Billboard Hot 100: 3/17/2018

[Golden Bluebird]

[Harx]

Ric Flair Drip (unexpected) and Never be the Same (overdue) in top 20!!!

[Ｓｏｕｎｄｃｌ🕤ｃｋ]

Whatever It Takes #33. Next week top 25 please!

[Au$tin]

Mar 11, 2018 14:39:37 GMT -5 pja said:

Mar 11, 2018 14:32:33 GMT -5 Gary said:

There was a parental advisory sticker movement that started in the 80s that help divide between clean and explicit

That didn't allow music to be more explicit.. but having more vulgar music did cause the need for that movement. The parental advisory /clean version came into existence because people were making more and more "vulgar" music as time went on. Even comparing music from today to the 90's and its more explicit. Generally most artists now have explicit albums when 20 years ago most artists had clean albums that didn't require them to make a "cleaner" version.

The people in the 50's used the same main 2 tools to promote music as people in the 90's...radio and tv. People in the 90s still had to make sure their music was tame enough to be played on tv and on the radio...hence the clean and explicit versions.

The reason explicit versions of songs do better now than before has to do more with the way people consume music rather than a change in values.

Before: The way most people discovered new music was through radio or TV, both of which have strict policies on explicit music. The clean versions of these songs would be the ones promoted to radio and TV, meaning it's the more prominent, and most importantly, the first version of the song most people were going to hear.

Today: The internet makes it possible for a listener to listen to any song they want at any time and has become the primary source for how people discover new music, whether that be through streaming, seeing songs/videos linked on social media, or downloading them. The internet had no rules whatsoever when it comes to explicit music, and since the explicit version is the primary version of a song on any album, it's going to be the one people stumble across first. A person is a lot less likely to seek out a different version of a song than the one they are hearing, and that's the main reason you'll see explicit versions of songs perform well.

That being said, if the song is vastly explicit, like say "Tonight (I'm Fucking You)," you probably will still see the clean version perform better just because that's the version being promoted more outside of the internet. That's a whole different ballgame than a track that might drop the f-bomb one or twice somewhere in the lyrics because the differences between the two versions are drastic rather than minor.

Are values changing? Maybe, and that could have an affect on this as well, but it's definitely the sole or even the main reason. I'd argue that the reason there is more explicit music today than even 20 years ago has more to do with the rise of streaming and digital music rather than a change in values. Suddenly there's less of a need to be "radio friendly" as a lot of your listeners won't be discovering you that way anyway.

[85la]

Isn't it always the case, even regardless of genre or time period, that radio and tv can only broadcast the clean versions of songs because of FCC regulations, while with sales and streaming the explicit versions almost always outperform the clean?

It's kind of funny actually, because if even if there's an expletive in a main part of the song, like Gold Digger or Hollaback Girl, sometimes they just leave it out for the clean version and it sounds really crappy, but radio still plays it a lot and that version still seems to be somewhat popular. Like, the clean version of Gold Digger completely changes the sound/meaning/punchline from the original, and I hated it, but the original was ok for me.

[pja]

Mar 11, 2018 15:17:49 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

Mar 11, 2018 14:39:37 GMT -5 pja said:

That didn't allow music to be more explicit.. but having more vulgar music did cause the need for that movement. The parental advisory /clean version came into existence because people were making more and more "vulgar" music as time went on. Even comparing music from today to the 90's and its more explicit. Generally most artists now have explicit albums when 20 years ago most artists had clean albums that didn't require them to make a "cleaner" version.

The people in the 50's used the same main 2 tools to promote music as people in the 90's...radio and tv. People in the 90s still had to make sure their music was tame enough to be played on tv and on the radio...hence the clean and explicit versions.

The reason explicit versions of songs do better now than before has to do more with the way people consume music rather than a change in values.

Before: The way most people discovered new music was through radio or TV, both of which have strict policies on explicit music. The clean versions of these songs would be the ones promoted to radio and TV, meaning it's the more prominent, and most importantly, the first version of the song most people were going to hear.

Today: The internet makes it possible for a listener to listen to any song they want at any time and has become the primary source for how people discover new music, whether that be through streaming, seeing songs/videos linked on social media, or downloading them. The internet had no rules whatsoever when it comes to explicit music, and since the explicit version is the primary version of a song on any album, it's going to be the one people stumble across first. A person is a lot less likely to seek out a different version of a song than the one they are hearing, and that's the main reason you'll see explicit versions of songs perform well.

That being said, if the song is vastly explicit, like say "Tonight (I'm Fucking You)," you probably will still see the clean version perform better just because that's the version being promoted more outside of the internet. That's a whole different ballgame than a track that might drop the f-bomb one or twice somewhere in the lyrics because the differences between the two versions are drastic rather than minor.

