This is starting to get ridiculous, the charts are a cluttered mess. I feel like billboard should have the streaming charts and the hot 100 should move to a chart focused on serviced singles only. What do y’all think?

 

I mean, I don’t see why. Taylor and Drake are still the only two capable of pulling this off. Otherwise the charts are pretty accurate outside of radio’s weight boosting songs that aren’t being consumed in other metrics. 

 

Drake earning 500M streams in one week is an enormous feat — why should any artist be punished for that? I already don’t like that some other countries only allow like 3 or 4 songs of an album to chart simultaneously. You’re telling me all these other weaker songs can keep charting but my overperforming song can’t? Ch.

Edited November 9, 20223 yr by WeFoundTrouble

I don't see what's the problem with that and it's not just because I stan them. Taylor and Drake's albums were events. An artist dominating the top-10 may "clutter" the charts, but it also accurately reflects what the public is listening to.

Only 2 artists can pull this off

yes I agree, Unholy deserves to leave the chart asap.

I don’t see this problem with this? Only a few artists are capable of dropping album bombs.

3 minutes ago, Héloïse said:

yes I agree, Unholy deserves to leave the chart asap.

Yes, let's base the charts off of ATRL User Héloïse's personal musical tastes.  

1 minute ago, Frogger17 said:

Yes, let's base the charts off of ATRL User Héloïse's personal musical tastes.  

Exactly, you get it. 

Yes its effecting Cuff It's chart run 

41 minutes ago, EnoughSaid said:

 

This is starting to get ridiculous, the charts are a cluttered mess. I feel like billboard should have the streaming charts and the hot 100 should move to a chart focused on serviced singles only. What do y’all think?

 

I definitely agree with this one. Album tracks streams are being counted for both H100 and BB200 which makes streaming artists bigger than it seems. For example Post Malone is already #30 on All Time Top Artists because of album tracks streams being counted twice and therefore inflating their stats. In the digital era this wasn't possible. 1989 or especially 25 would have had the whole top 10 too if their pure copies had been counted for the H100 chart too. So basically pure sales artists are disadvantaged at H100 unlike streaming artists

No. It should match the Spotify chart which is what the GP actually listens to. 

1 hour ago, EnoughSaid said:

the hot 100 should move to a chart focused on serviced singles only

Labels will just find loopholes around that and will "service" the entire album to like 1 radio station and call them all "official singles" so that they are all eligible to chart. 

 

I think it's best to leave the chart as it is, because them tinkering with what's allowed and what's not allowed to chart only leads to legit hits missing out (see Don't Speak by No Doubt which didn't chart because it wasn't available on CD single) 

No. Why punish them for overperforming?

Yes and ban any song from Bad Bunny, BTS, Ed Sheeran and Rosalia along the way 

2 hours ago, WeFoundTrouble said:

I mean, I don’t see why. Taylor and Drake are still the only two capable of pulling this off. Otherwise the charts are pretty accurate outside of radio’s weight boosting songs that aren’t being consumed in other metrics. 

 

Drake earning 500M streams in one week is an enormous feat — why should any artist be punished for that? I already don’t like that some other countries only allow like 3 or 4 songs of an album to chart simultaneously. You’re telling me all these other weaker songs can keep charting but my overperforming song can’t? Ch.

Something is off with this formula with streaming now. 1989 and Views never did this (both superior and more mainstream popular), it’s getting easier to do these bombs

Edited November 9, 20223 yr by EnoughSaid

Yes. There should be a chart rule to only allow 3 tracks from the same album to debut inside the top ten simultaneously.

1 minute ago, EnoughSaid said:

Something is off with this formula with streaming now. 1989 and Views never did this (both superior and more mainstream popular), it’s getting easier to do these bombs

1989 wasn’t on streaming, so any song that wasn’t on radio basically only had 1 component contributing to its chart points — sales — compared to every other non Taylor song getting sales, streams, and airplay. It makes sense that she didn’t flood the Hot 100 during album release: her songs only had one method of consumption. 
 

With Drake, Scorpion and CLB got bigger streams than Views, and their Hot 100 performance reflects that. Views had much bigger pure sales though. The charts are about as balanced as they can get until we remove radio. Like someone else said, no point creating rules about what can and can’t chart. You’re trying to penalize 1 or 2 HUGE artists but you end up hurting hundreds of smaller ones. 

2 minutes ago, popjunkie said:

Yes. There should be a chart rule to only allow 3 tracks from the same album to debut inside the top ten simultaneously.

But why? If Drake can have a song earning 40M streams, and all non-Drake songs in the top 20 are getting 20M streams that week, why should his songs that are clearly much much MUCH bigger, like literally twice as big, not get to chart accurately where they belong? 
 

 

44 minutes ago, WeFoundTrouble said:

But why? If Drake can have a song earning 40M streams, and all non-Drake songs in the top 20 are getting 20M streams that week, why should his songs that are clearly much much MUCH bigger, like literally twice as big, not get to chart accurately where they belong? 
 

 

Because its streaming era and it makes the Hot 100 stats from 2019 and before a joke. The Hot 100 is just a mirror of the BB200 at this point. We look at the BB200 to see how an album is performing, we should be able to look at the Hot 100 to see how singles are performing, not the album. They need to make it a singles chart and give streaming a bit more weightage and ban mass buying then it'd be perfect. 

 

And labels finding loopholes is a bad counter-argument, billboard just needs to up their iq by 2 points to prevent labels from manipulating their own charts.

No

 

Hot 100 / Billboard 200 felt redundant to me, as they factor the same streams from artist for both those charts, as well as certification.

 

 

For Hot 100 to feel authentic - songs released as a single are the ones only allowed to chart on Hot 100. Just like the way they do it in the past. After all, most album tracks drop out of Hot 100 after 2-3 weeks. 

 

Billboard 200 should then only count those album tracks when counting the units plus pure albums sales. They also need to remove individual songs downloaded converted into album units. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, idkwiam said:

I definitely agree with this one. Album tracks streams are being counted for both H100 and BB200 which makes streaming artists bigger than it seems. For example Post Malone is already #30 on All Time Top Artists because of album tracks streams being counted twice and therefore inflating their stats. In the digital era this wasn't possible. 1989 or especially 25 would have had the whole top 10 too if their pure copies had been counted for the H100 chart too. So basically pure sales artists are disadvantaged at H100 unlike streaming artists

They should implement only official release singles streams, digital and physical) to count (towards Hot 100 and not to the parent album. Album tracks should only chart if digital or physical formats are being bought, but once a single is release streams stop counting towards albums. 

There should be a rule that a song be deemed as an actual single to chart. 

I honestly don't see the problem. Radio is the real issue. 

Taylor already broke the record so yes, BB should change or limit it.