1. Singles
  2. Albums
  3. Film
  4. MoreView all charts
Previous
Next

Official Singles Chart on 11/12/2015

11 December 2015 - 17 December 2015

The Official UK Singles Chart reflects the UK’s biggest songs of the week, based on audio and video streams, downloads, CDs and vinyl, compiled by the Official Charts Company. The UK Top 40 is broadcast on BBC Radio 1 and MTV, the Top 100 is published exclusively on OfficialCharts.com. View the biggest songs of 2023.

 

Hot right now

Decorative flameDecorative flameDecorative flame

Join the conversation by joining the Official Charts community and dropping comment.

Already registered?

Log in

No account?

Register

avatar

🧡 oliviasnoodles 🍜

1

We’ve started this incredible year awesome, and we’re gonna end it even better, with Sweet Lovin jumping to #3 and the Christmas songs becoming big (like they do annually).

avatar

Paul Anthony Searle

0

STREAMS do not represent REAL SALES so although they may paint a picture of what are the most popular songs being listened to (or their audio ripped off for free as is often the case) they do NOT represent what is actually SELLING. As the OCC chart is supposed to represent sales and download sales to present a clear picture of what is really SELLING nationwide, STREAMS should therefore not count towards the SINGLES SALES CHART

DK

Dave Knight

0

I'm not a fan of Fleur East, but I do study the charts, and it always amazes me at how wrong I can be about what I and I'm sure most of us assume is popular, yet Fleur's album entered rather low you'd have to agree at number 14. With even artists such as Enya we haven't heard from for years is at number 10. Most of the people I know reckoned Fleur East should have won the x-factor last year, yet even her single Sax wasn't number 1. Yet for Enya to achieve a hit single would be unthinkable these days. I think my point is why is the difference between albums and singles so different and unpredictable these days? When I was young popular artists had top ten singles and albums, not just one or the other. Has the media done this on purpose by the way it promotes artists? Another example is Pink Floyd can be number 1 in the albums charts, or even their lead vocalist David Gilmour who just enjoyed a number 1 album as a solo artist, which most people under 30 won't know who we're talking about, yet why can't they get into the official singles charts? Yet Justin Biebre can have 15 singles in the top 100. The whole industry seems a joke!!

avatar

etin

0

streaming shouldn't count

avatar

CMK5233

0

Look! Some old songs are new. How lovely to see east17 and the Pouges making new progress with old songs of yuletide. Just be happy Justin bieber has 10 songs in the charts and oo aren't they lovely? Please stream as much xmas wee as possible and buy up all this wonderful music. Now. Do it. Don't think about it. Wee.

avatar

CMK5233

0

And talk about, pop music, talk about-pop music

avatar

Cathal Brugha

0

I miss when there wasn't all pop music in the top charts.

avatar

Simeon Davenport

2

"Pop music" is short for "popular music," kind of like how "pop culture" is short for "popular culture."
By definition, if a song is on the charts, it's, by definition, pop music.

avatar

dariowestern

1

You're right. There should be more heavy metal, punk, blues, jazz, folk, reggae, soul, and Gregorian charts in the charts. :-)

avatar

I Am A Stegosaurus

1

Yeah, that's true.

DS

David Sutton

0

OCC said in the News section: "Last week, Justin achieved the rare feat of replacing himself at the top of the Official Singles Chart, but his unmoved positions this week make him the first artist ever to knock himself off the top spot with both songs holding at 1 and 2 for two consecutive weeks."

This is not true. At the end of 1963 the Beatles "I Want To Hold Your HAnd" knocked "She Loves You" of the top of the charts and they held the Top 2 like that for 3 weeks. So Justin has one more to do before he equals this feat.

M

mike

0

The record they refer to is not just that they knocked themselves off the top spot, but it is qualified with "both songs holding at number 1 and 2 for two consecutive weeks" . In the week prior to knocking She Loves You off the top spot, I Want To Hold Your Hand was number 10 in the charts.

DS

David Sutton

0

I see what you mean even so Justin has held one and two for three weeks, same as the Beatles. The Beatles repeated that with Hello Goodbye and Magical Mystery Tour in 1967 buy admittedly that is not the same as MMT did not make No1. So for me Justin only shares the record.

M

mike

0

They are two different records

avatar

Gore Nagy

0

The Beatles didn't release their singles simultaneously. "She Loves You" was released in August, "I Want Hold Your Hand" in November. So, SLY didn't run out of steam even after four month's. And people had to buy the record in the stores week by week to keep it on top. That was a far bigger achievement than the Bieber boy's.

LB

Lee Brown

0

Its album tracks that should not be allowed in the official SINGLES chart, wheres does it say "oh and the chart also includes a few album tracks" there should be a separate album tracks chart.

avatar

Simeon Davenport

4

I know I said this last time, but I'll say it again:

I don't want to see any comments here that say that streaming should be abolished.

Guys, streaming is not going away. It's replacing the need to buy singles physically, and the reason they're added is because sales are losing out, so streaming a good way to see what songs are more popular. No matter what you guys think, streaming is not going away and the OCC is not getting rid of it. Cry and be angry all you want, but streaming is here to stay and it's not getting abolished from the charts any time soon, so just give it up.

