leonagwen
Diamond Member
#LiteralLegender
Joined: November 2011
Posts: 14,772
|
Post by leonagwen on Jul 8, 2017 12:07:36 GMT -5
Yes it will happen again.Could be a song from a movie or a song from a group like 5SOS.Imagine Dragons can do it.
|
|
rainie
8x Platinum Member
but its not real, and you don't exist
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 8,581
Pronouns: they / them
|
Post by rainie on Jul 8, 2017 17:07:32 GMT -5
Many fans of rock music would never admit that a rock song able to get popular in this musical landscape is actually a rock song unless it was by an already established and agreed-upon rock band like the Foo Fighters. This is why rock is living in a cave somewhere nearly dead. This just isn't true -- if there was a rock band that actually released a song with rock instrumentation and was considered rock enough to chart decently on the rock charts (not alt, active rock) then I think plenty of people would consider it a rock song. However bands like TOP use largely synth heavy, programmed instrumentation and are only able to scrape the bottom of the active rock charts based off their popularity, not fitting the format. Imagine Dragons may use more rock instrumentation, but it's usually used in more of a background way like many pop songs and most of their songs have more in common with HAC bands like OneRepublic then most of the songs you see on active. I'm not saying they're straight up pop, they're alternative, but alternative =/= rock.
|
|
Glove Slap
Administrator
Sweetheart
Downloading ༺༒༻ Possibilities
Joined: January 2007
Posts: 29,480
Staff
|
Post by Glove Slap on Jul 8, 2017 20:18:25 GMT -5
Rock music never really moved past its 90s mentality; that's why it's been out of the zeitgeist ever since that era ended. Unless you want to count Nickelback and the emo wave of the 00s .
|
|
rainie
8x Platinum Member
but its not real, and you don't exist
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 8,581
Pronouns: they / them
|
Post by rainie on Jul 8, 2017 20:55:24 GMT -5
Rock music never really moved past its 90s mentality; that's why it's been out of the zeitgeist ever since that era ended. Unless you want to count Nickelback and the emo wave of the 00s . They totally count imo. Actually it's really just been in the last 5 years that the public perception of rock has shifted to indie pop groups like TOP and ID.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Jul 8, 2017 21:18:58 GMT -5
Many fans of rock music would never admit that a rock song able to get popular in this musical landscape is actually a rock song unless it was by an already established and agreed-upon rock band like the Foo Fighters. This is why rock is living in a cave somewhere nearly dead. This just isn't true -- if there was a rock band that actually released a song with rock instrumentation and was considered rock enough to chart decently on the rock charts (not alt, active rock) then I think plenty of people would consider it a rock song. However bands like TOP use largely synth heavy, programmed instrumentation and are only able to scrape the bottom of the active rock charts based off their popularity, not fitting the format. Imagine Dragons may use more rock instrumentation, but it's usually used in more of a background way like many pop songs and most of their songs have more in common with HAC bands like OneRepublic then most of the songs you see on active. I'm not saying they're straight up pop, they're alternative, but alternative =/= rock. See, that's exactly it. Imagine Dragons are a rock band. They've had a few pop-like elements in a couple of their songs but they're still more rock than anything else. Like any genre, rock music has evolved over the years and will continue to but I never see so many attempts to distance present-day music from a genre the way I do with rock. Have there been any new rock bands that fans of rock music have any respect for who have emerged in the last ten years? There seems to be such opposition from fans of rock music to accept new stuff from young musicians. Most music fans respect the classics of their favourite genres but I've never seen the type of stranglehold rock fans have toward old vs. new.