Are values changing? Maybe, and that could have an affect on this as well, but it's definitely the sole or even the main reason. I'd argue that the reason there is more explicit music today than even 20 years ago has more to do with the rise of streaming and digital music rather than a change in values. Suddenly there's less of a need to be "radio friendly" as a lot of your listeners won't be discovering you that way anyway.

BEFORE streaming and BEFORE digital sales music was getting more and more explicit period. Even if streaming and digital downloads didn't exist, our values would still have gotten lax. Look at television. When I was younger "shit" was only allowed on premium channels. Now its allowed on any cable channel like AMC. 20 years ago you would have never heard that word on AMC. Our cultural in general gets more and more liberal..not just music...clothes, movies tv shows etc.

[jenglisbe]

Mar 11, 2018 14:29:14 GMT -5 jebsib said:

Very well known for the repetitive "Hey Hey Hey Hey" background chants in songs like "Rack City";
Also used by Sam Hunt, thus the main complaint from Country Purists.

Nah, country purists also take exception to the lyric that objectifies women, and production that rips off Uncle Kracker.

Even if people somehow consider this country music “evolving,” can they really defend this is a song?

[pja]

Mar 11, 2018 16:16:15 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Mar 11, 2018 14:29:14 GMT -5 jebsib said:

Very well known for the repetitive "Hey Hey Hey Hey" background chants in songs like "Rack City";
Also used by Sam Hunt, thus the main complaint from Country Purists.

Nah, country purists also take exception to the lyric that objectifies women, and production that rips off Uncle Kracker.

Even if people somehow consider this country music “evolving,” can they really defend this is a song?

Lyrics in general are more racy than they used to be...this isn't just limited to country music.

Bottom line is the song did good on country radio so a lot of country music fans must have loved it. It got number one on country radio I believe.

[mako]

Mar 11, 2018 14:02:12 GMT -5 Gary said:

Never heard of DJ Mustard, when I read it I keep thinking of Colonel Mustard and the Clue game


Probably how he picked his name anyway - LOL

He got his name from dijon mustard, and dijon was also his name. So there, DJ mustard was born.

And Ric Flair Drip rose because of video. 

[crazyb]

Nearly every rap song in 2014 had Dj Mustard for the beat

[tanooki]

Sad! at 16? Damn, I think we're gonna be seeing X around for a while.

[Harx]

Mar 11, 2018 17:01:42 GMT -5 crazyb said:

Nearly every rap song in 2014 had Dj Mustard for the beat

or was a DJ Mustard rip off (like Fancy)

[emperortigerstar]

Mar 11, 2018 3:44:52 GMT -5 Sherane Lamar said:

You'll never find BLABR and DJ Mustard played back to back on a radio station. They have virtually nothing in common, except that they are both music.

Actually, my local pop station did last year believe it or not. In fact pop stations in my area played BLABR quite a lot on a daily basis and right after hip hop songs in several cases.

[𝓲𝓽'𝓼.𝓰𝓿]

Mar 11, 2018 15:12:33 GMT -5 Ｓｏｕｎｄｃｌ🕤ｃｋ said:

Whatever It Takes #33. Next week top 25 please!

I can definitely agree with that. 

[Sherane Lamar]

Mar 11, 2018 18:26:28 GMT -5 emperortigerstar said:

Mar 11, 2018 3:44:52 GMT -5 Sherane Lamar said:

You'll never find BLABR and DJ Mustard played back to back on a radio station. They have virtually nothing in common, except that they are both music.

Actually, my local pop station did last year believe it or not. In fact pop stations in my area played BLABR quite a lot on a daily basis and right after hip hop songs in several cases.

I know they do. 

I guess I can imagine some of the more Pop-oriented DJ Mustard songs like "Needed Me" or "Post To Be" meeting in the middle with BLABR. 

Where I'm at we have a big urban station and a pop station. The pop station will play light urban and every once in a while a Country song like Cruise or BLABR. 

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Mar 11, 2018 15:17:49 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

Mar 11, 2018 14:39:37 GMT -5 pja said:

That didn't allow music to be more explicit.. but having more vulgar music did cause the need for that movement. The parental advisory /clean version came into existence because people were making more and more "vulgar" music as time went on. Even comparing music from today to the 90's and its more explicit. Generally most artists now have explicit albums when 20 years ago most artists had clean albums that didn't require them to make a "cleaner" version.

The people in the 50's used the same main 2 tools to promote music as people in the 90's...radio and tv. People in the 90s still had to make sure their music was tame enough to be played on tv and on the radio...hence the clean and explicit versions.

The reason explicit versions of songs do better now than before has to do more with the way people consume music rather than a change in values.

