10 Years - Through The Iris

[pen]

Well, it goes for adds February 13th. I'm not very surprised since this was the other track that came from their debut album and it's been played on some stations before, but I really wish that they had chosen something like Waking Up, Fault Line, or The Recipe instead. Oh well. Here's hoping it does as well as Wasteland.

[Matt4319]

Already a top-5 hit on my personal chart. Have they pushed it back nationally? It doesn't seem to be doing great for a song that already has gone for adds (if it has).

My Pop station has already added this, apparently. :o

[American Idiot]

It goes for adds next week. I'd assume it hasn't been climbing up the charts that much due to Wasteland still extremely high up there, but I'm sure things will change in the next few weeks.

[reception]

wm.allaccess.com/allaccess/10yethro.wma

[Chato]

I don't think I like this as much as Wasteland , the outro is pretty cool although I don't think any station will play the long version . It should easily make the top10 on Active.
Jesse Hasek is one hell of a singer.

[reception]

It's featured on the Radio & Records EPK.

[Matt4319]

Man, this isn't even recurrentitis, because "Wasteland" is still #12 (and had a bullet a few days ago).

41 41 10 YEARS Through The Iris 301 293 8

Both songs have a +22 on Active Rock.

[jdmasta289]

That is just ridiculous.

Radio spins seem so RANDOM nowadays, considering Fall Out Boy have such a major video hit and yet their new single is bombing, while "Dance Dance" is stabilizing. Weezer's fourth single, followed by a #1, could barely hit top 40. Avenged Sevenfold could barely do it after a top 5. And how the hell did the new Mudvayne bomb with their most impressive single to date, even if it did well on active rock.

This just further explains why radio in no way determines popular opinion.

[pen]

I think there is just too much for radio to handle at this point. New bands all the time, old favorites popping in, someone is bound to get burned.

Weezer was on their fourth single, fourth being the key word here. Plus I don't think it was that great of a single, but that's my opinion.

I think Fall Out Boy's new single is maybe too poppy and will probably do better on those stations than alternative. From what I understand this is already shaping up to be the case.

Avenged Sevenfold's second single was deliberately less radio-friendly and that probably cost them a bit, but it seems to be doing respectably on active rock which is where they largely belong anyway.

Same with Mudvayne, who were on their third single and you mention it did well on active rock, which is more likely to play Mudvayne than alternative.

The fact is that it's going to be very hard for radio to give equal attention to everybody given everything that's been going for adds, and probably bands on their third or fourth singles are going to drop a lot faster than ones on their first or second. It's not fair, but it's just the way things are rolling.

[jdmasta289]

It's not fair, but it's just the way things are rolling.

You said a mouthful there.  I've never been a supporter of second and third singles riding off of very successful first singles, but in this case, it just isn't fair when random new bands like Blue October and Panic! can cruise into the top 5 with no avail, and returning early '90s bands can automatically get #1 spots, and second singles can't even hit top 40.

Mudvayne and Avenged Sevenfold should've gone top 25 on alternative, no exceptions.  It doesn't matter that it did well on Active Rock.  If "Happy" can go top 10 and "Bat Country" can go top 5, there is no reason equally popular follow up singles should bomb here.

It kind of reminds me of how Alice In Chains and Tool never hit the alternative chart between 91-94 despite the fact they were huge and their singles from then get played nowadays.

Again, the market is so incredibly weak (in fact, it reminds me of 1996 when returning bands like Pearl Jam among other '80s bands who I can't remember at the top my head automatically went top 5, and then plummeted).  Either you are a new band and get lucky with a few stations, you are a returning band who automatically hits #1 without videos or promotions, or you are a new band who gets burned on 2nd singles.  I mean, have 10 Years even gone gold?  And that was off of a #1 SINGLE!!!  And Nine Inch Nails and Foo Fighters definitely do not deserve to be doing this well.  And it's a telling sign that that is true because it doesn't appear NIN will even release a fourth single following THEIR #1 hit.

I think, at least commercially, 1997-2003 was the pinnacle of the alternative chart.  What alternative radio is lacking now are bands that can produce several top 10 singles and cross over, and sell millions as a result.  In 1998, the Goo Goo Dolls & Matchbox 20 were MOGULS.  In 2001, again, we had Incubus, Staind, Creed, Nickelback, among many other "commercial" bands capable of producing huge hits, crossovers, selling millions of albums, and reaching a mogul status that cannot be seen even by NIN, for example, who have produced 3 #1s and counting from the new album.  The most successful bands here in 2006 can't even go platinum (System? NIN? FF?).

On the one hand, lack of commercialism in music in 2006 can be good, and on the other hand, it can be bad.  It's "good" because we have a plethora of new sounds coming onto the scene - sounds we haven't heard before, and ones that don't fit into a particular "box" like many of the post-grunge bands did.  It's "bad" because the format needs mainstream recognition and good album sales to survive.  There have been SEVEN (7) pop crossovers this year, so far.  Either the bands are too "by the formula" to even garner enough attention here alone (a la Faktion, new Hoobastank) or they are too off-the-wall to be accepted (Hard-Fi).

