Jul 28, 2022
KayTrayThat chart is culturally bias towards developed nations. It heavily favors physical sales and penalizes free streams.
Doesn’t take a genius to see that Bad Bunny is the most consumed artist in the world dawg.
- Jul 28, 2022·1 replyKayTray
That chart is culturally bias towards developed nations. It heavily favors physical sales and penalizes free streams.
Doesn’t take a genius to see that Bad Bunny is the most consumed artist in the world dawg.
If you buy a physical or digital album you’ll play it more than once. Of course it counts for more than 1 free stream lol
- Jul 28, 20221887
You made a new account just to post this?
Worldwide he is, canadians and american are just starting to know him after the collabs with drake and cardi b.
Jul 28, 2022It’s not going to happen but it would be cool if Running Up That Hill went number 1.
- Jul 28, 2022
Break my soul prolly going #1 next week
Already at 7 + album boost + video
- Jul 28, 2022·1 reply
mods really locked the lizzo thread 💀💀
response to your last post:
1. bundle era is over as of late 2020
2. It hasn't changed stream formula since 2018
3. I want radio to be lower because it doesn't fairly represent consumption imo. Prior to streaming era white people were able to dominate charts mainly due to radio.
I don't know how you have a problem with streams but not radio...
Jul 28, 2022·edited·1 replyDedication 666mods really locked the lizzo thread 💀💀
@youarecool
response to your last post:
1. bundle era is over as of late 2020
2. It hasn't changed stream formula since 2018
3. I want radio to be lower because it doesn't fairly represent consumption imo. Prior to streaming era white people were able to dominate charts mainly due to radio.
I don't know how you have a problem with streams but not radio...
It's not that I have an issue with streams or radio I have issue with a chart that doesn't represent things consistently.
Bundle Era is over yea but the chart in those years is forever tainted. I was making an example, this kind of tainting of the chart is all over the place if you consider youtube changing the view count algorithm as well as Apple music n spotify doing virtually the same thing.
The point of any chart is too be able to show changes in data overtime. The billboard chart was up to an impossible task trying to convert streams to sale numbers. From a data a***ytics standpoint it shouldn't have even attempted this. Streams and sales are not equivalent and can't convert. But they attempted it to maintain a brand n because there numbers are historically used at record labels to make decisions. From a data a***ytics standpoint the chart is a joke
n we don't really need it anymore.The streaming conversion on exists as to make garbage comparisons to sales numbers from decades ago
Edit: might make a thread on this
- Jul 28, 2022Stay Healthy
It's not that I have an issue with streams or radio I have issue with a chart that doesn't represent things consistently.
Bundle Era is over yea but the chart in those years is forever tainted. I was making an example, this kind of tainting of the chart is all over the place if you consider youtube changing the view count algorithm as well as Apple music n spotify doing virtually the same thing.
The point of any chart is too be able to show changes in data overtime. The billboard chart was up to an impossible task trying to convert streams to sale numbers. From a data a***ytics standpoint it shouldn't have even attempted this. Streams and sales are not equivalent and can't convert. But they attempted it to maintain a brand n because there numbers are historically used at record labels to make decisions. From a data a***ytics standpoint the chart is a joke
n we don't really need it anymore.The streaming conversion on exists as to make garbage comparisons to sales numbers from decades ago
Edit: might make a thread on this
First there's two different major charts the Hot 100 for songs and then there's the bilboard 200 for albums. I think it's important to make a distinction between which chart you are referring to.
Hot 100 prior to streaming essentialy converted song sales and radio into points and thats how chart placement was measured then they just added in streams. Virtually no difference in terms of the actual chart besides making it more accurate to what people are listening to.
Bundles era mainly effected bilboard 200 but all it did was attempt to make first week sales similar to what they were before streaming era.
you really cant compare sales from now to before streaming era. album sales are lower and single sales are higher. its really just a way to have bilboard 200 combine methods of album consumption.
- Jul 28, 2022·2 replies
Seriots question: once an album drops isn't every song a single?
- Jul 28, 2022Jiig
Seriots question: once an album drops isn't every song a single?
In the streaming era kind of. People pick the “single” now that they can listen to the whole album right on streaming services.
- Jul 28, 2022·1 reply1887
If you buy a physical or digital album you’ll play it more than once. Of course it counts for more than 1 free stream lol
That chart weighs paid subscriptions way higher than free so it loses credibility on what people are listening to the most. They don’t buy physicals in developing countries like they do in Europe, South Korea, and the US. Why marginalize people who are streaming music for free? It’s still being consumed.
