UK Charts/ Midweeks 2019

  • Thread starter Thread starter AGinAg (37)
  • Start date Start date
Jark said:
I mean, his last album sold 672k in week one. This one will do around 100k. So I'd sane that's a fairly reasonable fall off.

Either way it kind of feels like this is the era he'll reach saturation point and the tide of popularity will begin to turn, not helped by the fact that none of these hit singles will go down as great pop songs or even be remembered a year from now as they're all fundamentally shit.
Click to expand...

He is still outselling the whole top 10 probably more than twice over. May not be up to his usual phenomenal first week sales but still a great success in the current climate.
 
Wait a minute, did the Ed Sheeran/Justin Bieber single, that is #2 this week, completely vanish from this week's chart because of that stupid rule of 3 tracks per artist only? I mean, does this make any sense?
 
Alla said:
Wait a minute, did the Ed Sheeran/Justin Bieber single, that is #2 this week, completely vanish from this week's chart because of that stupid rule of 3 tracks per artist only? I mean, does this make any sense?
Click to expand...
Ed Sheeran is the reason the rule was put in place.
 
Seems there is a fair bit of streaming data missing from those midweeks, which is only going to favour Sheeran over everyone else, considering he's 70% of the top ten on Spotify.
 
I do pray Jark is right though regarding peak saturation. Didn't I read the other day that he's written over half the Westlife album as well?

He's no better than Robson and Jerome at this point. And at least I wanted to fuck Robson Green.
 
lolly said:
I do pray Jark is right though regarding peak saturation. Didn't I read the other day that he's written over half the Westlife album as well?

He's no better than Robson and Jerome at this point. And at least I wanted to fuck Robson Green.
Click to expand...

Not in to ginger?
 
I quite liked his first 2 albums before he was EVERYWHERE. Now I really wish he would just FUCK OFF.
 
Tuesday

Singles

1 Ed Sheeran feat. Khalid - Beautiful People (33.4k)
2 Shawn Mendes & Camila Cabello - Senorita (31.0k)
3 Ed Sheeran feat. Eminem & 50 Cent - Remember The Name (25.8k)
4 Ed Sheeran feat. Stormzy - Take Me Back To London (25.1k)
5 Lewis Capaldi - Hold Me While You Wait (17.6k)

6 Lil Nas X - Old Town Road
7 Sigala & Becky Hill - Wish You Well
9 Mabel - Mad Love

13 Billie Eilish - bad guy
15 Kygo & Whitney Houston - Higher Love :disco:
16 Dominic Fike - 3 Nights
17 Dave feat. Burna Boy - Location
18 Krept & Konan feat. Headie One & K-Trap - I Spy

26 Freya Ridings - Castles
30 Mark Ronson feat. Camila Cabello - Find U Again
37 Remedee feat. Not3s & Young Adz - Love of My Life
38 Tiësto, Jonas Blue & Rita Ora - Ritual


Albums

1 Ed Sheeran - No.6 Collaborations Project (77.2k)
2 Lewis Capaldi - Divinely Uninspired to a Hellish Extent (9.2k)
3 Kylie Minogue - Step Back in Time: The Definitive Collection (4.2k)
4 Billie Eilish - WHEN WE ALL FALL ASLEEP, WHERE DO WE GO? (3.7k)
5 Lady Gaga & Bradley Cooper - A Star Is Born (3.4k)
8 Ed Sheeran - ÷
9 George Ezra - Staying At Tamara's

13 New Order + Liam Gillick: So it goes..
14 Gerry Cinnamon - Erratic Cinematic
15 Tom Walker - What a Time to Be Alive

21 Ed Sheeran - x
26 DMA's - MTV Unplugged: Live
28 Jax Jones - Snacks
29 ABBA - Gold: Greatest Hits
30 Paul McCartney - Amoeba Gig (Live)

32 Motion Picture Cast Recording - Yesterday
33 Queen - The Platinum Collection
35 Fleetwood Mac - Rumours
36 Ed Sheeran - +
37 Bob Marley & The Wailers - Legend
38 Madonna - Madame X
 
Has A Star Is Born been hanging around the album chart since release? :confused:
 
Is that gap enough for Kylie to stay top three do we think, or could she still lose it when they add a bit more streaming on at the end of the week?

Those album sales though (Sheeran aside). It is no wonder HMV are barely clinging on.
 
^And even these pathetic sales are overstated. Kylie is like 90% physical/download, but I'd bet the likes of Billie below her would barely be on 1,000 actual copies sold so far this week.
 
Billie Eilish was 2.2k behind Kylie in the Monday midweeks last week, and ended up 2.5k behind, so I'm hopeful she may hold on.
 
Is that Ed Sheeran/Bieber single really going to have a 1-1-1-2-OUT run (or whatever)? :D Even more ludicrous than Gnarls Barkley - Crazy back in the day.
 
At least IN THE OLD DAYS when records were deleted you couldn't buy them any more (well, once stock had run out), or with downloads if they stopped selling it.

Now we have charts where the #1 selling and streaming song of a week can end up at #7 due to an entirely arbitrary rule (based on an arbitrary formula), and other songs which are still selling and streaming huge numbers not appearing in the chart at all.
 
