Slashdot Mirror
Music Charts No Longer Make Sense (qz.com)
American rapper Future's back to back new albums have created a stir among music enthusiasts and the studios alike. Billboard today refreshed its weekly US Top 200 chart, and the American rapper officially became the first artist to ever knock his own album out of the #1 spot with another one of his albums. Future released the self-titled FUTURE on Feb. 17. One week later, the artist then dropped a second album HNDRXX which is the new champion. What does it mean, though? Confusion, some say. From a report on Quartz: Up till December 2014, Billboard's Top 200 chart -- which pulls its numbers from data juggernaut Nielsen -- measured new music in the US only by album sales. As music streaming services like Spotify and Apple Music, came into the mainstream, Nielsen and Billboard revamped their system to be based off "units." How does is work? One "unit" is equivalent to either one album sale, 10 track sales, or 1,500 song streams. In other words, listeners on a streaming platform would need to stream a Future song 1,500 times for it to count the same way a single album purchase does.
While that number may seem high, consider that it costs (more or less) $9.99 a month to stream tens of thousands of songs, as opposed to dropping $10-15 on a single album to own it, either physically or digitally. That means people who subscribe to online streaming services aren't taking out an additional cost to listen to every new Future song or album or the same ones over and over again -- it's essentially free. It becomes an odd, if necessary, way of calculating charts, because it means people who pay the most for an artist's music count for the least when sales are tallied.
People just 'paid' for radio plays by listening to advertising. So why does streaming need to be considered but radio play does not?
Nothing in TFS explains to me why, "Music Charts No Longer Make Sense". Is it because an artist overtook himself on the charts? Is it because they've had to change their chart system to keep up with technology?
Maybe charts don't make sense anymore, maybe they still do, but I have no idea whether they do or not from reading TFS.
self obsessed and arrogant millenials
Coming from the guy who is telling everybody else what they should like. I trust the irony isn't lost on you?
I know in the US the slang is to "drop an album" but I would much prefer if slashdot would use the more widely understood "pooped out an album". ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Given the pay to play nature of radio, charts only ever really showed who paid the most money for airtime.
They've been meaningless for a long time now.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Get off my lawn!
Seriously though, I am sorry you feel that way but I disagree. There is still a lot of interesting music being produced if you know where to look. I agree that most everything listed on the Billboard top 200 will fit your description, but that list only covers music which a small group of record labels have defined to be appealing to the largest groups of people. It sounds like your tastes do not fit with that assumption (mine do not either) but all that means is that you have to work a little harder to find stuff you like.
I agree that rap is fucking garbage. On the other hand, you also have to agree that western and country music are also fucking garbage.
#DeleteFacebook
There's other music out there besides that produced by "the music industry". There's a big cottage industry of indie artists out there, producing their own recordings in their garages or maybe renting studio time, and doing everything themselves. Of course, none of these people are getting rich, and it's not that easy to find this stuff (and find stuff among it that you really like), but it is out there thanks to the Internet.
Autotuned voices, corporate-created-idols (usually some pretty teenaged kid with a previous 'career' as a Disney 'talent employee'), new stars with a pre-baked 'image' (naturally built/provided by the studio), lyrics that are focus-group-tested and written by someone else, a catchy tune usually ripped-off from some unknown who got paid a pittance for it...
Most *music* these days is fucking garbage. Okay, some of that may be the 'get off my lawn' syndrome on my part, but honestly, in the past the musician and/or band usually had to come up with everything themselves: lyrics, chords, composition, image, vision, etc. Even as late as the 1990s or so, there were still artists who did it themselves, and the quality tended to show through more readily. Yes there were pre-baked 'stars' in the past as well, but their appeal tended to die off pretty quickly, or their star faded long before their second album... much like, well, today. It's just that the signal-to-noise ratio went to hell of late.
Appreciation of music is inherently subjective, so I won't argue with whatever makes something garbage to you, but some of the elements you list just don't matter to me. I don't care if the performer wrote the song or not, or if a producer packaged them to be more appealing to an audience. If I like the song I like the song, and I don't have to be a purist about it.
Do you feel the same way about a car or a computer? Would Photoshop have more value to you if it was produced by a single person? Does a car have more authenticity if the body and the engine come from the same team?
Actually, I would like to comment that not all country is horrible. The really old stuff, and related genres like bluegrass, had musical value I think: these were authentic artists, not corporate-created caricatures. But you're looking at stuff from the 40s-70s or so. Johnny Cash, for instance, I think is a good example of an authentic country music artist. It's not my preferred style of music by any stretch, but I can recognize the value. But all the stuff that's sold as country these days is utter trash, and a lot of it seems to basically be "redneck rock".
This is not ironic. This is not a joke. It is very disturbing to see grown people have such strong feelings over something that is subjective art. I grew up on rap music. I enjoy rap when it is about drugs and guns and violence. I enjoy it when it about social issues and the voice of a disenfranchised people. Yes there is a certain degree of misogyny and glorification of violence but that is the same as assuming that all metal is about devil worshipping. There are negative stereotypes associated with everything but you have to look beyond that. All art that connects with people has merit. Whether it be sonically or lyrically or for whatever reason (here I include the modern mumble rap too, much to the chagrin of rap purists who insist mumble rap isn't "real hip-hop") that connects with the listener. The top comments remind me of the 15 year old high school kids who decide who to make friends with based on their taste of music. There is a certain kind of elitism and definitely passive racism associated with the disparaging of an entire genre that has replaced rock and rock as the mainstream genre for more than two decades now. Stay classy, Slashdot.