The graph below shows how people bought music from 2011 to 2018.
The line graph below gives information about the different ways people purchased music from 2011 to 2018.
In general, downloads and CDs purchased had a downward trend, while the percentage of people buying streams climbed dramatically. It can be seen that downloads fluctuated during the period
CDs had the largest proportion of all three ways in 2011, at nearly 55%. 30% of people paid more on downloads than streams, at 35% and 5%, respectively. During the next four years, CD sales significantly decreased from 50% to 35%, while the percentage of buying downloads surpassed CDs in 2013, and accounted for approximately 45% in 2014. The figure for sales of streams was 15% less in 2011 than in 2014.
After hitting its peak, the number of people purchasing for downloads gradually declined and then made up 30% in 2018. During the same period, the proportion of streams sold continually rose by over 25%. 35% of sales of CDs were less in 2014 than in the first year before experiencing a remarkable decrease of 30% in 2018.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-12-11 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2024-12-11 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2024-12-11 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2024-12-11 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2024-12-09 | Estriper | view |
- The graph below shows a typical American and a Japanese office 89
- The charts below give information about the price of tickets on one airline between Sydney and Melbourne Australia over a two week period in 2013 64
- Some people believe that media should be allowed to publish information about the private lives of famous people Others say that everybody has a right to privacy and this practice must be controlled or even stopped Discuss both views 78
- The pie charts show the percentage of persons arrested in the five years ending 1994 and the bar chart shows the most recent reasons for arrest 73
- The diagrams below show a small local museum and its surroundings in 1957 and 2007 71
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 10, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'graphs'.
Suggestion: graphs
The line graph below gives information about the diffe...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 110, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... gradually declined and then made up 30% in 2018. During the same period, the pro...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, so, then, while, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 858.0 965.302439024 89% => OK
No of words: 175.0 196.424390244 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90285714286 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.63713576256 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73958137723 2.65546596893 103% => OK
Unique words: 104.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.594285714286 0.547539520022 109% => OK
syllable_count: 226.8 283.868780488 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.7916638124 43.030603864 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.3333333333 112.824112599 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4444444444 22.9334400587 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.22222222222 5.23603664747 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.1909196108 0.215688989381 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0868689281557 0.103423049105 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.121991149515 0.0843802449381 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155577686876 0.15604864568 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.157624041314 0.0819641961636 192% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.2329268293 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 77.57 61.2550243902 127% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 10.3012195122 70% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 11.4140731707 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.38 8.06136585366 92% => OK
difficult_words: 31.0 40.7170731707 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.