|
|
Post by tonethestone1 on Mar 12, 2015 8:59:39 GMT -5
Like said before I doubt Noel cares about US charts. He's sold well in UK, which he even mentioned at O2 other night, selling well in Europe, fact is US in the main don't like Noel/Oasis, it'll never change no matter what record he puts out, various reasons behind it mainly from 1995-1997 era. From people who live there say he does near enough zero promotion, so selling enough for any kind of chart position is ok.
For Noel to sell more than Arctic Monkeys, Kasabian and others in same period is fantastic, especially in this day & age. Sells out every arena for his tour & producing great music, CY lauded by fans and respected media. Futures bright no matter what he sells here on in.
|
|
|
|
Post by jaq515 on Mar 12, 2015 9:12:48 GMT -5
I'm not talking about just the USA,it's a general thing,and it will probably affect dozens of indie bands and artists sales more than it's affecting his I don't think it's a line between indie and mainstream. I think it's a generational line. Most indie artists see way more action through streams than actual sales because the younger you are the less chance you actually buy music. The more I've thought about it the more I've changed on it. Steaming actually helps an indie artist more than pure sales. Because an indie artist will probably never put up large sales again, but plenty of indie artists are putting up good streaming numbers where younger fans are more likely to go to Spotify than buy the album or song. Noel has an older fan base. That's why he's going to get hard by this. Nothing to do with being indie. i agree with this completly. How many people on here have stories of discovering oasis via YT vids etc? Without opening this issue too wide, on the face of it surely its better for a person like Noel to have his music on streaming sites for people / to discover him for basically for 'free' (as they already pay to stream other artists) For Indie artists also surely this model will allow more people to hear their music vs people never discovering/buying and if they become a fan they buy physical (which a lot of people on hear who discovered oasis via YT did too) |
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Mar 12, 2015 9:13:37 GMT -5
I don't think it's a line between indie and mainstream. I think it's a generational line. Most indie artists see way more action through streams than actual sales because the younger you are the less chance you actually buy music. The more I've thought about it the more I've changed on it. Steaming actually helps an indie artist more than pure sales. Because an indie artist will probably never put up large sales again, but plenty of indie artists are putting up good streaming numbers where younger fans are more likely to go to Spotify than buy the album or song. Noel has an older fan base. That's why he's going to get hard by this. Nothing to do with being indie. Being nearly 15,and knowing a few people I share the same musical tastes with,I can tell you guys who are into rock and indie music tend to buy records Streaming is obviously for younger people,but the members of an artist's fanbase would buy the album,not fucking stream it,so if you're not that popular amongst the youngsters,and they don't play your music on the radio you're essentially fucked  Huh? So, let's just apply your subset of friends to an entire marketplace? Sales charts have been stacked against indie artists since the end of the 90's. Indie artists will never sell in high droves again. They're already suffering on the charts. The more I think about it the less and less sense it makes not to have steaming count for sales. If you're an indie artist wouldn't you rather have two methods to get on the charts than have one that you already know doesn't work for you? It's idiotic. I think indie artists will have a better chance at long term success through streams. At least, they'll be less judged by a factor they've rarely been good at, hard sales. And even if indie fans did buy more physical albums, then why aren't they charting everywhere? Because they have smaller fan bases of course. Then why not maximize that fan base through other means? Noel's issue isn't that he's indie. Hell, it's difficult to count Noel as indie. He's indie because he's on an independent label, but the music he makes is mainstream. Him being indie literally means nothing. It's that he has an older fan base that's more connected to bricks and mortar and physical copies. |
|
|
|
Post by muckyfingers on Mar 12, 2015 9:13:40 GMT -5
DM # 58
MG # 4
BHN # 2
SOTSOG # 24
HC # 23
DBTT # 12
DOYS # 5
NOEL SOLO
NGHFB # 28
CY # 35
BEADY EYE
DGSS # 31
BE # didn’t chart
So 3 oasis albums top 10
1 top 20
2 top 30
all albums practically disappeared from the chart after 1 week, apart from MG & BHN
going on how oasis or noel didnt really promote thier albums in the states,chart positions arent bad.
