the shit you see in the top 40 will not change UNTIL Billboard finds a way to get the charts back into the publics hands and out of radio's

what i mean is at least before people had the choice to buy a single and decide on what a hit would be no matter if radio played it or not

today the whole singles chart is based on mainly airplay (with single sales and downloading accounting for a very small percentage of the chart position)

the problem with radio being in control of the charts like this is they decide what we listen to and what becomes and doesnt become popular..and with radio in control payola is at an all time high because right now radio is the deciding factor

i have many billboard books and when you look at the way the chart used to be compiled you can have a song that radio totally ignored BUT if the public bought the single the song would still be a hit..there are many songs that were in 60's on radio airplay but in the top 10 in sales but since the sales counted for a lot more than they do now the songs would peak pretty high on the charts based on those sales..at least back then people had a say unlike now

a good example of whats going on these days is about a month or so ago Duran Duran's newest single "Sunrise" was released as a single in the u.s and it hit #3 on the billboard sales chart but because of a lack of airplay it didnt hit the top 100 until it debut'd a few weeks later at #95..also this shows how little sales are actually counted in the overall chart figures..in the past if a song was #3 in single sales you could be assured it was at least going to be a top 40 song on the overall chart

the only way things are ever going to turn around is if Billboard starts counting downloaded single sales and giving it a much higher percentage of the chart figures like it used to...i know the single download figures are still low but they are rising but at least we would know what the public likes and not what radio forces down our throat

another thing radio is so unfair to some artists these days for example John Mellencamps new song "walk tall" has very few radio outlets it can be played on
its pretty much limited to triple a,Hot Ac & some rock stations maybe and thats about it and those stations have a very low count of spins. now Usher comes out with something new..he has the Top 40,Urban,Urban adult contemp,Top 40 Rhythmic,Hot ac..with so many outlets its nowonder Usher is in the top 10 on a consistent basis!

so anywaw im going way too long with this let's just hope things change soon because many people are so sick of the music thats forced down our throats by radio and mtv everyday!

Nothing is going to change until companies like Clear Channel are dethroned. FUCK Clear Channel!!

I agree, but I think the labels like being able to buy hits too much for that to happen.

Well said , Maz...all true.

I remember the days when Prince hit #21 with Gett Off and #67 (?) with Sexy MF on the Hot 100 with little to no airplay.
[Edited 12/3/04 5:35am]

Mazerati said:

people start doing more drugs and getting seriously, seriously high.

At least thats what happened in the 60's; once Dylan and The Beatles gave the "seal of approval" on hallucogens, all the crazy underground stuff that had been in clubs broke through to major exposure (Zappa, Dead, Airplane, Hendrix, Pink Floyd, and many others).

Since the Reagan era, with "just say no" and the current neo-fascist conservatism, music has been getting more and more apolitical and homogeneous. Think about it, and do your part tonight!

good thread, but I don't see anything like that happening. The Top 40 is something different now than it used to be. It's filled with basically 5 categories.

1) pop-tart divas like Jessica Simpson, Ashlee Simpson, Christina and Britney (includes the new breed of Teen-Hos, like Jo Jo, Skye Sweetnam, and even the angry ones like Avril Lavigne.)

2) arena-rock posers still pretending to hold onto the last vestiges of grunge, like Puddle of Mudd, Incubus, Creed, Switchfoot, etc..

3) pop/psuedo-punk 3-chord boy bands (New Found Glory, Simple Plan, etc)

4) soulless, plastic, disposable R&B drivel (USHER!)

5) and novelty hip-hop/rap songs that will be forgetten in 2 years


Those 5 categories cover I would say 90% of what is on the pop charts, played on Top 40 radio, and played on MTV (when they DO play videos).


Those of us who appreciate something a little less "product" will have to accept the fact that our music is NOT going to be on the Top 40 anytime soon, but artists we love can still be very popular and have great careers - look at REM, Tori Amos, U2, Prince, David Bowie, The Cure, Radiohead, etc. All of them going strong, but very little Top 40 prospects. That's just fine with me.

jackflash said:

What a great post. I'll have a beer or two tonight. It's a small contribution to the cause, but a heartfelt one nonetheless...

jackflash said:

scary thing is, zappa wasn't on drugs in the '60s. that's just how his mind worked.

Anxiety said:

so he was glad everybody else around him was on drugs.....finally he wasn't alone anymore.....

vainandy said:

God, whenever someone mentions Clear Channel, "Chechclear" springs to my mind all over again, and i'm trying to forget that shit

I was just saying this last night. Funky music just doesn't make it's way on the raido anymore. Everything is genre-ated, put into niche catagories.

Everything just about in the mainstream is bland bland bland. It's SO bland that when something slightly good comes along, everyone jumps on it and talks about how GOOD it is. It is MUCH worse now than it's ever been...dare I say even the 90's was better. Back in the day who had to sound different...execs also took chances on artists and helped them mature. Now it's just a machine that uses you until the pappz stops flashing the bulbs. Music is SO disposable now. It's not even about the music...it's about the money.

Another issue is that all one hears now on the radio is american music. In a world that we are being exposed to almost everything at once, you'd think that radio and music would open up in general. I mean as a music enthusiast, I have been exposed to much more music in the past decade due to the internet, media etc. Maybe pop music is a niche in itself that will no longer be paving the way...well unless it's just to more money. ANd then theres the whole...you don't have to have any talent to make a record. Or get a deal. Look at the latest Jessica ramblings..."I'm not going to put that much thought into it" Yes...thank you Jessica very much for promising the world crap.

Mazerati said:

Billboard's album charts are a much better reflection of people's tastes in the U.S.

You are right that counting download sales toward chart placings will help, but that is still a ways off. When a song can be certified gold based on its number of downloads, that's when you'll see something happen. But right now, as with traditional singles' sales, the total number is still too small to give it so much weight toward the singles' charts. The #1 selling single one week will sell maybe 3,000 copies if that much. It's not fair to give 3,000 people the power over a chart that represents 500 million.

jackflash said:

Maybe that's why the early 90's were so good.

VoicesCarry said:

And it seriously must be cheaper to buy hits on the radio than to sell a single. In the mid-nineties, some people didn't released singles for their singles. For example, Alanis' "You Oughta Know" didn't have an actual single, so it didn't chart on the Top 100. Same for The Cardigans "Lovefool". They both got a lot of radio play, which helped a lot. I mean, why release a single if the album can sell without it. Record companies, according to them, lose money on singles. It's a gamble to put out a single and hope it AND the album sells. So just don't release them at all and let radio and MTV do it's best. Billboard say this trend happening and in the Fall of 1998 (oh what a dark day in radio history) they changed how the charts worked and made radio play count for a lot more. I thought this was really disturbing when I first read it but then figured it really made no difference. Well, it made a huge difference. It should be noted that this change didn't happen overnight. Madonna and Janet still had bit hits in 2000 and 2001 with the success of their sell through singles (radio probably wasn't so harsh them either). However, after 2002, the sell through single was dead and that is why we are stuck with the shit we have now. Billboard pretty much gave the record labels free reign to create their own hit songs and we have to live with it. I'm really hoping that satelite radio becomes the new cable and just weakens regular radio to the point where something will have to be done to alter what is going on with this national radio that we have now. Hopefully, radio will return to being more personalized for the locations that it is in.

JonSnow said:

Actually number 4 and 5 cover about 80% of Top 40, with the other 3 catogeries struggling for the remaining 20%. Other music doesn't count at all!

sextonseven said:

Preach! The Billboard album charts are actually determined by the people and are shockingly much more diverse! Remember back in the day when the album sales charts and the singles charts matched pretty well?