|
|
rainie
8x Platinum Member
but its not real, and you don't exist
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 8,581
Pronouns: they / them
|
Post by rainie on Jul 8, 2017 21:44:26 GMT -5
This just isn't true -- if there was a rock band that actually released a song with rock instrumentation and was considered rock enough to chart decently on the rock charts (not alt, active rock) then I think plenty of people would consider it a rock song. However bands like TOP use largely synth heavy, programmed instrumentation and are only able to scrape the bottom of the active rock charts based off their popularity, not fitting the format. Imagine Dragons may use more rock instrumentation, but it's usually used in more of a background way like many pop songs and most of their songs have more in common with HAC bands like OneRepublic then most of the songs you see on active. I'm not saying they're straight up pop, they're alternative, but alternative =/= rock. See, that's exactly it. Imagine Dragons are a rock band. They've had a few pop-like elements in a couple of their songs but they're still more rock than anything else. Like any genre, rock music has evolved over the years and will continue to but I never see so many attempts to distance present-day music from a genre the way I do with rock. Have there been any new rock bands that fans of rock music have any respect for who have emerged in the last ten years? There seems to be such opposition from fans of rock music to accept new stuff from young musicians. Most music fans respect the classics of their favourite genres but I've never seen the type of stranglehold rock fans have toward old vs. new. There totally is, it's just not the type of rock that's doing well. Over on the rock boards many modern bands such as Muse, Highly Suspect, Queens of the Stone Age, Royal Blood, Nothing But Thieves, Bad Suns, Modest Mouse, hell even Kaleo who had a minor pop hit earlier this year are generally praised for being great rock bands that aren't just throwbacks to older sounds and bring fresh, original rock music to the table. However people generally hate bands like Imagine Dragons for the same reason the country board generally hates artists like Sam Hunt and Florida Georgia Line -- they're watered down versions of that respective genre. Many Imagine Dragons songs blend right in with songs from adult contemporary groups like OneRepublic or Train which doesn't exactly spread to them being an "alternative" to the mainstream. Granted, they have released some songs that are less HAC and more alternative, but even then, people question whether they really count as "alternative," especially since most of those songs are deep cuts. If a band is barely alternative because they're so poppy, then they're pretty far from the definition of rock. Now imo TOP IS pretty indesptuably alternative, but again alternative =/= rock. In general it's hard for me to call a band who uses non guitars on most songs and largely synthetic production rock, since that goes against the definition of the word itself.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Indie Party Rock on Jul 9, 2017 0:27:43 GMT -5
See, that's exactly it. Imagine Dragons are a rock band. They've had a few pop-like elements in a couple of their songs but they're still more rock than anything else. Like any genre, rock music has evolved over the years and will continue to but I never see so many attempts to distance present-day music from a genre the way I do with rock. Have there been any new rock bands that fans of rock music have any respect for who have emerged in the last ten years? There seems to be such opposition from fans of rock music to accept new stuff from young musicians. Most music fans respect the classics of their favourite genres but I've never seen the type of stranglehold rock fans have toward old vs. new. There totally is, it's just not the type of rock that's doing well. Over on the rock boards many modern bands such as Muse, Highly Suspect, Queens of the Stone Age, Royal Blood, Nothing But Thieves, Bad Suns, Modest Mouse, hell even Kaleo who had a minor pop hit earlier this year are generally praised for being great rock bands that aren't just throwbacks to older sounds and bring fresh, original rock music to the table. However people generally hate bands like Imagine Dragons for the same reason the country board generally hates artists like Sam Hunt and Florida Georgia Line -- they're watered down versions of that respective genre. Many Imagine Dragons songs blend right in with songs from adult contemporary groups like OneRepublic or Train which doesn't exactly spread to them being an "alternative" to the mainstream. Granted, they have released some songs that are less HAC and more alternative, but even then, people question whether they really count as "alternative," especially since most of those songs are deep cuts. If a band is barely alternative because they're so poppy, then they're pretty far from the definition of rock. Now imo TOP IS pretty indesptuably alternative, but again alternative =/= rock. In general it's hard for me to call a band who uses non guitars on most songs and largely synthetic production rock, since that goes against the definition of the word itself. I've given up on Alt not crossing over Imagine Dragon's songs. It's goning happen weather I protest or not. Active Rock is where I'm at theses days. There is one song in the Active Top 10 that has no Rock vibe whatsoever. It could have easily been a Chainsmokers' song. It's from I Prevail; who have had minor success on Active with actual Active rock songs, but this new song called "Alone" is completely void of any Active vibe whatsoever. It's not as awful as Imagine Dragons' new songs, but the fact that it's in the top 10, makes me question the integrity of that chart. At least in the sense of the word "Rock". I've added the link so you can listen and make up your own mind. If you think it's a song that belongs in The Active Rock chart, please feel free to share your thoughts of what is so rock about it? www.youtube.com/watch?v=wljKBANpmI8
|
|
Dylan :)
Diamond Member
smth 'bout youu
Joined: October 2014
Posts: 12,435
|
Post by Dylan :) on Jul 9, 2017 8:39:32 GMT -5
I think that by 2030, the Hot 100 will be 95+% streaming, and that the weekly list will look almost identical to a "most streamed songs" list. And I think by 2040 the Hot 100 will be retired for this reason. I'm not sure about that. I'm sure there are people who thought the same when iTunes began to be included. 7 years ago streaming was nothing compared to iTunes/radio. Who is to say in 7 years there won't be something completely new that replaces it as the most dominant factor on the charts. Or maybe a new Spotify (like Apple Music but more relevant) which makes sure the charts aren't just the Spotify weekly chart list. Anyway, on topic, I don't know. It is possible. I never would have thought at the start of the year a Latin song would be #1 while Katy Perry was struggling to enter the top 50 for longer than a few weeks. Heathens was quite rock sounding and it got to #2. Same with Radioactive (#3). It just takes one song to change it
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2017 14:17:27 GMT -5
I think that by 2030, the Hot 100 will be 95+% streaming, and that the weekly list will look almost identical to a "most streamed songs" list. And I think by 2040 the Hot 100 will be retired for this reason. I'm not sure about that. I'm sure there are people who thought the same when iTunes began to be included. 7 years ago streaming was nothing compared to iTunes/radio. Who is to say in 7 years there won't be something completely new that replaces it as the most dominant factor on the charts. Or maybe a new Spotify (like Apple Music but more relevant) which makes sure the charts aren't just the Spotify weekly chart list. Anyway, on topic, I don't know. It is possible. I never would have thought at the start of the year a Latin song would be #1 while Katy Perry was struggling to enter the top 50 for longer than a few weeks. Heathens was quite rock sounding and it got to #2. Same with Radioactive (#3). It just takes one song to change it Radioactive was also more successful than many number one songs
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Jul 9, 2017 14:30:59 GMT -5
However people generally hate bands like Imagine Dragons for the same reason the country board generally hates artists like Sam Hunt and Florida Georgia Line -- they're watered down versions of that respective genre. And that's a fair comparison. Though I do find it interesting how country music fans have embraced that watered down country (or at the very least, there seems to be a split) whereas, from my perspective (and again, this is a smalllllll sample size), rock fans are so unwilling to let go of the past, whether it's the 60s and 70s or 90s grunge and alternative, it seems like the last accepted era for good rock music was pre-Nickelback. I suppose it even applies to me. Most rock I like is pre-early 2000s with a few exceptions (MCR, American Idiot, JEW) and I personally can't explain why I'm not interested in hearing new rock music. I'd love to come across some to love though (ie. that Sleepless Nights song from a few months back did quite well on my personal chart).