- Jul 28, 2022·5 repliesKayTray
That chart weighs paid subscriptions way higher than free so it loses credibility on what people are listening to the most. They don’t buy physicals in developing countries like they do in Europe, South Korea, and the US. Why marginalize people who are streaming music for free? It’s still being consumed.
Yes, but it is being consumed for free. That will always be an important distinction. Streaming was incorporated into music charts by various global music markets to substitute for pure sales due to its sharp decline. That's where the value of the number of streams equal to one sale was arrived at, relative to what people would have to pay for premium access to music. It wasn't just some random figure they pulled from the air. It's silly to suggest that free streams and paid-tier streams should weigh the same thing or even be close to each other in value when they're clearly so different.
All you're doing is making up excuses. Being a developing country doesn't mean you don't have options to pay for your music, neither does it mean that you're too broke to pay for your music. It's people in Spanish-speaking countries (where Bad Bunny is the strongest) that spend A LOT of money on other s***. They just don't see the value in spending money on music and that's where the difference lies so why shouldn't there be consequences for that when streaming is basically a last attempt to get people to still place a value on art and content?
Free streams do count as consumption. They're just weighed a lot less than paid-tier streams, which is more than fair/reasonable imo. You're only bothered because it affects Bad Bunny more than most other artists but the problem isn't because Bad Bunny fans are so poor they can't afford to pay to stream his music (many of those same fans have no issues buying merch/buying tickets to see him on tour — which is a lot more than what they'd have to pay to have premium access to Bad Bunny's music for a month or even a year), you should be asking why the bulk of his fans don't think his music is worth paying to be streamed.
- Jul 28, 2022
BRAVENigga you just said you only enjoy music if you hear other people liking it. You admitted to not having your own taste. Don’t cop out and make it a “yall don’t like to party” thing. You have no room to be sassy here
they not teaching you guys how to read now? that's crazy lol
go re-read what I said. I never said I only enjoy music if I hear other people enjoy it lol
- Jul 28, 2022·2 repliesKayTray
That chart is culturally bias towards developed nations. It heavily favors physical sales and penalizes free streams.
Doesn’t take a genius to see that Bad Bunny is the most consumed artist in the world dawg.
and spotify streaming numbers are culturally biased towards heavily populated nations w/ heavy advertising from Spotify
one day you're all gonna realise that it's basically impossible to figure out who the biggest artist globally is.
- Jul 28, 2022Jiig
Seriots question: once an album drops isn't every song a single?
wym lol. singles are the next song being pushed
- Jul 28, 2022mangotflu
and spotify streaming numbers are culturally biased towards heavily populated nations w/ heavy advertising from Spotify
one day you're all gonna realise that it's basically impossible to figure out who the biggest artist globally is.
or places with more people using spotify will have more streaming numbers...
- orangetcovid 👌🏿Jul 28, 2022https://twitter.com/chartdata/status/1552417798332096512
KweenFunny how you Papi devil advocates conveniently ignored this
Jul 28, 2022Drake keeps flopping crazy
Jul 28, 2022thegreatdivineYes, but it is being consumed for free. That will always be an important distinction. Streaming was incorporated into music charts by various global music markets to substitute for pure sales due to its sharp decline. That's where the value of the number of streams equal to one sale was arrived at, relative to what people would have to pay for premium access to music. It wasn't just some random figure they pulled from the air. It's silly to suggest that free streams and paid-tier streams should weigh the same thing or even be close to each other in value when they're clearly so different.
All you're doing is making up excuses. Being a developing country doesn't mean you don't have options to pay for your music, neither does it mean that you're too broke to pay for your music. It's people in Spanish-speaking countries (where Bad Bunny is the strongest) that spend A LOT of money on other s***. They just don't see the value in spending money on music and that's where the difference lies so why shouldn't there be consequences for that when streaming is basically a last attempt to get people to still place a value on art and content?
Free streams do count as consumption. They're just weighed a lot less than paid-tier streams, which is more than fair/reasonable imo. You're only bothered because it affects Bad Bunny more than most other artists but the problem isn't because Bad Bunny fans are so poor they can't afford to pay to stream his music (many of those same fans have no issues buying merch/buying tickets to see him on tour — which is a lot more than what they'd have to pay to have premium access to Bad Bunny's music for a month or even a year), you should be asking why the bulk of his fans don't think his music is worth paying to be streamed.
Your last point is a fallacy. Nobody is paying streaming to stream 1 artist/album. To insinuate that the question needing to be asked is "why don't they think his music is worth paying to be streamed?" is completely off base.
