever been…. Is ass backwards at best.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2024 13:59:03 GMT -5
Some of y’all are really doing the most to (aggressively) deny that a one week wonder is a one week wonder. There’s no “open to interpretation” there. Plenty of songs these days score a high peak on the h100 and then disappear into the ether forever. Never used to be so common, and this is all factual. There is also nothing genuinely organic either about how the songs when an album is first released that do the best on streaming can be so easily manipulated by what is at the front of the album (or high profile feature artist). But I do appreciate those who are rationally and politely arguing why they don’t agree with my suggestion fwiw.
|
|
jayhawk1117
2x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2013
Posts: 2,758
|
Post by jayhawk1117 on Apr 25, 2024 14:07:05 GMT -5
Some of y’all are really doing the most to (aggressively) deny that a one week wonder is a one week wonder. There’s no “open to interpretation” there. Plenty of songs these days score a high peak on the h100 and then disappear into the ether forever. Never used to be so common, and this is all factual. There is also nothing genuinely organic either about how the songs when an album is first released that do the best on streaming can be so easily manipulated by what is at the front of the album (or high profile feature artist). But I do appreciate those who are rationally and politely arguing why they don’t agree with my suggestion fwiw. Who denied it? It simply doesn’t matter because… they’ll fall off the next week. The Hot 100 is a weekly chart. I mean look at how hard Nicki gets clowned TO THIS DAY for being week 1 wonders. It’s not it’s some secret lol The work around ? Release songs at 9pm EST. Now every big song debuts in the 90s and jump to number 1 and ruin that record or they miss 3 hours of streams and still debut at 1. And in the end… nothing changes 😫 |
|
dremolus - solarpunk
Diamond Member
𝙁𝙧𝙤𝙢 𝙋𝙖𝙡𝙚𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙋𝙝𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙥𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙨, 𝙎𝙩𝙤𝙥 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙐.𝙎. 𝙒𝙖𝙧 𝙈𝙖𝙘
Joined: August 2019
Posts: 13,323
My Reviews
Pronouns: (he/him/they)
|
Post by dremolus - solarpunk on Apr 25, 2024 14:08:44 GMT -5
Some of y’all are really doing the most to (aggressively) deny that a one week wonder is a one week wonder. There’s no “open to interpretation” there. Plenty of songs these days score a high peak on the h100 and then disappear into the ether forever. Never used to be so common, and this is all factual. There is also nothing genuinely organic either about how the songs when an album is first released that do the best on streaming can be so easily manipulated by what is at the front of the album (or high profile feature artist). But I do appreciate those who are rationally and politely arguing why they don’t agree with my suggestion fwiw. You've still failed to give a reason why they should change a chart of 100 songs just to compensate a couple one week numbers. If you're not gonna give a good reason besides whining about "prestige" then it's not worth entertaining this idiotic suggestion to punish songs. Things move faster and slower nowadays, get with the times or stop following the charts altogether if you don't like album bombs because they're aren't ever going away. Also you pointing out that high profile feature artists is manipulation is funny as if that hadn't been the strategy for artists since the dawn of man. Would you rather people not collab with big acts? The same goes btw with putting the big singles at the start of the album, that's not new at all. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2024 14:11:43 GMT -5
Some of y’all are really doing the most to (aggressively) deny that a one week wonder is a one week wonder. There’s no “open to interpretation” there. Plenty of songs these days score a high peak on the h100 and then disappear into the ether forever. Never used to be so common, and this is all factual. There is also nothing genuinely organic either about how the songs when an album is first released that do the best on streaming can be so easily manipulated by what is at the front of the album (or high profile feature artist). But I do appreciate those who are rationally and politely arguing why they don’t agree with my suggestion fwiw. Who denied it? It simply doesn’t matter because… they’ll fall off the next week. The Hot 100 is a weekly chart. And I disagree it doesn’t matter since so many people are claiming that the current system represents the best way to measure organic popularity that there’s ever been. If anything, it’s easier to manipulate now more than ever. Like I said, just throw what songs you want to get a top ten with in the first 5 spots of your album if you’re a big artist, and there you go. It’s not organic. These are curiosity listens based on an artist’s name because people now have free access to whatever they want. Far cry when someone had to actually pay for what they wanted to hear, that truly was “organic.” Even radio was more organic at the time since they actually paid attention to things like callback scores and what listener habits were far more (and single sales, which again were much more indicative of organic popularity). Streaming has made it all more inorganic if you ask me, and I still would like some stop gaps to course correct that a bit, but that’s me. I also don’t care to argue it anymore since no one is changing my mind thus far, and apparently there is now a narrative I’m not going to overcome that this is all some matter of what songs I “want” to chart high. It’s not, it’s just about not thinking so much vanishing clutter getting prestige spots on the chart is good for its reputation, not my own opinion of said songs. And as I already mentioned, yes my argument is moot if you truly believe all the hot 100 should be is one instance in time and nothing else. I have a different belief obviously. |
|
dremolus - solarpunk
Diamond Member
𝙁𝙧𝙤𝙢 𝙋𝙖𝙡𝙚𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙋𝙝𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙥𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙨, 𝙎𝙩𝙤𝙥 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙐.𝙎. 𝙒𝙖𝙧 𝙈𝙖𝙘
Joined: August 2019
Posts: 13,323
My Reviews
Pronouns: (he/him/they)
|
Post by dremolus - solarpunk on Apr 25, 2024 14:18:52 GMT -5
In regards to this week, don't you think if these were just curiosity listens they'd fall off harshly throughout the week? Like idk about you If I listen to something out of curiosity and don't care for ir, I'm not listening to it a second time. And yet here we are 6 days later and she still occupies the entire top 20, it's almost like people organically came back to the album or something 🤔
And you can't say album placement for TTPD either btw because the top streamed songs are not in order of the album.