are chart pos really that important? as long as noel continues to release material as good as NGHFB & CY
i dont really care where it charts.
|
|
|
|
Post by defmaybe00 on Mar 12, 2015 10:49:13 GMT -5
What I meant is, take fucking Temples for example, they're a new band, they've got their small fanbase who will buy their record, then other people will see them at festivals or supporting other bands and will become fans too, and that's it Now take Sam Smith, you've got a fanbase to start who will buy your records, then you've got a couple of singles which are being constantly played by Radio 1, so they'll be heard by casual fans, usually young ones, who will go to Spotify and listen to the song or, if they're more curious and they really like the songs they've heard to the whole record, and the stream will add to the one from another girl and then another one and there you go Even if it looks like a website where you can discover new music, that's not the reason people use Spotify, they use it cause it's the easiest way to listen to what you want to listen, it's basically youtube with better quality, d'you know what I mean? And I never said Noel was an Indie artist nor that me and my friends represent the whole market, but people who are really into music buy it (unless they haven't got the money of course ) |
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Mar 12, 2015 12:55:23 GMT -5
What I meant is, take fucking Temples for example, they're a new band, they've got their small fanbase who will buy their record, then other people will see them at festivals or supporting other bands and will become fans too, and that's it Now take Sam Smith, you've got a fanbase to start who will buy your records, then you've got a couple of singles which are being constantly played by Radio 1, so they'll be heard by casual fans, usually young ones, who will go to Spotify and listen to the song or, if they're more curious and they really like the songs they've heard to the whole record, and the stream will add to the one from another girl and then another one and there you go Even if it looks like a website where you can discover new music, that's not the reason people use Spotify, they use it cause it's the easiest way to listen to what you want to listen, it's basically youtube with better quality, d'you know what I mean? And I never said Noel was an Indie artist nor that me and my friends represent the whole market, but people who are really into music buy it (unless they haven't got the money of course ) That literally makes no sense. What's to stop Temples fans from doing the same as Sam Smith fans? If Spotify is the easiest way to access music then why would it hurt Indie artists' who at times have difficulty giving access music on a mass scale? Do indie fans not have access to this easily accessible site? Do indie fans not like the internet, while Sam Smith fans seem to take full advantage of it? Who's to say that a festival audience isn't as likely to stream the easily accessible spotify link after hearing the Temples at a festival than buy the physical copy? This isn't the 90's anymore when someone hears you at a festival and then goes out and buys a physical copy. They're just as likely to go out and stream. If you're a small band like the Temples then how could counting streaming really hurt you? You were already small before they started counting Spotify streams and you already weren't going to chart high because the charts were purely based on physical/digital sales. Now, you have a chance to release music, go play festivals, have your small fanbase buying your music, while hoping that a mainstream festival audience will stream and buy your music. You get a chance to double dip and compete with an artists like Sam Smith more readily. Indie bands will always be behind the Sam Smith's of the world. Spotify doesn't change that. So, why stick to status qup? What's to stop a band like Temple's dedicated fanbase from also sharing and adding other people? Nothing. To say otherwise seems like a dead end. If Indie artists and their fans embrace streaming, then it could get them back in the game where guitar based music may be popular again. It's A LOT easier to get a fellow fan to listen to a stream of an album or song or a Youtube video than it is say, 'Here. Go out there and buy this.' Indie fans stream just as much as pop fans. There's no sacred cow to physical sales. Fans will always be more likely to buy their favorite artists' music more than casuals whether you like Sam Smith or The Temples just like a casual fan is more likely to stream than to buy whether you're listening to Sam Smith or the Temples. TL/DR: How could an indie artist with a small dedicated fanbase not welcome a platform where that fanbase could connect to casual fans to gain that artist more exposure and higher chart placements, while combining two casual and hardcore to get back to a state in music where a band like the Temples could thrive more readily and release good music to a mass audience? |
|
|
|
Post by defmaybe00 on Mar 12, 2015 13:07:03 GMT -5
People listen to the radio and hear Sam Smith-----> If they're not part of his fanbase and are just casual fans they'll go and check him out on Spotify
How many chances are there that those people will hear Temples and check them out as well? None,cause they won't hear about fucking Temples
Now let's say streams are not affecting Indie bands sales,at least compared to major acts (and I don't agree with it),they're surely affecting older artists sales,and that's just not right
|
|
|
|
Post by lamboasis on Mar 12, 2015 13:07:30 GMT -5
Noel is #3 on iTunes. But #1 Basically, compilations don't count.
