Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pop Talk - General Music Discussion

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • stevyy
    replied
    Originally posted by InFamous View Post

    No offence but I find it difficult to equate these opinions with your actions. You are one of the main streaming info spammers on the site. When it comes to Mariah you post endless lists of her spotify streams everywhere, you tell us over and over again how many streams Merry Christmas now has at xmas time, even though you have to know most of its traction comes from one song. You constantly update streaming threads with numbers that reflect overall traction. You certainly didn't need to use Ariana for an example.
    It's actually annoying when you twist everything like that. You are like a Republican waiting for their GOTCHA moment... like as if posting streaming lists of songs would disprove my opinion on how the charts are made. You seem unable to differentiate.

    I collect charting data which is true. Every Xmas I post the charts table of what Mariah Carey's Christmas music is doing on the charts. BUT even then I can have an opinion on how that chart is compiled. IF the charts would become more logic and fairer, it would be harder for Mariah to achieve her Xmas statistics... however, the charts would be more comparable to the old times. What we are seeing now is artificially inflated statistics which make it impossible to compare charts from different eras.

    I think Germany has the best system of how charts should be compiled in this day and age. a revenue chart is the only chart which makes sense if you want to avoid double counting and if you want to diminish the influence of gimmicks like price tampering and merchandise bundling.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrLeonix
    replied
    Originally posted by InFamous View Post

    Only after her performance where she groped G Eazy on stage and plummetted again the following week.
    Well some others perform on TV and don’t see any effect

    Leave a comment:


  • Hejira
    replied
    I'm bopping to Prince's "The Time" project. Loving the spun out, long, funky instrumentals.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hejira
    replied
    Originally posted by stevyy View Post

    Mariah:

    3,4m - 2018 - Caution
    1,6m - 1995 - Daydream****
    1,4m - 1993 - Music Box
    1,2m - 1997 - Butterfly *****
    1,0m - 1994 / 2019 - Merry Christmas (Original) ******
    0,8m - 1990 - Mariah Carey
    0,7m - 2008 - E=MC˛
    0,6m - 1999 - Rainbow ****
    0,6m - 1991 - Emotions
    0,5m - 2014 - Me. I am Mariah*
    0,4m - 2009 - Memoirs***
    0,4m - 2002 - Charmbracelet
    0,3m - 2005 - TEOM
    0,03m - 2001 - Glitter
    0,01m - 2010 - Merry Christmas II You**

    *spoken outro
    ** Intro
    *** remix
    **** interlude
    ***** reprise
    ****** God Rest Ye Merry Gentleman from the original album was added to Spotify on the album's re-release in 2019

    So, even if the least streamed song is considered the streaming acts will still be far ahead.
    What even is this chile.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrLeonix
    replied
    Originally posted by stevyy View Post

    You can stop right there... it's all assumption... there is no study anywhere which could prove that "many people" only listened to 1 or 2 songs... One thing that goes against this logic is that the single... was also very much in demand and popular and if you only like 1 song... you could have bought the single.

    I'm not saying that it didn't occur... but you make it seem like hordes of people bought an album and would only listen to 1 song and ignore the rest... at the very least... "some" of those "many" people who would only listen to 1 song might've played the whole damn album at least once in order to find out that only 1 song was any good.

    Not to mention that the further back you go in time... the more "expensive" an album was... and not "everyone" was even buying music...

    That's only logical and supported by streaming information... because today we have acts with 50 - 60 million monthly listeners... BUT back in the day you did not have 50 - 60 million people buying an album by 1 act.

    You will probably use this as proof how today's charts are reflecting consumption... which is true - in part... it still does not show any consumption by those who buy and listen to music.

    Back in the day you HAD to buy a full album if you wanted an album... today you can cherry-pick songs... However, an album is a collection of work and as such all its parts are counting... and the least consumed part shows what the total consumption of an album is - nothing else.

    The thing is that physical singles were not effectively shipped like albums, I mean why do you think there are more 20 million selling albums than 20 million selling physical singles? I think only one physical single had +20 million sales, most of these singles were limited and there were many markets where physical singles were not even issued, on the contrary albums were massively shipped around the world, many people had no more choice than buying the album.