The chart is almost as useless as when I worked in a video shop in the late 80s and the owner let me make a chart up :D

I'm surprised the good people of BS5 never questioned why there were only ever Cher and Sigourney Weaver films at #1 :disco:
 
Last edited:
Another thing that I never understood in the UK charts is why they separate compilations from the rest of the albums. Aren't they albums too? Was that to not upset the artists, so Rihanna could claim a #1 album, when in fact was outsold by a Now compilation? It's all FAKE.
 
Alla said:
Another thing that I never understood in the UK charts is why they separate compilations from the rest of the albums. Aren't they albums too? Was that to not upset the artists, so Rihanna could claim a #1 album, when in fact was outsold by a Now compilation? It's all FAKE.
Click to expand...

They weeded compilation albums out of the chart into their own in the late 80s, precisely for the reason of the Now albums (there were other compilations, but Now was by far the most successful) dominating.

I actually don't have an issue with that rule, though.
 
I agree - I'm really not sure what value every NOW album being at #1 would really add to the chart.

I do like that there are a lot more movie soundtracks included now, though - I know people might be a bit sick of 'The Greatest Showman', but I think it deserves to have that achievement 'officially' recognised rather than being shoved in a compilation chart.
 
That's not far from the new rules,, next is moving all the Ed Sheeran songs to another chart because he's dominating in excess.
 
I think an artist album is an entirely different beast than a compilation album. I don't see that it's comparing like with like at all.
 
Slave said:
I agree - I'm really not sure what value every NOW album being at #1 would really add to the chart.
Click to expand...
Yes, the charts look better with proper artists having the number one album, that's the reason why they decided the compilations had to go somewhere else. Well, that's faking the charts, and it's exactly the same they're doing now with the 3 songs per artist rule, or downgrading songs after a number of weeks, so we can have more variety and new number ones, even when it's all FAKE. What a farce.
 
lolly said:
I think an artist album is an entirely different beast than a compilation album. I don't see that it's comparing like with like at all.
Click to expand...
Weren't they compiled together until the Now compilations became too popular?
 
Alla said:
Yes, the charts look better with proper artists having the number one album, that's the reason why they decided the compilations had to go somewhere else. Well, that's faking the charts, and it's exactly the same they're doing now with the 3 songs per artist rule, or downgrading songs after a number of weeks, so we can have more variety and new number ones, even when it's all FAKE. What a farce.
Click to expand...
I don't see that this holds, really. I mean it's obviously creating the chart the industry wants, like you say - but they are two separate charts, clearly labelled. Nobody is fooling anybody, it's utterly transparent. Nothing is counted differently, it's just recorded separately.
 
Alla said:
Weren't they compiled together until the Now compilations became too popular?
Click to expand...
Yes, as I posted above. But they never really became popular until the success of the Now compilations and its imitators, so it's not like it was an issue until then.
 
lolly said:
I don't see that this holds, really. I mean it's obviously creating the chart the industry wants, like you say - but they are two separate charts, clearly labelled. Nobody is fooling anybody, it's utterly transparent. Nothing is counted differently, it's just recorded separately.
Click to expand...
Yes and no, because if they decided to create the other chart because compilations were becoming too popular, then the criteria for the separation was simply because they wanted to have proper artists at #1. If compilations were selling less copies they probably wouldn't feel like they had to do that. I know it's their charts, their rules, but it looks all a bit fake to me. But whatever, no big deal, just saying.
 
Well of course that was the reason - compilation albums had existed for years before, just without much success.
 
lolly said:
Yes, as I posted above. But they never really became popular until the success of the Now compilations and its imitators, so it's not like it was an issue until then.
Click to expand...
But what's the real issue? Did that upset the music industry? Did they upset the fans because their divas couldn't claim a #1 album? I sort of understand why they didn't, but the compilations were still the top selling album of the week, even if they pretended it wasn't.
 
On a random note, if the charts had remained physical only(!) ABBA would have recently had 6 top 10 singles including a number 1.
 
Alla said:
But what's the real issue? Did that upset the music industry? Did they upset the fans because their divas couldn't claim a #1 album? I sort of understand why they didn't, but the compilations were still the top selling album of the week, even if they pretended it wasn't.
Click to expand...

I suspect it was the record industry rather than the artist or the fans, as much as neither would have liked it. But as I see a compilation album as being different, it doesnt bother me if it isn't #1 in the same chart or if it sold more. It doesn't make the status of the rtist album any less valid for me.
 
Ag said:
On a random note, if the charts had remained physical only(!) ABBA would have recently had 6 top 10 singles including a number 1.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but so would Saint Etienne :D

Obviously the lack of physical singles make it possible.
 
lolly said:
At least IN THE OLD DAYS when records were deleted you couldn't buy them any more (well, once stock had run out), or with downloads if they stopped selling it.

Now we have charts where the #1 selling and streaming song of a week can end up at #7 due to an entirely arbitrary rule (based on an arbitrary formula), and other songs which are still selling and streaming huge numbers not appearing in the chart at all.
Click to expand...

The charts really are so confusing these days.

This is like the episode of "House" where it actually was lupus...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom