I guess people really like Post Malone
Printed From: Top 40 Music on CD
Category: Top 40 Music On Compact Disc
Forum Name: Chat Board
Forum Description: Chat away but please observe the chat board rules
URL: https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8909
Printed Date: 06 September 2025 at 7:11am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: I guess people really like Post Malone
Posted By: JL328
Subject: I guess people really like Post Malone
Date Posted: 08 May 2018 at 11:59am
| 13 Top 40 hits this week. 11 debuts. |
Replies:
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 08 May 2018 at 1:01pm
|
That's insane. ------------- John Gallagher Erie, PA https://www.johngallagher.com" rel="nofollow - John Gallagher Wedding & Special Event Entertainment / Snapblast Photo Booth |
Posted By: Underground Dub
Date Posted: 08 May 2018 at 2:38pm
|
Many acts barely managed 13 Top 40 hits over an entire career...
The definition of a "Top 40 Hit Single" has deviated so far from the original meaning that it's impossible to compare modern chart accomplishments to those of the past. |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 08 May 2018 at 3:01pm
|
Mediabase only lists one Post Malone single getting spins
right now... "Psycho." ------------- John Gallagher Erie, PA https://www.johngallagher.com" rel="nofollow - John Gallagher Wedding & Special Event Entertainment / Snapblast Photo Booth |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 08 May 2018 at 8:24pm
This is the new norm when average hip-hop artists release an album and almost all the songs chart due to streaming. J. Cole almost did it last week and there have been many others during the past 3-4 months. With the exception of Drake, none of these artists would really be considered superstars. I wish Billboard would run some columns describing the artists who had the greatest number of chart “hits” that fell off the chart in a week. Check out what happens to these Top 40 songs next week. |
JL328 wrote:Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 08 May 2018 at 8:33pm
The modern charts have little resemblance to pre 1992 charts which make chart achievement comparisons between these two eras totally inappropriate, yet Billboard keeps doing it in their Chart Beat column. One could argue that charts from 2018 and those from 2010 are totally different animals. |
Posted By: JL328
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 12:57am
|
I realize that maybe I don't fully understand what counts as a stream.
When you see reports that Post Malone's album was streamed 236 million times in the US alone in its first week, the math starts to fall apart really quickly. Given that national population is a fixed number, and we can be pretty sure that small children and the elderly weren't desperately counting down for the album drop, I find these numbers a little unreachable and would love some kind of explanation. What does the chart even measure nowadays? I always thought it was meant to rank songs by the most number of people in the US impacted by a song in a particular week. So, if 100 million different people legitimately sought out and listened to a song by Post Malone (whether they liked it or hated it) then I think that's legitimate and I wouldn't have a problem with it. But that's clearly not what's happening. There aren't 236 million different Americans doing anything in common, let alone jamming to Cardi B or J Cole, artists that a lot of people don't even know. So is this just a small group of people streaming each new album on repeat hundreds of times? Just setting their account on repeat and walking away? If so, you don't have 100 million people impacted by a song, you have maybe 100,000 people impacted by it 1,000 times each (if they're even actually listening). I don't understand why billboard wants this. Although I guess they'd argue the hot 100 still measures the popularity of songs in a given week (albeit with a flawed formula) it no longer serves at all to measure a particular song's popularity progression and the ability to use the chart as a source of historical comparison is lost forever. That just doesn't seem like a good thing to me. If Billboard wants a true measure-- and I understand that it obviously doesn't-- it should limit the impact that each individual streaming account has on the charts. For instance, if the same account streams an album 1000 times in a week, should the last 995 times even be counted? I'll give you 5, because maybe somebody is playing it for others, but after that you can assume the streams are not impacting a new listener. Whereas sales are an easy way to track different buyers and radio play goes by an audience impressions formula based on the station's range and the surrounding population, streams aren't limited to ensure you're counting distinct listeners instead of the same people over and over and over again. Maybe I'm wrong and there really are 236 million people in the US alone that are really into post malone. I understand that I'm no longer squarely within the age demographic most targeted by music labels (but I'm not that far removed from it), but I don't know a single person who is talking about the post malone album. By the way, if you think this cardi b and post malone stuff is bad, keep in mind that Drake's new album comes out next month. If he were smart, he'd include a bunch of old style interludes to get the album up to 40 tracks so he can get the whole chart... then maybe Billboard would fix it (actually they'd probably just celebrate it). |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 3:52am