A possible solution - I think we need bands that hit big around 2000 to make it big here. We need to rely on bands like Three Days Grace, Coldplay, Incubus, SOAD (among others) to SHELL IT OUT with quality, potentially crossover material. We need to prove that bands that hit big AFTER 1991 can actually sustain enough success here, to cater to the "younger" generation who may not be as familiar with grunge or vintage. People my age (ages 16-24) generally identify with bands as old as Incubus, Coldplay, and Staind, but believe it or not, RHCP and PJ fans in my age group are in the minority.

[pen]

I don't disagree with anything you've said. I think the most obvious solutions would be either more stations or to even out everyone's spins, but I don't know how effective or possible either one would be.

One thing though: System and NIN did go platinum and NIN's fourth single is Right Where It Belongs. Not taking away from your point, but I thought you should know.

[jdmasta289]

+8 bullet.

I can't even root for this song at this point, but then again, I root for the Royals, so I know how sheer hopelessness in a sea of bigger fish feels.

Geez, "So Far Away" was already up at #16 at this point.

[American Idiot]

jdmasta289 said:

I can't even root for this song at this point, but then again, I root for the Royals, so I know how sheer hopelessness in a sea of bigger fish feels.

Haha, I'm a Marlins fan, so I know what it feels like to root for something that's going on a one way track to nowhere. :(

[jdmasta289]

(Apologies...can not quote via this computer...)

"Haha, I'm a Marlins fan, so I know what it feels like to root for something that's going on a one way track to nowhere."

2 World Series Championships in 7 years ain't bad, AI. Accompanied with 3 .500+ seasons, and I'll take it.

The Royals have been downright disgusting consistently for the past 11 years, and it's only getting worse :/

2005
56-106 (.346)
2004
58-104 (.358)
2003
83-79 (.512)
2002
62-100 (.383)
2001
65-97 (.401)
2000
77-85 (.475)
1999
64-97 (.398)
1998
72-89 (.447)
1997
67-94 (.416)
1996
75-86 (.466)
1995
70-74 (.486)

Sorry for going off subject, I'm just a diehard analyst.

[American Idiot]

jdmasta289 said:

(Apologies...can not quote via this computer...)

"Haha, I'm a Marlins fan, so I know what it feels like to root for something that's going on a one way track to nowhere." 

2 World Series Championships in 7 years ain't bad, AI.  Accompanied with 3 .500+ seasons, and I'll take it.

The Royals have been downright disgusting consistently for the past 11 years, and it's only getting worse :/

2005
56-106 (.346)
2004
58-104 (.358)
2003
83-79 (.512)
2002
62-100 (.383)
2001
65-97 (.401)
2000
77-85 (.475)
1999
64-97 (.398)
1998
72-89 (.447)
1997
67-94 (.416)
1996
75-86 (.466)
1995
70-74 (.486)

Sorry for going off subject, I'm just a diehard analyst.

Wow I'd say you definitely have me beat. I had no idea they had only one season above .500 over the past decade. I mean yeah the Fish won 2 World Series Championships in 7 years, which is more than many other teams could say, but the way the ownership broke up both championshp teams is disgusting. The MLB as a whole is going down the tube everyday. Anyway, we should get back on topic here. Good luck the rest of the season.

[jdmasta289]

Thanks, AI, and good luck with the move (will you be following/cheering for them even after 2008?).  That said, the Marlins now are still an exciting team to watch.  Although both World Series teams were broken up, and it must have been sad as a Marlins fan to see those big names leave, the management's direction has been nothing but brilliant.  They have made shrewd, excellent moves, acquiring young talent - which defines a true youth movement, which the Royals have claimed to have had for 11 years but really the owner just has his head up his own ass and refuses to spend any money.  And the G.M. is a dimwit and will never be fired.  It's really depressing in K.C. right now.  (Sorry, I digress mucho....)

At least there isn't as much disparity on the alternative chart now as there is in MLB, as new bands like the Arctic Monkeys & Blue October can compete with the big boys.  In desperate attempt to get this back on topic, "Through The Iris" grows on me more and more each day.  As Gliben stated, Jesse Hasek really IS one hell of a singer.

(By the way, would there be enough interest if I started a Alternative Chart topic for every week's update?)

[American Idiot]

jdmasta289 said:

(By the way, would there be enough interest if I started a Alternative Chart topic for every week's update?)

I'm all in favor for it. I remember someone used to make a thread about it every week up until about a year or two ago, but one week I guess it just went kaput.

[tortuga]

I mean, have 10 Years even gone gold?  And that was off of a #1 SINGLE!!!

That still puzzles me as well. The album has sold 278,163 copies.

Almost 300, I guess thats good for a new band that doesn't get any critical praise.

[American Idiot]

tortuga said:

I mean, have 10 Years even gone gold?  And that was off of a #1 SINGLE!!!

That still puzzles me as well. The album has sold 278,163 copies.

Almost 300, I guess thats good for a new band that doesn't any critical praise.

Definitely. Even if their album doesn't go gold in the end, the band should still know they earned quite some good recognition and publicity, and has a good future ahead of them.