Before: The way most people discovered new music was through radio or TV, both of which have strict policies on explicit music. The clean versions of these songs would be the ones promoted to radio and TV, meaning it's the more prominent, and most importantly, the first version of the song most people were going to hear.

Today: The internet makes it possible for a listener to listen to any song they want at any time and has become the primary source for how people discover new music, whether that be through streaming, seeing songs/videos linked on social media, or downloading them. The internet had no rules whatsoever when it comes to explicit music, and since the explicit version is the primary version of a song on any album, it's going to be the one people stumble across first. A person is a lot less likely to seek out a different version of a song than the one they are hearing, and that's the main reason you'll see explicit versions of songs perform well.

That being said, if the song is vastly explicit, like say "Tonight (I'm Fucking You)," you probably will still see the clean version perform better just because that's the version being promoted more outside of the internet. That's a whole different ballgame than a track that might drop the f-bomb one or twice somewhere in the lyrics because the differences between the two versions are drastic rather than minor.

Are values changing? Maybe, and that could have an affect on this as well, but it's definitely the sole or even the main reason. I'd argue that the reason there is more explicit music today than even 20 years ago has more to do with the rise of streaming and digital music rather than a change in values. Suddenly there's less of a need to be "radio friendly" as a lot of your listeners won't be discovering you that way anyway.

Music is more explicit today because, gradually, over time, artists push the envelop. That's one of the main points of art. Push the envelop, make a statement, do something not done before. One of the ways to do that is to put words, phrases, concepts, etc, in songs that hadn't been tried before. Some work, some don't. Those that work eventually become more of the norm and then someone else will try the next attempt at pushing the envelop. So to go from songs in the 50s and 60s about cotton candy to songs in the 2010s about sex or whatever, it's a big leap. But filling in that gap, not so much.

And as Au$tin said, non-edited versions of songs are easier to access now so that particular line is now completely wide open and it's no longer a big deal to have multiple 4-letter words in a song, or even the title for that matter.

[Deleted]

I think a big reason we get so few direct remakes these days is royalties. The artist doesn't get any radio royalties, for example, if they didn't either write the song or mess with the original enough to get a writing credit. In the US, only songwriters get royalties, not labels or artists. It's a major loss of revenue by not giving yourself partial credit.

It's the original song that's going to give the song some built-in familiarity and potential success, in most cases, so why not pay the piper AND get paid, right?



EDIT:  Didn't realize a few pages of posts weren't viewed yet while typing this.  It sounds so random now.

[ry4n]

As I posted before, I think the influx of Glee, American Idol, the Voice and YouTube covers have made the cover song less respected. It's seen as karaoke nowadays.

[Deleted]

Mar 12, 2018 8:32:54 GMT -5 ry4n said:

As I posted before, I think the influx of Glee, American Idol, the Voice and YouTube covers have made the cover song less respected. It's seen as karaoke nowadays.

That may be true and I've honestly never thought of it that way.  However, this also reminded me that the reason the songwriters allow shows like Glee and Idol to perform/record their songs is for the royalties etc.  This supports my point that it's likely more about taking advantage of a revenue stream than anything else.  I also think people like familiarity, which is why sampling and interpolating are so common... so I'm not sure I can fully get behind your point about remakes being uncool.

It's interesting to read about royalties and such. I didn't realize there were 2 bonuses:

Under the BMI radio payment system, each feature work, including those written for films and the theater, can become eligible for up to three distinct royalty payment components each quarter. They are called the CURRENT ACTIVITY PAYMENT, the HIT SONG BONUS and the STANDARDS BONUS.

Source

[Gary]

I think we established lots of covers out there. None are hits as new pop songs (and I guess old ones) not the "flavor of the moment"

as we can see from Disturbed "Sound of Silence" - it sold really well - but the "streamers" out there never took to it - probably not hip-hop enough.

[Golden Bluebird]