| Joel and I have been having this discussion a lot recently. Just what kind of "hits" are these really? Perhaps it's time for Billboard to re-evaluate their chart formulas. Not only is Drake coming up, but Kanye West also has a new album being released soon. At least the Glee Cast is no longer recording! |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 8:46am
|
Even Billboard recognizes that streaming is an issue
as they are once again changing the formulas! https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/8006673/bi llboard-charts-adjust-streaming-weighting-2018 Others have issues with the Hot 100: How streaming undermines the Hot 100: https://www.forbes.com/sites/garysuarez/2016/12/20/str eaming-billboard-hot-100/#7416fa66aa7b https://popgoesthecharts.wordpress.com/2013/02/21/bill board-please-stop-changing-your-chart-methodology- every-week-love-adam/ https://noisey.vice.com/en_au/article/gyd537/the- charts-made-no-goddamn-sense-in-2017 Here's how Post Malone games the system a few years ago: https://www.thrillist.com/entertainment/nation/billboa rd-hot-100-chart-youtube-streaming I could go on, but you get the idea. |
Posted By: Chartman
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 10:37am
|
The C&W charts problem (i.e. Hot Country Chart vs.
Country Airplay) revisited. Seems this is also an issue with the R&B chart. Lengthy diatribe about it here: https://pitchfork.com/features/article/9378-i-know- you-got-soul-the-trouble-with-billboards-rbhip-hop- chart/ Some great quotes from this article: "Billboard’s overhauled genre lists are essentially what I call “accordion charts”: condensed versions of the Hot 100, with all the songs that Billboard has decided don’t qualify for that genre taken out. You could actually make any week’s R&B/Hip-Hop chart yourself: Take that week’s Hot 100; cross out the pure-pop, country, and rock songs; and re-stack all the songs that are left, keeping them in the same order. Voilà: instant R&B chart.(To satisfy my curiosity for this story, I played the create-the-R&B- chart game with four different Hot 100s from various weeks throughout 2013. The only differences between my handmade R&B charts and Billboard’s official ones were the inclusion of older songs on lower rungs of the R&B chart that Billboard removes from the Hot 100 due to its recurrent rules that prune old songs. If these records had been left on the Hot 100, my faux R&B charts and Billboard’s would have been identical.)" "Indeed, fans of the pre-2012 system can check out the R&B/Hip-Hop Airplay chart, which is virtually identical to the old methodology. As Pietroluongo implies, when the physical singles market died in the 2000s, the big R&B/Hip-Hop chart was essentially all- airplay, anyway." I was actually thinking that the "Top Pop Singles" book should be retitled the "The Hot 100 Singles" - does anyone think that the Hot 100 qualifies primarily as a Pop chart anymore? |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 10:45am
|
I thought Billboard had a streaming chart. Looking at
Nielsen and Mediabase, all this Post Malone isn't seeimng airplay. Again, the only one listed is "Psycho." Well, I just pulled up Billboard Hip Hop Airplay and here's what's listed: POST MALONE Chart History R&B/Hip-Hop Airplay RANKED BY PERFORMANCE ON CHART Rockstar Post Malone Featuring 21 Savage Peaked at #1 on 12.9.2017 White Iverson Post Malone Peaked at #8 on 11.28.2015 Psycho Post Malone Featuring Ty Dolla $ign Peaked at #19 on 5.5.2018 Congratulations Post Malone Featuring Quavo Peaked at #23 on 8.26.2017 All of these other songs aren't listed until you pull up on demand streaming. Apparently, that now weighs into the Hot 100 too? ------------- John Gallagher Erie, PA https://www.johngallagher.com" rel="nofollow - John Gallagher Wedding & Special Event Entertainment / Snapblast Photo Booth |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 11:08am