|
|
rainie
8x Platinum Member
but its not real, and you don't exist
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 8,581
Pronouns: they / them
|
Post by rainie on Jul 9, 2017 18:00:59 GMT -5
However people generally hate bands like Imagine Dragons for the same reason the country board generally hates artists like Sam Hunt and Florida Georgia Line -- they're watered down versions of that respective genre. And that's a fair comparison. Though I do find it interesting how country music fans have embraced that watered down country (or at the very least, there seems to be a split) whereas, from my perspective (and again, this is a smalllllll sample size), rock fans are so unwilling to let go of the past, whether it's the 60s and 70s or 90s grunge and alternative, it seems like the last accepted era for good rock music was pre-Nickelback. I suppose it even applies to me. Most rock I like is pre-early 2000s with a few exceptions (MCR, American Idiot, JEW) and I personally can't explain why I'm not interested in hearing new rock music. I'd love to come across some to love though (ie. that Sleepless Nights song from a few months back did quite well on my personal chart). Imo it's actually the other way around. It seems most country fans on this board (not pop fans on this board who are posting about country songs) want country to go back to the neo-traditional popular in the 80s and 90s, whereas while this is true for some rock fans, many rock fans on this board are primarily a fan of the modern rock being made today. There are even many fans of the 2000s nu-metal/post-grunge scene which many cite as a disgrace to rock. And idk what you're into but there's a lot of good rock floating around, I can point you in the direction of some if you want.
|
|
Troy
9x Platinum Member
I have learned I will rise & you'll see me return Being what I am Theres no other Troy For me 2 burn
Joined: January 2015
Posts: 9,725
My Charts
Pronouns: he/him/his
|
Post by Troy on Jul 9, 2017 18:30:28 GMT -5
jazz is much less prevalent in pop music than it was in the 40s...still, it never died, instead it moved from mainstream to niche...this is what has happened to rock lately
pop music will always look back & use elements of other styles to incorporate into the current "it" sound
I don't care to define "rock" ... a definition will never be universally accepted, it's like trying to define "cold"
what I'm curious about is, what will be the new genre to supplant hip-hop as the dominant mainstream pop style?
|
|
Sherane Lamar
2x Platinum Member
Banned
Long live XXX
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 2,900
|
Post by Sherane Lamar on Jul 9, 2017 21:55:39 GMT -5
Why are we bringing up Alternative and Country artists in a thread about Rock music? Just because you qualify for the "Rock'n'Roll Hall of Fame" doesn't make you a Rock artist.
|
|
Sherane Lamar
2x Platinum Member
Banned
Long live XXX
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 2,900
|
Post by Sherane Lamar on Jul 9, 2017 21:56:24 GMT -5
Throwback to when Lorde won some "best Rock artist of the year" award.
|
|
|
Post by truemusicreviews on Jul 9, 2017 22:33:27 GMT -5
Throwback to when Lorde won some "best Rock artist of the year" award. I love Lorde like nobody else, but even I have to admit that her getting that award was bullshit.
|
|
fearlessarrow
Moderator
Now a 7x PMA winner!
Joined: June 2015
Posts: 24,285
My Charts
Pronouns: he/him/his
Staff
|
Post by fearlessarrow on Jul 9, 2017 22:46:32 GMT -5
I don't think it's entirely out of the question, but it does seem kind of unlikely.
The only situation I can see it happening is backlash against the EDM/hip-hop dominated landscape of pop music, but I think what will get popular in that case is alternative music or more HAC-leaning stuff, not rock, but there might be a rare case of rock songs crossing over.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Jul 9, 2017 23:17:23 GMT -5
And that's a fair comparison. Though I do find it interesting how country music fans have embraced that watered down country (or at the very least, there seems to be a split) whereas, from my perspective (and again, this is a smalllllll sample size), rock fans are so unwilling to let go of the past, whether it's the 60s and 70s or 90s grunge and alternative, it seems like the last accepted era for good rock music was pre-Nickelback. I suppose it even applies to me. Most rock I like is pre-early 2000s with a few exceptions (MCR, American Idiot, JEW) and I personally can't explain why I'm not interested in hearing new rock music. I'd love to come across some to love though (ie. that Sleepless Nights song from a few months back did quite well on my personal chart). Imo it's actually the other way around. It seems most country fans on this board (not pop fans on this board who are posting about country songs) want country to go back to the neo-traditional popular in the 80s and 90s, whereas while this is true for some rock fans, many rock fans on this board are primarily a fan of the modern rock being made today. There are even many fans of the 2000s nu-metal/post-grunge scene which many cite as a disgrace to rock. And idk what you're into but there's a lot of good rock floating around, I can point you in the direction of some if you want. Yes, let's talk. lol As an aside and somewhat related to the point of this thread, I do sometimes wonder if it's because rock music is a predominately white genre and pop culture has been interspersed with social issues to the point where if something appeals to primarily a white-only demographic, it is no longer enough. That's probably not the best way to put it but it has been something that I've wondered about in recent years. I also wonder if that's related to Katy Perry's recent struggle to get a hit and whether Taylor Swift is next. Is it such a thing now to be "too white"?