kworb.net/airadio/

*** = Dropped or added a format

Overall AI (Top 20) - 03/12/2018
1. (=) BRUNO MARS & CARDI B - Finesse (188.606) (+0.135)
2. (=) ED SHEERAN - Perfect (170.482) (-1.412)
3. (=) DRAKE - God's Plan (130.917) (+0.701)
4. (=) BEBE REXHA - Meant To Be f/F.G.L. (129.841) (+1.304)
5. (=) DUA LIPA - New Rules (124.177) (-1.862)
6. (=) G-EAZY & HALSEY - Him & I (123.684) (-0.391)
7. (=) CAMILA CABELLO - Havana f/Young Thug (121.651) (-1.472)
8. (=) MAX - Lights Down Low (111.938) (-0.507)
9. (=) NF - Let You Down (110.056) (-0.589)
10. (=) THE WEEKND & KENDRICK LAMAR - Pray For Me (95.181) (+0.829)
11. (+1) ZEDD/MAREN MORRIS/GREY - The Middle (91.329) (+0.432)
12. (-1) SELENA GOMEZ X MARSHMELLO - Wolves (91.079) (-0.896)
13. (=) CHARLIE PUTH - How Long (87.905) (-2.071)
14. (=) HALSEY - Bad At Love (78.422) (-1.574)
15. (=) PORTUGAL. THE MAN - Feel It Still (72.616) (-0.190)
16. (=) IMAGINE DRAGONS - Thunder (71.164) (-1.204)
17. (=) POST MALONE - Rockstar f/21 Savage (70.385) (-1.593)
18. (=) THOMAS RHETT - Marry Me (69.819) (-0.432)
19. (+1) CHRIS STAPLETON - Broken Halos (68.673) (+0.006)
20. (-1) KENDRICK LAMAR - LOVE. (67.494) (-2.319)

Outside the Top 20:
22. (=) IMAGINE DRAGONS - Whatever It Takes (66.744) (+2.225)

[imbondz]

I can’t stand all of the explicit material available. It’s a sad statement on the music industry and society as a whole in my opinion. Not a fan of being around people that cuss a lot don’t want to hear it in music. I think it’s usually a sign of insecurity if you have to cuss a lot.

[lazer]

Mar 12, 2018 8:43:13 GMT -5 Gary said:

I think we established lots of covers out there. None are hits as new pop songs (and I guess old ones) not the "flavor of the moment"

as we can see from Disturbed "Sound of Silence" - it sold really well - but the "streamers" out there never took to it - probably not hip-hop enough.

More like not enough Drake or Post Malone

[Gary]

Either way - that works for me - LOL

[smiley22]

Mar 12, 2018 10:04:55 GMT -5 imbondz said:

I can’t stand all of the explicit material available. It’s a sad statement on the music industry and society as a whole in my opinion. Not a fan of being around people that cuss a lot don’t want to hear it in music. I think it’s usually a sign of insecurity if you have to cuss a lot.

How did the Hot 100 thread get hijacked by the anti-cuss crowd. Slow news day maybe? Freedom of choice.

[Gary]

Actually that was just one post.

The discussion was actually about the history and growth of explicit music

[Gary]

G-Eazy & Halsey's 'Him & I' Hits No. 1 on Pop Songs Airplay Chart

The song is each artist's second Pop Songs leader.

G-Eazy and Halsey top Billboard's Pop Songs radio airplay chart (dated March 17), as "Him & I" rises 2-1.

The track is each artist's second Pop Songs leader. G-Eazy led the list for two weeks beginning April 23, 2016, with "Me, Myself & I," featuring Bebe Rexha, while Halsey reigned for 11 weeks beginning Oct. 8, 2016, as featured on The Chainsmokers' "Closer." Thus, "Him & I" marks her first Pop Songs No. 1 as a lead act.

The Pop Songs chart measures total weekly plays, as tabulated by Nielsen Music, among its reporting panel of 160 mainstream top 40 stations.

As for him and her romantically, G-Eazy and Halsey aren't the first couple in real life to top Pop Songs together: Beyonce led the list dated Aug. 16, 2003, with "Crazy in Love," featuring then-future husband JAY-Z.

Among other moves on Pop Songs, Camila Cabello earns her fourth top 10 as a soloist, as "Never Be the Same" surges 14-10. (Fifth Harmony, which Cabello left in December 2016, tallied two top 10s while she was a member.)

Plus, Meghan Trainor's "No Excuses" is the Pop Songs chart's Greatest Gainer, jumping 40-26 with a 211 percent increase in plays.

G-Eazy and Halsey's "Him & I" has hit a No. 14 high on the streaming-, airplay- and sales-based Billboard Hot 100. Highlights of the March 17-dated Hot 100's top 10 will be revealed later today and all charts will update tomorrow (March 13) on Billboard.com.

[Choco]

Him & I has a good chance to join the following songs as the only Pop #1s to miss the top 10 on the Hot 100 since 2000:

"Let You Down" - NF (#12 so far)
"Slow Hands" - Niall Horan (#11)
"Give Your Heart a Break" - Demi Lovato (#16)
"Leave (Get Out)" - JoJo (#14)
"With You" - Jessica Simpson (#14)

(I might be missing something? Up until early last year the list was just those three ladies, and I don't think anything else since that missed top 10 except "Slow Hands" and "Let You Down").

[Golden Bluebird]

[rimetm]

Choco , Leave (Get Out) peaked at #12, actually. Otherwise, yeah, I checked the pop songs' number one list from that time period, and only those 5 have done so so far.