    Also buying the full album was cheaper in the end. Physical singles would cost $4 dollars ($3,99 to be exact) so If a person liked the 4 singles the artist released that would mean spending $12 dollars for the 4 singles while the album would cost $10 and you would get the whole thing.

    It was a very common practice that people would buy an album because of two or three songs. Of course if someone bought a full album that person listened to the whole thing but after 1 or 2 listens many would then focus on the 2-3 songs they liked and replay those ones over and over again.

    It's very hard to find a person listening to the full entire album every single time no matter the method (physical copy, itunes copy or streaming platform).
    Last edited by MrLeonix; Wed May 27, 2020, 19:38.

    Leave a comment:


  • stevyy
    replied
    Originally posted by InFamous View Post

    How would that equate for Merry Christmas ?

    Also it doesn't actually mean that. People who listened to the least streamed song may have hated all the other songs and never listened to them even once.
    Mariah:

    3,4m - 2018 - Caution
    1,6m - 1995 - Daydream****
    1,4m - 1993 - Music Box
    1,2m - 1997 - Butterfly *****
    1,0m - 1994 / 2019 - Merry Christmas (Original) ******
    0,8m - 1990 - Mariah Carey
    0,7m - 2008 - E=MC˛
    0,6m - 1999 - Rainbow ****
    0,6m - 1991 - Emotions
    0,5m - 2014 - Me. I am Mariah*
    0,4m - 2009 - Memoirs***
    0,4m - 2002 - Charmbracelet
    0,3m - 2005 - TEOM
    0,03m - 2001 - Glitter
    0,01m - 2010 - Merry Christmas II You**

    *spoken outro
    ** Intro
    *** remix
    **** interlude
    ***** reprise
    ****** God Rest Ye Merry Gentleman from the original album was added to Spotify on the album's re-release in 2019

    So, even if the least streamed song is considered the streaming acts will still be far ahead.

    Leave a comment:


  • KEY9481
    replied
    Stevyy is a walking confusion, nothing new here!

    Leave a comment:


  • InFamous
    replied
    Originally posted by stevyy View Post



    Back in the day you HAD to buy a full album if you wanted an album... today you can cherry-pick songs... However, an album is a collection of work and as such all its parts are counting... and the least consumed part shows what the total consumption of an album is - nothing else.

    No offence but I find it difficult to equate these opinions with your actions. You are one of the main streaming info spammers on the site. When it comes to Mariah you post endless lists of her spotify streams everywhere, you tell us over and over again how many streams Merry Christmas now has at xmas time, even though you have to know most of its traction comes from one song. You constantly update streaming threads with numbers that reflect overall traction. You certainly didn't need to use Ariana for an example.

    Leave a comment:


  • InFamous
    replied
    Originally posted by MrLeonix View Post

    The song went back to #17 on the Billboard Hot 100 on it’s 8th week
    Only after her performance where she groped G Eazy on stage and plummetted again the following week.

    Leave a comment:


  • InFamous
    replied
    Originally posted by stevyy View Post

    That is why... only the least streamed song shows how much an album was consumed... not cumulative plays of all songs.

    Ariana's latest album: Thank You, Next... was consumed 90,6 million times in total and not 3 billion times as the cumulative number of songs suggests.
    How would that equate for Merry Christmas ?

    Also it doesn't actually mean that. People who listened to the least streamed song may have hated all the other songs and never listened to them even once.

    Leave a comment:


  • stevyy
    replied
    Originally posted by MrLeonix View Post

    It’s not that different to how old times worked though .. I mean how many people bought albums in the 80s and 90s just to played 2 / 3 songs over and over again and ignore the remaining tracklist?
    You can stop right there... it's all assumption... there is no study anywhere which could prove that "many people" only listened to 1 or 2 songs... One thing that goes against this logic is that the single... was also very much in demand and popular and if you only like 1 song... you could have bought the single.