|
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Mar 12, 2015 13:16:42 GMT -5
NGHFB needed 1 month to get the platinum disc. I dont Think CY will sell 300k copies by 2 april HFB was released at the beginning of the Christmas season. It will take much longer with this album to get the sales. I think he was almost double platinum within 3 months. But the #14 albums as selling like 40K a week through last Novmeber/early December |
|
|
|
Post by joladella on Mar 12, 2015 14:30:46 GMT -5
No. 8 in Austria, if no one has mentioned that yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Mar 12, 2015 18:22:00 GMT -5
People listen to the radio and hear Sam Smith-----> If they're not part of his fanbase and are just casual fans they'll go and check him out on Spotify How many chances are there that those people will hear Temples and check them out as well? None,cause they won't hear about fucking Temples Now let's say streams are not affecting Indie bands sales,at least compared to major acts (and I don't agree with it),they're surely affecting older artists sales,and that's just not right Huh? Do you know how Spotify works? You know Spotify gives you recommendations on who to listen to based on the music you already listen to, right? The Temples don't need to be played on radio to get streams on Spotify. How many chances will they get to hear the Temples on Spotify? Plenty. Especially, if that small dedicated fanbase you're talking about that buys the physical copies shares playlists with other fans/music listeners. And what about those festivals you were talking about? So, no one is going to hear them there, is that it? Ways a band like the Temples gets plays: 1.) Spotify recommending them based on other indie fans' taste 2.) their fanbase sharing playlists 3.) Festivals: showcasing their music to casual fans who then go back to stream them. What's unfair about Spotify is that indie artists don't earn as much for their plays when they hit it big as their mainstream counter parts do. But this idea that Spotify can hurt an indie artists on the charts more than the current, the money rat race that is say the Billboard charts, is ludicrous. There's no solid argument against a system that's trying to do something different against a system that's been broken. Indie artists were doomed when charts only counted sales. At least, they have a chance with streams being counted now. |
|
|
|
Post by Mean Mrs. Mustard on Mar 12, 2015 18:41:18 GMT -5
People listen to the radio and hear Sam Smith Which is pretty much all they will hear on the radio. |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 12, 2015 21:05:31 GMT -5
People listen to the radio and hear Sam Smith-----> If they're not part of his fanbase and are just casual fans they'll go and check him out on Spotify How many chances are there that those people will hear Temples and check them out as well? None,cause they won't hear about fucking Temples Now let's say streams are not affecting Indie bands sales,at least compared to major acts (and I don't agree with it),they're surely affecting older artists sales,and that's just not right Huh? Do you know how Spotify works? You know Spotify gives you recommendations on who to listen to based on the music you already listen to, right? The Temples don't need to be played on radio to get streams on Spotify. How many chances will they get to hear the Temples on Spotify? Plenty. Especially, if that small dedicated fanbase you're talking about that buys the physical copies shares playlists with other fans/music listeners. And what about those festivals you were talking about? So, no one is going to hear them there, is that it? Ways a band like the Temples gets plays: 1.) Spotify