Jul 28, 2022thegreatdivineYes, but it is being consumed for free. That will always be an important distinction. Streaming was incorporated into music charts by various global music markets to substitute for pure sales due to its sharp decline. That's where the value of the number of streams equal to one sale was arrived at, relative to what people would have to pay for premium access to music. It wasn't just some random figure they pulled from the air. It's silly to suggest that free streams and paid-tier streams should weigh the same thing or even be close to each other in value when they're clearly so different.
All you're doing is making up excuses. Being a developing country doesn't mean you don't have options to pay for your music, neither does it mean that you're too broke to pay for your music. It's people in Spanish-speaking countries (where Bad Bunny is the strongest) that spend A LOT of money on other s***. They just don't see the value in spending money on music and that's where the difference lies so why shouldn't there be consequences for that when streaming is basically a last attempt to get people to still place a value on art and content?
Free streams do count as consumption. They're just weighed a lot less than paid-tier streams, which is more than fair/reasonable imo. You're only bothered because it affects Bad Bunny more than most other artists but the problem isn't because Bad Bunny fans are so poor they can't afford to pay to stream his music (many of those same fans have no issues buying merch/buying tickets to see him on tour — which is a lot more than what they'd have to pay to have premium access to Bad Bunny's music for a month or even a year), you should be asking why the bulk of his fans don't think his music is worth paying to be streamed.
-81
- Jul 28, 2022thegreatdivine
Yes, but it is being consumed for free. That will always be an important distinction. Streaming was incorporated into music charts by various global music markets to substitute for pure sales due to its sharp decline. That's where the value of the number of streams equal to one sale was arrived at, relative to what people would have to pay for premium access to music. It wasn't just some random figure they pulled from the air. It's silly to suggest that free streams and paid-tier streams should weigh the same thing or even be close to each other in value when they're clearly so different.
All you're doing is making up excuses. Being a developing country doesn't mean you don't have options to pay for your music, neither does it mean that you're too broke to pay for your music. It's people in Spanish-speaking countries (where Bad Bunny is the strongest) that spend A LOT of money on other s***. They just don't see the value in spending money on music and that's where the difference lies so why shouldn't there be consequences for that when streaming is basically a last attempt to get people to still place a value on art and content?
Free streams do count as consumption. They're just weighed a lot less than paid-tier streams, which is more than fair/reasonable imo. You're only bothered because it affects Bad Bunny more than most other artists but the problem isn't because Bad Bunny fans are so poor they can't afford to pay to stream his music (many of those same fans have no issues buying merch/buying tickets to see him on tour — which is a lot more than what they'd have to pay to have premium access to Bad Bunny's music for a month or even a year), you should be asking why the bulk of his fans don't think his music is worth paying to be streamed.
You will say anything that is always in favor of Drake. Crazy.
- Jul 28, 2022thegreatdivine
Yes, but it is being consumed for free. That will always be an important distinction. Streaming was incorporated into music charts by various global music markets to substitute for pure sales due to its sharp decline. That's where the value of the number of streams equal to one sale was arrived at, relative to what people would have to pay for premium access to music. It wasn't just some random figure they pulled from the air. It's silly to suggest that free streams and paid-tier streams should weigh the same thing or even be close to each other in value when they're clearly so different.
All you're doing is making up excuses. Being a developing country doesn't mean you don't have options to pay for your music, neither does it mean that you're too broke to pay for your music. It's people in Spanish-speaking countries (where Bad Bunny is the strongest) that spend A LOT of money on other s***. They just don't see the value in spending money on music and that's where the difference lies so why shouldn't there be consequences for that when streaming is basically a last attempt to get people to still place a value on art and content?
Free streams do count as consumption. They're just weighed a lot less than paid-tier streams, which is more than fair/reasonable imo. You're only bothered because it affects Bad Bunny more than most other artists but the problem isn't because Bad Bunny fans are so poor they can't afford to pay to stream his music (many of those same fans have no issues buying merch/buying tickets to see him on tour — which is a lot more than what they'd have to pay to have premium access to Bad Bunny's music for a month or even a year), you should be asking why the bulk of his fans don't think his music is worth paying to be streamed.
Jul 28, 2022·1 replyDamn Bad Bunny couldn’t even do 100k this week? Floppp
- Jul 28, 2022·edited·4 repliesmangotflu
and spotify streaming numbers are culturally biased towards heavily populated nations w/ heavy advertising from Spotify
one day you're all gonna realise that it's basically impossible to figure out who the biggest artist globally is.
If Spotify streaming numbers are culturally biased toward heavily populated nations the why is India struggling to do at least 2 songs over a mil daily. And yeah Spotify is partnered with a lot of Indian movie companies and does huge advertising there