    I'm not saying that it didn't occur... but you make it seem like hordes of people bought an album and would only listen to 1 song and ignore the rest... at the very least... "some" of those "many" people who would only listen to 1 song might've played the whole damn album at least once in order to find out that only 1 song was any good.

    Not to mention that the further back you go in time... the more "expensive" an album was... and not "everyone" was even buying music...

    That's only logical and supported by streaming information... because today we have acts with 50 - 60 million monthly listeners... BUT back in the day you did not have 50 - 60 million people buying an album by 1 act.

    You will probably use this as proof how today's charts are reflecting consumption... which is true - in part... it still does not show any consumption by those who buy and listen to music.

    Back in the day you HAD to buy a full album if you wanted an album... today you can cherry-pick songs... However, an album is a collection of work and as such all its parts are counting... and the least consumed part shows what the total consumption of an album is - nothing else.


    Leave a comment:


  • cheapthrills
    replied
    That seems wordy

    Leave a comment:


  • InFamous
    replied
    Originally posted by cheapthrills View Post
    If you're a label exec, you don't care where the money is coming from though - ad revenue, radio revenue - it's all revenue. The tiered system makes sense because they get more money from a premium user. But while these charts are a measure of popularity to a degree, they are more meant for the industry as a sales tool. Whether you play that song one time or a million, they still got your money.
    If that's what the charts are truly reflecting then they should be called "The Revenue Based Hot 100".

    Leave a comment:


  • MrLeonix
    replied
    Originally posted by InFamous View Post

    Regardless, there was not much demand or longevity for the song seeing as how it plummetted in week two.
    She looked hot in the video. She gets backlash anyway so .
    The song went back to #17 on the Billboard Hot 100 on it’s 8th week

    Leave a comment:


  • MrLeonix
    replied
    Originally posted by stevyy View Post

    That is why... only the least streamed song shows how much an album was consumed... not cumulative plays of all songs.

    Ariana's latest album: Thank You, Next... was consumed 90,6 million times in total and not 3 billion times as the cumulative number of songs suggests.
    It’s not that different to how old times worked though .. I mean how many people bought albums in the 80s and 90s just to play 2 / 3 songs over and over again and ignore the remaining tracklist?

    At the end of the day it’s the same and just an evolution of consuming music. We can’t criticize an album for having one or two songs being the focus of streams because: 1) that song is part of the album, 2) that’s pretty much the same thing people did back in the day when buying physical albums. When 20 million people bought the Spice Girls debut album most did it because they wanted to play “Wannabe” and “2 Become On 1” over and over again and not because they were dying to play album track “Love Thing”.

    Leave a comment:


  • InFamous
    replied
    Originally posted by MrLeonix View Post
    BTW, this was the original “Make Me” music video directed by David LaChapelle (it leaked last year). After the leak David confirmed this was not the original edit though and what leaked was just a collection of scenes from the shooting put together by the person who leaked the video.

    The music video is an over the top prostitution tacky porn-orgy liberated fantasy



    The music video got scrapped at the very last minute without a sole explanation leading to multiple theories about what could have happened, however after the leak David LaChapelle broke silence and said the reason the music video got scrapped was because Britney didn’t like it when she saw it.

    This was set to premiere the same day “Make Me” was released but it never happened, the song debuted at #17 on the Billboard Hot 100 without the aid of a music video and it’s believed that it could have made the Top 10 on the Hot 100 pushed by streams had the music video been released that week.

    What do you think guys? Could this have worked? Some people say this was a freaking mess and that it was a good thing it got shelved as it portrayed Britney as a desperate woman doing porn. Backlash would’ve been insanely bad.
    Regardless, there was not much demand or longevity for the song seeing as how it plummetted in week two.
    She looked hot in the video. She gets backlash anyway so .

    Leave a comment:


  • InFamous
    replied
    Originally posted by beredy View Post

    If you watch a movie on TV you have ads. If you watch it on streaming then you paid for it. So unless you downloaded a rip, whenever you watch a movie on TV somebody is earning money from it.