If you want to see what the chart looks like WITHOUT streams, check this out: http://www.officialcharts.com/charts/singles-sales-chart/

avatar

drew

-2

streaming should be abolished.

avatar

Simeon Davenport

2

You're only saying that because I wrote a comment telling people not to say that.

Did you even read more than just the first 2 paragraphs of my comment?

avatar

drew

-1

no i did not read it all as i was too busy crying and getting angry.

D

Danny

0

Fair enough. Not bothered really because frankly the singles chart is a farce these days. Bieber has over ten songs on it. With that many, one wonders why his album isn't simply bought instead.

M

mike

4

"I don't want to see any comments here "
OK BOSS (!)

avatar

Bazza Splutter Sobersaurus

1

streaming shouldn't count. cos streaming is listening to music. you might as well add illegal downloading. the singles chart was and should always be about physical sales or downloads. actual purchasing and as for album tracks in a singles chart?????
they are not singles. the artist should have to release a song as a single before it qualifies for the singles chart and no song that isn't being actually released as a single should qualify either. including old songs re=entering. our charts is as embarrassing and stagnant as the US charts which we use to mock.

avatar

Simeon Davenport

1

You know, the Billboard Hot 100 chart in the U.S. was actually changed from a singles chart to a songs chart. Shouldn't be long till the "Official Singles Chart" is renamed to the "Official Songs Chart." Doesn't bother me, but it does somehow bother everyone else.

avatar

Anthony Armani-Cadillac Sander

2

In 5 more years, digital sales will be noexistent so...

avatar

Anthony Armani-Cadillac Sander

3

Digital sales are decreasing and will be nonexistent in 5 more years. Streaming is the future. Get with it or jump off the ship.

avatar

Karl Macnaughton

1

I'm pleased to see this, rather than the usual moaning. The Charts aren't supposed to be about sales; they're supposed to be a measure of what's popular right now. In the past, the best proxy for this was sales. Now it's still partially sales, albeit largely in an electronic format, but also through streaming. This is one of the major ways in which music is discovered, listened to and enjoyed. People do also pay for streaming, don't forget; it's not just free, and each stream has a tiny fraction of the impact of 1 sale. It takes 100 streams to count as one sale and no one user can have more than 10 streams per day of a song count towards the chart. Considering nobody's ever really going to get anywhere near 10 plays per day, and that a whole week of doing so doesn't even count as a single sale, something really does need to be very popular indeed to register on streams alone. If it's that popular, it deserves a place in the chart, album track or not; why should record companies decide what constitutes a 'single'.

These rules make the UK chart the most democratic in the world. Almost every other country has gone down the airplay route, which really would be the end as that's basically the record companies deciding what gets in the chart again but in the most undemocratic way possible.

The only thing I'd moan about chartwise is Radio One destroying the chart show but, you know what, someone publishes a list of the Top 40 every week on Spotify so I just flip it using an app and listen to that instead. If Radio One is going to play silly buggers we can find another way of listening.

Streaming isn't going away any time soon and we need to be able to welcome new advances like this to keep music alive.

avatar

Paul Anthony Searle

-1

Couldn't agree more with you. The British Singles Chart Top 40 also used to be a National Tradition which attracted millions of followers. Because of the addition of streams and other changes to the way it's compiled, it has become a laughing stock, resulting in massive turn offs and a couldn't care less attitude towards it. SINGLES means SINGLES and not dozens of cherry picked album tracks. Let's go back to the days when the chart actually meant something and when it was a true and accurate weekly reflection of what's really selling and really popular in the UK.

avatar

Simeon Davenport

1

Thank you! Why are you and me the only people who see this?

DS

David Sutton

0

Wrong! The charts are (or should be) about sales and only sales. If I play a CD at home, it counts for nothing. Why should it count if I stream the album instead. there is no difference-only the media used to listen to it.

avatar

Karl Macnaughton

3

There's a big difference in the way music is 'consumed' between those two media: when streaming, you're playing tracks and paying for them on a play by play basis; when buying a CD or download you're buying all your plays at once.
I don't agree with the argument that streaming shouldn't count just because it's play-as-you-go. Each play is worth 100 times less than a purchase, remember, and I know I haven't played most of my CDs or downloads anything _like_ 100 times so if anything streaming is having a very low impact proportionally.

Musical media, and the way we enjoy music, is always (and has always been) constantly evolving and if the chart doesn't move along with these advancements then there's no point in it being there. Ten years ago some people were screaming about downloads not being valid for similar reasons but few would argue that now; if the chart only included physical sales it would very misrepresentative indeed given that physical sales are so low. Such is also increasingly true for streaming.
Downloads and streaming have also taken a lot of the power over what gets into the chart away from the record companies and given it to us. That has to be a good thing. I think the chart has a lot more cultural value than its probable original purpose as a capitalist promotional tool.

avatar

Official Charts

2

Well said Karl!

avatar

theboy

2

OLLY MURS NUMBER 1*!!!!!