|
|
Sherane Lamar
2x Platinum Member
Banned
Long live XXX
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 2,900
|
Post by Sherane Lamar on Jul 9, 2017 23:23:27 GMT -5
Imo it's actually the other way around. It seems most country fans on this board (not pop fans on this board who are posting about country songs) want country to go back to the neo-traditional popular in the 80s and 90s, whereas while this is true for some rock fans, many rock fans on this board are primarily a fan of the modern rock being made today. There are even many fans of the 2000s nu-metal/post-grunge scene which many cite as a disgrace to rock. And idk what you're into but there's a lot of good rock floating around, I can point you in the direction of some if you want. Yes, let's talk. lol As an aside and somewhat related to the point of this thread, I do sometimes wonder if it's because rock music is a predominately white genre and pop culture has been interspersed with social issues to the point where if something appeals to primarily a white-only demographic, it is no longer enough. That's probably not the best way to put it but it has been something that I've wondered about in recent years. I also wonder if that's related to Katy Perry's recent struggle to get a hit and whether Taylor Swift is next. Is it such a thing now to be "too white"? Tell that to the 20 Country songs on the Hot 100 every single week.
|
|
Sherane Lamar
2x Platinum Member
Banned
Long live XXX
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 2,900
|
Post by Sherane Lamar on Jul 9, 2017 23:27:01 GMT -5
Throwback to when Lorde won some "best Rock artist of the year" award. I love Lorde like nobody else, but even I have to admit that her getting that award was bulls**t. I also remember that the People's Choice Awards had Fall Out Boy, One Direction, Maroon 5, and P@TD as there "Best Rock Groups" category. I feel like... if you can't find any Rock groups to put in the category, then just stop having it.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Jul 9, 2017 23:35:43 GMT -5
Yes, let's talk. lol As an aside and somewhat related to the point of this thread, I do sometimes wonder if it's because rock music is a predominately white genre and pop culture has been interspersed with social issues to the point where if something appeals to primarily a white-only demographic, it is no longer enough. That's probably not the best way to put it but it has been something that I've wondered about in recent years. I also wonder if that's related to Katy Perry's recent struggle to get a hit and whether Taylor Swift is next. Is it such a thing now to be "too white"? Tell that to the 20 Country songs on the Hot 100 every single week. And country songs have their own limited demographic that rarely ever go beyond that.
|
|
rainie
8x Platinum Member
but its not real, and you don't exist
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 8,581
Pronouns: they / them
|
Post by rainie on Jul 10, 2017 2:16:50 GMT -5
Imo it's actually the other way around. It seems most country fans on this board (not pop fans on this board who are posting about country songs) want country to go back to the neo-traditional popular in the 80s and 90s, whereas while this is true for some rock fans, many rock fans on this board are primarily a fan of the modern rock being made today. There are even many fans of the 2000s nu-metal/post-grunge scene which many cite as a disgrace to rock. And idk what you're into but there's a lot of good rock floating around, I can point you in the direction of some if you want. Yes, let's talk. lol As an aside and somewhat related to the point of this thread, I do sometimes wonder if it's because rock music is a predominately white genre and pop culture has been interspersed with social issues to the point where if something appeals to primarily a white-only demographic, it is no longer enough. That's probably not the best way to put it but it has been something that I've wondered about in recent years. I also wonder if that's related to Katy Perry's recent struggle to get a hit and whether Taylor Swift is next. Is it such a thing now to be "too white"? Shoot me a DM for some song recommendations ;) And that's actually a really interesting point I've never thought of before. Country is way whiter then rock, but it has enough of a following to carve out a niche for itself, even if it is somewhat of a very limited one. I don't think that's true because alt is predominantly white as well, but I'm sure that doesn't help. I've wondered why a lot of the pop divas don't do well these days as well, and I think a large part of it is actually what you just said, the mainstream audience for pop is shifting in an increasingly urban direction. Also that doesn't explain the troubling double standard in which many pop males can still get hits...