    Also if a stream is earning money - that is COMPLETELY on point. It's just something that doesn't fit into your idea
    It's not on point. Using a song to make money via ads is not the same thing as someone actually buying a song. It has nothing to do with the charts.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrLeonix
    replied
    BTW, this was the original “Make Me” music video directed by David LaChapelle (it leaked last year). After the leak David confirmed this was not the original edit though and what leaked was just a collection of scenes from the shooting put together by the person who leaked the video.

    The music video is an over the top prostitution tacky porn-orgy liberated fantasy



    The music video got scrapped at the very last minute without a sole explanation leading to multiple theories about what could have happened, however after the leak David LaChapelle broke silence and said the reason the music video got scrapped was because Britney didn’t like it when she saw it.

    This was set to premiere the same day “Make Me” was released but it never happened, the song debuted at #17 on the Billboard Hot 100 without the aid of a music video and it’s believed that it could have made the Top 10 on the Hot 100 pushed by streams had the music video been released that week.

    What do you think guys? Could this have worked? Some people say this was a freaking mess and that it was a good thing it got shelved as it portrayed Britney as a desperate woman doing porn. Backlash would’ve been insanely bad.

    Leave a comment:


  • stevyy
    replied
    Originally posted by beredy View Post

    But you can buy an album and listen to it once. Sale doesn't say anything about actual consumption. On the other hand streaming at least shows if an album has longevity and replay value. Also you do know they get money for every stream?
    That is why... only the least streamed song shows how much an album was consumed... not cumulative plays of all songs.

    Ariana's latest album: Thank You, Next... was consumed 90,6 million times in total and not 3 billion times as the cumulative number of songs suggests.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrLeonix
    replied
    Originally posted by Aaronsmithjune1 View Post
    While the girls are getting #1 hits, let's make this number one next week
    Such a chilled fresh pop song.

    But for real, this was the lead single from her 9th studio album (18 years into her career at that time) and I'm just glad it wasn't struggling to make the Top 40

    Leave a comment:


  • beredy
    replied
    Originally posted by InFamous View Post

    As if every person in the world doesn't use an adblock to turn off ads. It makes no difference if there are ads as I said. It's the equivalent of watching a movie at home for free on a site or paying for it on netflix. Unless you are actually paying for a product it should not count for the charts in my opinion.
    Whether or not it makes money somehow via "ads" is another topic/point anyway and has nothing to do with what I am even saying.
    If you watch a movie on TV you have ads. If you watch it on streaming then you paid for it. So unless you downloaded a rip, whenever you watch a movie on TV somebody is earning money from it.

    Also if a stream is earning money - that is COMPLETELY on point. It's just something that doesn't fit into your idea

    Leave a comment:


  • Aaronsmithjune1
    replied
    While the girls are getting #1 hits, let's make this number one next week
    Last edited by Aaronsmithjune1; Wed May 27, 2020, 17:51.

    Leave a comment:


  • InFamous
    replied
    Originally posted by beredy View Post
    LOL. I guess we're not here for the facts but arbitrary conclusions. Makes no sense to have this conversation then.
    As if every person in the world doesn't use an adblock to turn off ads. It makes no difference if there are ads as I said. It's the equivalent of watching a movie at home for free on a site or paying for it on netflix. Unless you are actually paying for a product it should not count for the charts in my opinion.
    Whether or not it makes money somehow via "ads" is another topic/point anyway and has nothing to do with what I am even saying.

    Leave a comment:


  • cheapthrills
    replied
    If you're a label exec, you don't care where the money is coming from though - ad revenue, radio revenue - it's all revenue. The tiered system makes sense because they get more money from a premium user. But while these charts are a measure of popularity to a degree, they are more meant for the industry as a sales tool. Whether you play that song one time or a million, they still got your money.

    Leave a comment:


  • beredy
    replied
    Originally posted by InFamous View Post

    Incorrect, free spotify streams and free youtube streams are counted for the charts. Whatever they do via ads is irrelevant. The people are not paying. Simple.

    Plus those different tiers were only brought in pretty recently.
    LOL. I guess we're not here for the facts but arbitrary conclusions. Makes no sense to have this conversation then.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X