BBC Launches Downloaded Music Charts 206
PReDiToR writes "The BBC today aired its first chart rundown of downloaded music. 'The Official UK Download Chart is based on the most popular, legally downloaded tracks in the UK. It's compiled from the sale of permanently owned single track downloads and doesn't include streamed downloads, subscriptions or free downloads.' The Chart played on Radio 1, the UK's most listened to station, and will be a regular feature."
Wouldn't it be cool (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Wouldn't it be cool (Score:3, Interesting)
It's all manafactured stuff, some british some american but no real good music.#
Re:Wouldn't it be cool (Score:2, Interesting)
Something more interesting... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Wouldn't it be cool (Score:3, Interesting)
I was a little too quick criticise, not all of it is bad, actually I rate Maroon 5 quite highly. Most of it however is crap.
As for goldie lookin chain, I'm still not sure whether they are a joke or not, it wouldn't surprise if in a few months time we find out that they are all ali g style comedians.
TOTP? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Official Downloads Sites: (Score:3, Interesting)
iTunes: 90%
Everyone else: 10%
Stuart
Chart Inflation (Score:5, Interesting)
Meanwhile (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:A Hit Chart... (Score:5, Interesting)
Including the only band that mattered [wikipedia.org].
The British impact on popular music over the last fifty years is arguably greater than that of any country in the world, including the US.
But what are the MASSES listening to? (Score:2, Interesting)
But legal downloads account for only a tiny percentage of all downloads. So wouldn't it be more relevant to track all downloads, legal + illegal?
If I was selling music, wouldn't I would want to know what's actually popular with the masses?
(Actually, I think I heard that the RIAA companies do obtain illegal-download statistics via back channels for use in their marketing decisions.)
Re:Wouldn't it be cool (Score:3, Interesting)
Some other genres of music (hard rock, metal, jazz etc) do not rely on attractive people to make it sell, they rely on good music.
Having said that, I listen to and enjoy many pop tunes. However, what I also object to is the fact that media and listeners give the singer all the credit for the song. All the singer did is sing (and occasionally an effect is even added, presumably because they can't even sing that well). Why aren't we crediting the people who wrote the music, the people who played their instruments etc.?
I know that a solo musician's band is hardly ever credited and it has been this way for decades, but IMHO it is becoming more and more prevalent and very annoying. At least most solo musicians of the 60's, 70's and some of them in the 80's wrote their own songs (or wote most of them at least).
Re:Wouldn't it be cool (Score:3, Interesting)
remember, Craig David, when he started was NOT manufactured.. the guy has talent, and can litterally come out with lyrics when placed on the spot.. i know because i have seen the guy peform in a london club before he became famous.
However, now he is famous, he is considered "manufactured"