Yes. Streaming data has been used for the Hot 100 since August 2007. YouTube views (from U.S. viewers only) have been used since February 2013. Not sure what the answer is for all of this. The Hot 100 is supposed to be a snapshot of the 100 most popular songs for any given week. The problem is, they have rules. For instance, any song over 20 weeks charted and dropping below #50 is removed. And, of course, a song used to have to be released as a commercial single in order to chart. It's a whole different world these days, for sure. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 11:12am
|
Now it's being reported that Tidal seriously inflated some streaming numbers: https://www.spin.com/2018/05/tidal-fake-streams-kanye-beyonc e-investigation-300-million/
Maybe this will help lead to some type of chart reform?!? |
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 3:24pm
That's why BuzzAngle doesn't incorporate Tidal data into its charts, because Tidal will not allow Nielsen-type monitoring... they just submit a report on their streaming and sales numbers. (Though BuzzAngle has some serious problems of its own the past few months -- popular songs like Cardi B's "Be Careful" simply missing from the chart, etc.) And the one-week-on-the-charts thing, yeah, true, but that could also be said of "The Voice" or "American Idol" so-called hits, or some of these charity singles that Lin-Manuel Miranda likes to put out. (Which often are #1 on sales for one week and then simply drop off the chart completely.) Sometimes I think "Billboard" should adopt a policy that the first week of a song's release only counts at 50% or something. But this all brings up a question I have been wondering lately -- why is streaming so dominated by hip-hop, whereas digital sales has more of a pop/hip-hop/country balance? |
Posted By: torcan
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 4:00pm
|
For a long time I've thought that songs shouldn't be
allowed to enter the Hot 100 unless they're actively being promoted by the labels to radio as singles. I find it bogus when these acts have so many debuts in a given week when most are just "album cuts", then drop off quickly. Those shouldn't be on the Hot 100 in the first place. I've never even heard most of these songs, and all those debuts skew chart numbers for other legitimate hits. I kind of echo most of what JL328 said several posts above. I stopped buying Billboard in early 2004 but still follow the charts online. The charts certainly aren't what they were :( |
Posted By: Steve Carras
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 4:54pm
|
Post Malone...? Hardly heard of them.....yet look at what my signature is and you will see I do buy some modern artists (Taylor Swift being another) ------------- You know you're really older when you think that younger singer Jesse McCartney's related in anyway to former Beatle Paul McCartney. |
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 5:00pm
I guess not, 'cause it's a "him," not a "them," LOL. He's a white rapper from Texas. |
Posted By: Steve Carras
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 5:00pm
|
Looked the name up, this is thew guy who does Rockstar, the single with the longest run, since at least January, the only #1 this year. ------------- You know you're really older when you think that younger singer Jesse McCartney's related in anyway to former Beatle Paul McCartney. |
Posted By: Steve Carras
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 5:01pm
Alone,that is..:) ------------- You know you're really older when you think that younger singer Jesse McCartney's related in anyway to former Beatle Paul McCartney. |
Posted By: JL328
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 6:07pm
|
Truth be told, the glee cast and American idol songs didn't bother me
much because those songs were at least based on measurable sales. Those songs actually were impacting millions of listeners because people were watching the shows and talking about the songs and debating the artists. People were consuming those songs and they are mostly remembered. On the other hand, this streaming phenomenon seems to be based on a few people taking advantage of a really flawed formula. |
Posted By: jebsib
Date Posted: 09 May 2018 at 7:24pm
|
Problem is, this IS the music that the kids are listening to now - take it from a
father of 3 who sees the middle school & high school echo-chamber. They stream these songs all day long to the point that it is as ubiquitous as old school radio in the background. And forget Billboard - every major Western Country's charts are affected by these "Album Bombs"… except the UK which recently changed policy due to Ed Sheeran taking up 17 of the top 20 singles spots. The argument is that our "Casey Kasem" charts are old-school, that radio's influence has diminished, that singles haven't really been defined since 1994. And that these songs - as fleeting as some are (cough - J. Cole - cough) are actually as popular for 7 days - as anything on CHR, which is currently in the identity doldrums phase... |
Posted By: JL328
Date Posted: 10 May 2018 at 12:01pm
|
Great discussion!