|
|
Az Paynter
Diamond Member
On Dsico's Block List™
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 114,474
|
Post by Az Paynter on Apr 25, 2024 14:19:10 GMT -5
Your issues with Billboard are a "you" problem. Not a "chart" problem. If Billboard/the industry took an issue with album bombs they would do something about it. They didn't. Ergo they don't care, just you.
|
|
jayhawk1117
2x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2013
Posts: 2,758
|
Post by jayhawk1117 on Apr 25, 2024 14:21:08 GMT -5
Who denied it? It simply doesn’t matter because… they’ll fall off the next week. The Hot 100 is a weekly chart. And I disagree it doesn’t matter since so many people are claiming that the current system represents the best way to measure organic popularity that there’s ever been. If anything, it’s easier to manipulate now more than ever. Like I said, just throw what songs you want to get a top ten with in the first 5 spots of your album if you’re a big artist, and there you go. It’s not organic. These are curiosity listens based on an artist’s name because people now have free access to whatever they want. Far cry when someone had to actually pay for what they wanted to hear, that truly was “organic.” Even radio was more organic at the time since they actually paid attention to things like callback scores and what listener habits were far more (and single sales, which again were much more indicative of organic popularity). Streaming has made it all more inorganic if you ask me, and I still would like some stop gaps to course correct that a bit, but that’s me. Putting the likely hits in the front of the album is quite literally the oldest trick in the book…. If streams are easy to game, don’t even look into sales 💀💀 did you miss the BTS era lmao. Playlisting can only carry so much; if people don’t like it…. They can change it in a fraction of a second. Radio is violently slow to rotate new things, we’re consistently getting new longevity records specifically because of it. People stream at a much larger rate because they have 100% control not just “Hopefully Q102 plays something I like”. |
|
|
|
Post by Rose "Payola" Nylund on Apr 25, 2024 14:23:07 GMT -5
Some of y’all are really doing the most to (aggressively) deny that a one week wonder is a one week wonder. There’s no “open to interpretation” there. Plenty of songs these days score a high peak on the h100 and then disappear into the ether forever. Never used to be so common, and this is all factual. There is also nothing genuinely organic either about how the songs when an album is first released that do the best on streaming can be so easily manipulated by what is at the front of the album (or high profile feature artist). But I do appreciate those who are rationally and politely arguing why they don’t agree with my suggestion fwiw. I think ultimately, you'd be looking for a longer-term chart, whether that be the year-end chart (which might be too long-term) or even a monthly chart (which doesn't exist but the data probably exists for someone who had the time and inclination to put it together). Even the suggestion from last week of a rolling chart sounds like something you'd be looking for. The thing is, a rolling chart -- while it would satisfy the desires you and others have expressed in relation to issues with the current Hot 100 -- still covers a wider period of time. So that's fine if you want something that reflects what the HITS are (and a HIT tends to be something that is longer-lasting anyway), but for those who are genuinely looking for a snapshot of what's what for a single week (which is what the Hot 100 is and has always been), that's not what a rolling chart would cover. That in itself tells me that your issue isn't with the Hot 100. It's with the industry and people's own listening habits. There's nothing else to it. Also worth mentioning is that in the before times, movement on the Hot 100 tended to be gradual, because people's listening/buying habits were gradual. A song was gain traction on radio or TV, and people would get on board gradually. You'd have your early adopters, then others jumping on ship, then the period where the song is trendy. This would all take place over the course of weeks or months until a song peaks. By the time a song peaks, that's when it's most popular (lol, obviously), but it's had enough momentum so that people are well-familiar with it by that point. Nowadays, that momentum is immediate because streaming and social media has made everything a click away and immediately accessible. There's little room for momentum-building so when a song is released, it could very well peak right away because a majority of active music fans are going to check it out right away. That leaves little time for late-comers to jump aboard and unless radio gets involved, the song isn't going to have a long shelf-life without some sort of hook or story to keep it afloat. None of this is the fault of the Hot 100. And as I've said before, if you look at a chart peak of a song and conclude anything from that without looking at any other information (weeks on the chart, weeks in the top 10, or chart activity on other charts such as streaming, radio, formats, etc), then you're doing it wrong. Music is segmented now more than ever before and if you're trying to determine how big a song is, you can't rely on one piece of information from one source. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2024 14:26:26 GMT -5
Taylor was smart front loading a lot that she probably knew would never get high attention otherwise. Stuff like Boy, title track, or London getting top ten at the end of the album? Cant imagine it honestly. Yet we still see at the front it’s enough of an edge to drastically inflate peaks.
