Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Ed Sheeran illustrates the death of the chart
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
Ronald Bump |
And in turn Vinnie Vincent is no David Hasslehoff! Looking for freedom! |
|
andrew |
Chris wrote:
A lot of the problem now re: streaming, downloading to devices and tracks hanging around the chart forever is the channel-hopping attention-spans combined with the throwaway culture re: those devices the tracks are downloaded onto. People are buying or streaming the same tracks over & over due to a lack of imagination, and the same kinds of 'artist' being over-promoted by the media.
I find Ed Sheeran & Adele OK in small doses, I find being told over & over they are musical genius's objectionable. I hear interviews with young musicians spouting platitudes and citing Coldplay as 'inspiration', then I watch a group of 50-something hedonists on a BBC Four documentary being challenging, eloquent and inspiring - and there is no comparison. It's a different world.
The music I love the most was all about and inspiration & 'vision'. Either the artists had vision, or the producers or svengali's behind 'lesser acts' had a vision. Most pop had a deftness of touch and a degree of intelligence behind it - and so did the audience it was created for. Not the case now, alas.
They have talent but they are not geniuses in any form. Ed Sheeran just uses simple chords and basic strumming he is no Vinnie Vincent. |
|
Chris |
A lot of the problem now re: streaming, downloading to devices and tracks hanging around the chart forever is the channel-hopping attention-spans combined with the throwaway culture re: those devices the tracks are downloaded onto. People are buying or streaming the same tracks over & over due to a lack of imagination, and the same kinds of 'artist' being over-promoted by the media.
I find Ed Sheeran & Adele OK in small doses, I find being told over & over they are musical genius's objectionable. I hear interviews with young musicians spouting platitudes and citing Coldplay as 'inspiration', then I watch a group of 50-something hedonists on a BBC Four documentary being challenging, eloquent and inspiring - and there is no comparison. It's a different world.
The music I love the most was all about and inspiration & 'vision'. Either the artists had vision, or the producers or svengali's behind 'lesser acts' had a vision. Most pop had a deftness of touch and a degree of intelligence behind it - and so did the audience it was created for. Not the case now, alas. |
|
JK2006 |
Yes my Pop-I would have been fine for then but it would be different now. No the problem is not the chart; it is the people running the music companies who have allowed music to drift down the running order of public importance. |
|
dixie |
I wish I had more time to debate this, but a few comments.
The current chart includes sales (digital downloads and physical - where they exist) and streaming, where a stream is ratios at 150:1. On paper that all looks sensible. But the issues are that ANY track (single or album track) can be streamed (obviously assuming its on the streaming service - which wasn't the case with Adele's 25 album initially). So all the Ed Sheeran tracks counted as album streams (1000;1) AND Sinle streams (150:1).
The singles chart did exactly what it was supposed to do. It ranked the 40 most popular tracks over the last 7 days. It reflected the fact that 9 of the Top 10 happened to be by Ed Sheeren.
It in fact didn't do much different to what the "Pop-I" idea would have done. It MEASURED on-going popularity i.e. consumption, of the music.
But the good old public don't like the results. I'm sure OCC are now looking at the methodology again, but a knee-jerk reaction isn't the answer. |
|
|
|