|
|
|
Post by .It'sGriffin on Jul 10, 2017 10:08:13 GMT -5
Yeah, I agree that Nickelback is the most recent Rock #1. Personally, I think iTunes has a great genre categorizer. I think that by 2030, the Hot 100 will be 95+% streaming, and that the weekly list will look almost identical to a "most streamed songs" list. And I think by 2040 the Hot 100 will be retired for this reason. So Rock hasn't had a #1 for 15 years... I think they have another 12-22 years to get a #1. I doubt it will happen. I think there's two possibilities for a Rock song to go #1: A song like Uptown Funk comes along. A song that is a throwback to the Rock era and is actually considered a Rock song. A lot of the biggest songs of the last 10 years have been kinda weird songs that really stick out stylistically. And that's part of their appeal. So I can imagine a Rock song maybe doing that sometime in the next decade and a half. The other possibility is that in the future, the charts become even more suggestive to current events than they are now. Christmas songs are peaking higher than ever. Celebrity death songs are more common than ever. So when Paul McCartney dies, Hey Jude or something goes #1. Helena Beat by FTP was the fifth most streamed song in like 2011 and it didn't even chart on the hot 100
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2017 10:35:46 GMT -5
Alternative rock like ID surely has a chance
|
|
leonagwen
Diamond Member
#LiteralLegender
Joined: November 2011
Posts: 14,772
|
Post by leonagwen on Jul 12, 2017 0:52:51 GMT -5
Right now I would say either Imagine Dragons or Fall out Boy probably have the best chance.
|
|
MilesW1998
3x Platinum Member
Banned
#1 Song: Bad At Love by Halsey (1st Week)
Joined: January 2017
Posts: 3,713
|
Post by MilesW1998 on Jul 14, 2017 22:03:39 GMT -5
On the Hot 100, it's not possible any more. Radioactive is considered the most successful rock song, and the most sold one of the decade, but never went to #1. I hate to say it, but I think rock is mostly a dying or already dead genre.
|
|
craziaskowboi
2x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2015
Posts: 2,673
|
Post by craziaskowboi on Jul 17, 2017 1:49:35 GMT -5
Yes, let's talk. lol As an aside and somewhat related to the point of this thread, I do sometimes wonder if it's because rock music is a predominately white genre and pop culture has been interspersed with social issues to the point where if something appeals to primarily a white-only demographic, it is no longer enough. That's probably not the best way to put it but it has been something that I've wondered about in recent years. I also wonder if that's related to Katy Perry's recent struggle to get a hit and whether Taylor Swift is next. Is it such a thing now to be "too white"? Tell that to the 20 Country songs on the Hot 100 every single week. How many of those songs cross over to CHR?
|
|
craziaskowboi
2x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2015
Posts: 2,673
|
Post by craziaskowboi on Jul 17, 2017 3:15:59 GMT -5
I recently had a debate with people on a different message board I post on about the sad state of rock music in Atlanta. Here are some of my posts:
Maybe some of that will make sense and contribute to the discussion.