Now if Taylor holds up week 2 with most of these songs, then great they weren’t such inorganic curiosity peaks. Very glad some songs that show real hit potential aren’t getting such high peaks to just fall off a cliff then. Doesn’t change my stance on anything.
|
|
clsvltn
Platinum Member
Joined: October 2019
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by clsvltn on Apr 25, 2024 14:29:38 GMT -5
We are descending into chaos again. We either have boring chart weeks with no talking or fun chart weeks that get filled with a bunch of crazies...not sure what is worse at this point
|
|
mms82
Platinum Member
...
Joined: January 2019
Posts: 1,282
|
Post by mms82 on Apr 25, 2024 14:54:13 GMT -5
We are descending into chaos again. We either have boring chart weeks with no talking or fun chart weeks that get filled with a bunch of crazies...not sure what is worse at this point Bring back phieagles and meg haha No, but seriously as much as I think Pikandru’s suggestion is ludicrous, I respect them arguing their point and putting it out there despite the board being entirely against them. Pikandru is positively contributing to discussion with this, and shouldn’t be lumped into some of the past trolls. respect, Pikandru |
|
|
|
Post by Rose "Payola" Nylund on Apr 25, 2024 15:03:17 GMT -5
Agreed. Personally, I'm a @pikandru stan.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2024 15:09:41 GMT -5
Agreed. Personally, I'm a @pikandru stan. I appreciate you 😊 I might owe dremolus - solarpunk an apology here since I think at some point in this thread I called your points “silly.” Wasn’t meant as an attack on you personally though if that’s how I came off. Big on not believing in attacking others during these arguments. |
|
|
|
Post by Mayman on Apr 25, 2024 15:42:50 GMT -5
We are descending into chaos again. We either have boring chart weeks with no talking or fun chart weeks that get filled with a bunch of crazies...not sure what is worse at this point No I think weeks like this are great. Discussion on multiple different topics is fun even if not everyone agrees, especially when we have users who bring great insight into the discussion. Less posts like this that discourage that please!! |
|
|
|
Post by Mayman on Apr 25, 2024 15:44:36 GMT -5
We are descending into chaos again. We either have boring chart weeks with no talking or fun chart weeks that get filled with a bunch of crazies...not sure what is worse at this point Bring back phieagles and meg haha No, but seriously as much as I think Pikandru’s suggestion is ludicrous, I respect them arguing their point and putting it out there despite the board being entirely against them. Pikandru is positively contributing to discussion with this, and shouldn’t be lumped into some of the past trolls. respect, Pikandru Totally agree! Part of what makes discussion boards great is stuff like this - if everyone agreed on everything what would be the point. And if Lee is reading this don't yell at me for double posting I'm on mobile and don't have the patience to quote two posts in one. |
|
clsvltn
Platinum Member
Joined: October 2019
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by clsvltn on Apr 25, 2024 15:45:59 GMT -5
We are descending into chaos again. We either have boring chart weeks with no talking or fun chart weeks that get filled with a bunch of crazies...not sure what is worse at this point Bring back phieagles and meg haha No, but seriously as much as I think Pikandru’s suggestion is ludicrous, I respect them arguing their point and putting it out there despite the board being entirely against them. Pikandru is positively contributing to discussion with this, and shouldn’t be lumped into some of the past trolls. respect, Pikandru btw I was not referring to anyone specific, just these weeks always bring out a lot of tension it seems lol |
|
|
|
Post by sedrickwilhelm on Apr 25, 2024 15:58:36 GMT -5
Nope. Taylor Swift just is not satisfied with only beating Olivia Rodrigo by being the biggest artist on earth and shattering records, she also needs to pick a different young up and coming pop star to push to beat her as well. Olivia’s known enemy. I just hate people who say shit like this, like grow the fuck up. My bad, I forgot the money making business was all just child’s play. |
|
|
|
Post by sedrickwilhelm on Apr 25, 2024 15:59:17 GMT -5
Nope. Taylor Swift just is not satisfied with only beating Olivia Rodrigo by being the biggest artist on earth and shattering records, she also needs to pick a different young up and coming pop star to push to beat her as well. Olivia’s known enemy. Ah yes, Taylor Swift wants push down Sabrina Carpenter from ever succeeding. That's why Taylor chose Sabrina to be one of her opening acts for the Eras Tour and even had her come on stage to sing with her Keep Sabrina from succeeding? No, I was saying she is trying to keep Olivia Rodrigo from succeeding. |
|
|
|
Post by sedrickwilhelm on Apr 25, 2024 16:04:15 GMT -5
I do not like how not only did you misread what I said but then multiple people liked it meaning they too misread it.