recommending them based on other indie fans' taste 2.) their fanbase sharing playlists 3.) Festivals: showcasing their music to casual fans who then go back to stream them. What's unfair about Spotify is that indie artists don't earn as much for their plays when they hit it big as their mainstream counter parts do. But this idea that Spotify can hurt an indie artists on the charts more than the current, the money rat race that is say the Billboard charts, is ludicrous. There's no solid argument against a system that's trying to do something different against a system that's been broken. Indie artists were doomed when charts only counted sales. At least, they have a chance with streams being counted now. Taylor Swift quit Spotify.  Enough said. |
|
|
|
Post by World71R on Mar 12, 2015 21:27:08 GMT -5
Tay Tay quit Spotify. Enough said. FTFY. |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 12, 2015 21:50:18 GMT -5
Noel should open for Taylor Swift on her summer USA tour. #Exposure |
|
|
|
Post by thomuk2006 on Mar 12, 2015 23:06:45 GMT -5
Sweden 49  Denmark 34 Fuck. |
|
|
|
Post by leak4ever on Mar 13, 2015 0:25:59 GMT -5
Sweden 49 Denmark 34 Fuck. I wonder how many copies you need to sell to get 49th in Sweden. Probably about 49. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2015 1:36:42 GMT -5
This is what we have so far. | Austria | 8 | | Belgium (Flanders) | 7 | | Belgium (Wallonia) | 26 | | Netherlands | 8 | | Germany | 5 | | Ireland | 1 | | Italy | 5 | | Japan | 10 | | New Zealand | 12 | | Sweden | 49 | | Switzerland | 4 | | United Kingdom | 1 |
|
|
|
|
Post by Mean Mrs. Mustard on Mar 13, 2015 2:59:59 GMT -5
What about countries like Hungary and stuff |
|
|
|
Post by carryusall on Mar 13, 2015 3:09:54 GMT -5
What did Noel do to Sweden?
|
|
|
|
Post by stevemeister on Mar 13, 2015 4:28:03 GMT -5
# 12 in Canada
|
|
|
|
Post by Sternumman on Mar 13, 2015 5:38:56 GMT -5
DM # 58 MG # 4 BHN # 2 SOTSOG # 24 HC # 23 DBTT # 12 DOYS # 5 NOEL SOLO NGHFB # 28 CY # 35 BEADY EYE DGSS # 31 BE # didn’t chart So 3 oasis albums top 10 1 top 20 2 top 30 all albums practically disappeared from the chart after 1 week, apart from MG & BHN going on how oasis or noel didnt really promote thier albums in the states,chart positions arent bad. are chart pos really that important? as long as noel continues to release material as good as NGHFB & CY i dont really care where it charts. I Don't believe BE was ever officially released in the US. It just showed up months later on ITunes. |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 13, 2015 7:34:31 GMT -5
DM # 58 MG # 4 BHN # 2 SOTSOG # 24 HC # 23 DBTT # 12 DOYS # 5 NOEL SOLO NGHFB # 28 CY # 35 BEADY EYE DGSS # 31 BE # didn’t chart So 3 oasis albums top 10 1 top 20 2 top 30 all albums practically disappeared from the chart after 1 week, apart from MG & BHN going on how oasis or noel didnt really promote thier albums in the states,chart positions arent bad. are chart pos really that important? as long as noel continues to release material as good as NGHFB & CY i dont really care where it charts. I Don't believe BE was ever officially released in the US. It just showed up months later on ITunes. It's ok, most Americans didn't even know Beady Eye existed. |
|
|
|
Post by Sternumman on Mar 13, 2015 7:40:11 GMT -5
I Don't believe BE was ever officially released in the US. It just showed up months later on ITunes. It's ok, most Americans didn't even know Beady Eye existed. If a band breaks up before anyone knew they existed, did they ever exist at all? |
|
|
|
Post by defmaybe00 on Mar 13, 2015 8:27:17 GMT -5
Oh btw it was #21 in the USA on pure album sales,shame
and #8 in Australia
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5