I think "album bomb" is a great term. I think I've seen that in an article as well. The way you describe the use of streaming is more or less the way I've understood it. I also have 3 kids but they're younger and haven't hit the echo chamber yet. They still listen only to what I feed them... plus Despacito--- they love that track for some reason. My problems with relating this type of obsessive listening to the charts is that it doesn't really reflect anything. (1) At most, it reflects the popularity of the album without saying anything about the individual tracks; and (2) it inflates the popularity of these albums by counting multiple listens by the same individual. I don't have a problem with charting album cuts but I think the chart breaks down when people are not intentionally selecting a particular cut (and only listening to it as part of an album) and when the chart fails to distinguish between 1 million people listening to a song vs. 1 person listening to a song 1 million times. The former reflects societal saturation, the latter (although it might generate more raw listens) reflects only a cult following. Although it's true that there are a group of people (mostly kids and maybe college students) who are listening to post Malone and these other acts on endless loops, there is a great percentage of the music consuming public (not just out of touch old folks) who doesn't know who post malone even is. For me, it comes back to the question of what the hot 100 is supposed to be measuring. Billboard used to be a trade magazine and the chart was meant as a guide for record store owners, djs, and jukebox operators to know what to stock and play for commercial reasons. Even after the 1998 change, it still served those purposes, albeit more for djs. I'm not sure what it is now, other than a technical list of the songs that were streamed the most--- I'm not sure what purpose that serves, beyond trivia, because it no longer seems to measure "popularity" or serve any commercial purpose for people who make a living selling or playing music. I don't know what the answer is (or if one is even needed) but as the British tend to do, I think the U.K. charts went too far. The "three songs per album" rule is pretty arbitrary and has the potential to cut out songs that are truly popular among the masses. They should have just better defined what songs are eligible to chart or simply adjusted the way they count streams. When the charts started, it was long before the current age of instant everything. Nowadays, the popularity of songs rises and wanes on a daily basis. I wonder whether 7 days is just too short of a lookback for a weekly chart to have any meaning in this day and age? Because it can be so drastic from week to week, the charts are too affected by short term fluctuations and are failing to give a good idea of what is actually popular anymore. What would happen if BB still did a weekly chart but used a 14 day lookback period? It would normalize these 1- day wonders by diluting their impact over a two week period--- if one of these album cuts can maintain its popularity over two weeks instead of a couple days, then it probably deserves its spot. In any event, I wonder if Billboard changing the weight of unpaid streams is going to have much of an effect. It's a good move because those free streams can be gamed so easily. |
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 13 May 2018 at 4:47pm
True, but I'm not sure of the difference between that and radio playing a song all day long (or refusing to play a song). I actually think Billboard should just drop the radio component to the Hot 100. At least on-demand streaming is the listener choosing, not the radio station. But I do think the streaming component really needs to be adjusted and possibly a rule about album tracks implemented. |
Posted By: jebsib
Date Posted: 15 May 2018 at 5:09am
|
Paul, hate to bring this up, but BECAUSE of STREAMING it looks like we are
back to the stage where some Hot 100 Airplay songs (Radio Songs) are no longer getting onto the Hot 100. Not sure if you guys are still monitoring the Hot 100 Airplay chart weekly, but this week there are at least 2 songs on there that are either JUST bubbling under (Keith Urban), or not present at all (Ricky Martin) on either big chart. In the past your Top Pop Singles books denoted these airplay-only 'hits'; Except at this point, it's not due to ineligibility (1987 - 1998), it's that they are not 'popular' enough... |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 10:36am
We quit researching the Airplay chart years ago. The difference between the 1990s and today is that those 1990s songs would've made the Hot 100, had they been allowed. |