|
|
|
|
Post by sedrickwilhelm on Apr 25, 2024 16:05:28 GMT -5
Sabrina is Olivia’s known enemy. I was using the fact that Taylor is promoting the ever living hell out of her as a point for her using a younger upcoming pop star who is an enemy of Olivia Rodrigo like how Taylor is.
|
|
lazer
2x Platinum Member
Joined: January 2018
Posts: 2,628
|
Post by lazer on Apr 25, 2024 16:20:58 GMT -5
We are descending into chaos again. We either have boring chart weeks with no talking or fun chart weeks that get filled with a bunch of crazies...not sure what is worse at this point Bring back phieagles and meg haha No, but seriously as much as I think Pikandru’s suggestion is ludicrous, I respect them arguing their point and putting it out there despite the board being entirely against them. Pikandru is positively contributing to discussion with this, and shouldn’t be lumped into some of the past trolls. respect, Pikandru Don’t forget amore and hot100predictions. They were so damn messy lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Mayman on Apr 25, 2024 16:21:41 GMT -5
Or Taylor is promoting an artist she feels should be recognized? Why does it have to be a competition? As if Taylor also hasn't given out props and recognized Olivia multiple times either.
You wouldn't say that about a man that's for sure. Absolute loser behavior
|
|
|
|
Post by sedrickwilhelm on Apr 25, 2024 16:39:02 GMT -5
Or Taylor is promoting an artist she feels should be recognized? Why does it have to be a competition? As if Taylor also hasn't given out props and recognized Olivia multiple times either. You wouldn't say that about a man that's for sure. Absolute loser behavior You seem to be missing context. Taylor and Olivia have already had money/legal related issues. And of all people, Sabrina Carpenter? It is plain as day. Sorry you can’t see it. |
|
sayhey
Charting
Joined: February 2023
Posts: 84
|
Post by sayhey on Apr 25, 2024 16:42:25 GMT -5
Happy to see Sabrina's Espresso performing so well. I can see this soon hitting #1 on Spotify, seeing that it's so big on TikTok apparently. And pop radio's already picking it up fast. The very first time I heard it I thought it was an obvious smash and love the Nintendo Switch reference too lol!! I feel like this'll be the next Hot 100 #1 after Taylor's Fortnight, let's see what happens!
|
|
David
4x Platinum Member
Joined: February 2005
Posts: 4,473
|
Post by David on Apr 25, 2024 16:42:26 GMT -5
ESPRESSO IS A JAM!!!!
|
|
mms82
Platinum Member
...
Joined: January 2019
Posts: 1,282
|
Post by mms82 on Apr 25, 2024 17:12:37 GMT -5
Shaboozey is supposed to rise to top 30 even with Taylor according to TOTC! Love his new successs, so deserved
|
|
mms82
Platinum Member
...
Joined: January 2019
Posts: 1,282
|
Post by mms82 on Apr 25, 2024 18:04:20 GMT -5
Not to fall right back in my endless loop with this argument, but yet another reason no one has convinced me my “qualifying week” idea is a bad one for the hot 100. Half of these “one week wonder” peaks only get there due to their track listing on an album bomb. It’s all so calculated annd inorganic. While I admire the goal here, there's a pretty big hole in this logic. Artists would just release songs sometime on Thursdays and their first "week" would be a few hours of activity Thursday, so effectively they'd still end up with the same result, minus only a sliver of sales/streams. I occasionally pitch this when these conversations come up, but I still feel like the best path is not to add more rules but to simplify them way the hell down and make the Hot 100 a "minutes listened" chart. You'd look at how many minutes a song was heard on radio, streaming, social media, etc. and just add that up. Doesn't matter if it's passive/active/whatever. This already takes place with TV shows, you can view charts of hours watched for shows on Netflix for example. I think this would have the opposite problem of today’s chart - it’ll incentivize people to put out long extended versions of songs to hopefully get someone to listen to all of Mirrors or ATW10MVTVFTV if it comes up on shuffle. I kinda like shorter songs ngl |
|