Somebody else mentioned a possible racial component to the exile of rock music from the mainstream, and to be honest, I sense it too. Rock music has historically appealed to a mostly white audience, not that the genre has ever intended to be racially exclusive. More specifically, it's a working- to middle-class suburban white audience. The problem is, nobody in the entertainment industry cares to serve this demographic anymore. These days, pop culture is produced for, and marketed to, only three general groups of people:
1. Wealthy and upper-middle-class urbanites 2. Racial and ethnic minorities 3. People in rural areas
And I have them listed in order of importance to the producers, from most to least. In general, rock music fans don't fit any of those three groups, so they ultimately don't matter to the industry. It also doesn't help that the industry is full of people with insane political views who believe that your average white American is a bigot who deserves to be culturally, socially and economically isolated. To those people, the death of rock music would probably just be considered collateral damage.
Quite frankly, I find the lack of emphasis on race, ethnicity, or even sexual identity in rock music refreshing. Rock music fans don't care that Lajon Witherspoon is black, or that Slash is half-black, or that Robert Trujillo is Mexican and Native American. They don't care that Volbeat is from Denmark, or that Sepultura is from Brazil. They don't care that Rob Halford is gay. I'd also venture that most don't care whether a musician is left-wing like Tom Morello or right-wing like Zoltan Bathory. Despite the relative lack of racial diversity among rock music fans, I'd argue that it's actually the most tolerant fan base of any genre.
|
|
|
Post by Naos on Jul 17, 2017 4:05:01 GMT -5
The last typical "rock" song I remember doing well was "The Sound of Silence" by Disturbed. Which didn't even make the Top 40. But hey, we got Metallica, Megadeth, Babymetal (yes, they are rock, fight me), and a ton of other rock music doing well on the Billboard 200. So, I guess there's a bit of a consolation.
|
|
Sherane Lamar
2x Platinum Member
Banned
Long live XXX
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 2,900
|
Post by Sherane Lamar on Jul 17, 2017 4:15:45 GMT -5
Tell that to the 20 Country songs on the Hot 100 every single week. How many of those songs cross over to CHR? CHR? You mean like the "Top 40" format? Who cares? I don't see how that's relevant at all, considering that they're clearly doing fine without CHR. A lot better than Dance, Alternative, or R&B, which are featured on CHR all the time. CHR is a very small part of the industry at this point. Maybe what? 10% of Hot 100 points comes from "CHR" stations at this point. It almost seems as if the question is implying that their popularity doesn't count without CHR. It's like me saying "Dunkin Donuts is one of the biggest chain restaurants in America, with 11,000 locations. And then you responding, "Lol, Ok. Well how many of those are actually in California?"
|
|
Sherane Lamar
2x Platinum Member
Banned
Long live XXX
Joined: February 2016
Posts: 2,900
|
Post by Sherane Lamar on Jul 17, 2017 4:32:49 GMT -5
That's not really how it works. Demographics aren't "served". People choose what they what they want to listen to. Even on the radio, the stations are constantly bending backwards to figure out what people want to listen to. You think "middle class suburban white" people (probably about 30% of the population) just don't listen to music? No. They listen to Pop, Hip-Hop, Country, Alternative, R&B, and Dance music. Really, they run the gamut. They might be less likely to be into R&B or Hip-Hop than black people. And they may be slightly less likely to be into Country than the rural population. But that still seems to be what's played by subruban white people. The average person stops paying attention to new music when they're about 35 years old. That's when the average person becomes somewhat stuck in their ways. Demographically, it's just what happens. At around 35, people tend to switch from modern hit music stations to "classics" (such as "Classic Rock" format). Advertisers pay good money to know exactly what kind of people are listening to what stations. You were right when you said that the newer generation of people simply don't like Rock. It's a genre that's been steadily declining since the early 1990's. My theory is that Alternative, Hip-Hop and Country are the people who "stole" the demographics from Rock. The rebellious youth that embraced Rock in the 1980's embrace Hip-Hop today. Rural (older) white people who listened to Rock in the 1980's listen to Country today. And the young hipster garage bands that ended up making it big are Alternative rather than Rock.
|
|