Mediabase Top 100

[oscillations.]

Here are the Top 100 biggest Alternative songs of 2007

pdf.mediabase.com/YearEnd07/YearEnd07.pdf

(forward to page 39)

#1 is Finger Eleven's "Paralyzer"

Muse is #11 (Starlight) and #35 (Supermassive Black Hole); 30 Seconds To Mars, Linkin Park, and Incubus have TWO songs in the Top 20. NIN ranked lower than expected (and Capital G charts higher than the #1 Survivalism!) Overall, Warner Bros. was the #1 Alternative label this year, thanks to successes from RHCP, Linkin Park, and Muse.

The Top 20:

[oscillations.]

Most Played:

[pen]

It's kind of jarring how much radio performance seems to not impact album sales as much anymore. Take Incubus and Papa Roach as examples.

[crash46]

For as good of a year for music it seemed to be, I sure wish that top 6 had ended up more interspersed throughout the top 100. All these songs I was never rooting for at any point just all crammed up there at the top.

[pen]

So what you're really trying to say is "Man, I wish those songs hadn't done as well as they did."

[jdmasta289]

Much of it has to do with timing. Consider that Three Days Grace, Linkin Park, Breaking Benjamin, and (to a slightly lesser extent) Papa Roach are bands known for their undying longevity on the charts. Each of these bands happened to release these songs earlier in the year, enough to accumulate enough airplay. They're obviously doing something right if they can shell out these hits and maintain them for 30+ weeks consistently.

[Crushcrushchris]

Finger Eleven having the #1 song of the year is great. Congrats to them for beating the powerhouse Linkin Park. And congrats to them for getting that second hit when they were considered a one-hit wonder...that song took practically the whole year to peak.

[jazklash]

Dec 16, 2007 21:13:56 GMT -5 pen said:

It's kind of jarring how much radio performance seems to not impact album sales as much anymore. Take Incubus and Papa Roach as examples.

Or maybe - just maybe - the problem with Modern Rock radio runs very much deeper than that.

www.deaconlight.com/music/ddt/radio1983/

Really, when one proceeds to read Part 1 of the link above, it's hard not to read some parallels into what's been happening to the Modern Rock format for some years already. And the fact that 2007 signaled a new low both in terms of ratings numbers and the number of stations that fit into the format SHOULD function as a final wake-up call to all those who run the show.
This link below should also shed some more lights on this subject.

www.chicagoreader.com/features/stories/ourtown/070615/q101/

[pen]

I'm kind of unsure as to what you're proposing. I get that the second article is talking about how less people listen to alternative because they don't need radio to hear new songs anymore, and to some extent that's true. I myself don't even really listen to radio much if at all.

But the second article also suggests that taking too many risks with a playlist could backfire and that radio is better off trying to cater to as many people as possible, while the first article seems to be suggesting that radio should take a lot of risks and abandon mainstream material completely.

So which is it that you're trying to recommend? Because one article is saying the opposite of the other.

And personally, I think the latter option would only turn even more people off of radio. I don't listen to radio regularly because I don't need it to find new music, but when I do, it'd be nice to know I could hear stuff I'd actually like as opposed to something so underground only ten people are going to want to hear it.

[jdmasta289]

Some people love to bitch about the state of Alternative/Rock radio because it doesn't exactly fit their extremely anti-"corporate" criteria, which includes, like, 97% of the bands that exist on the format.

I've been hearing "alternative radio is dying" since, when? 1997.

Get over it, folks. It ain't dying. If anything, considering the plethora of different sounds that get played in 2007/08, it's better now than it's ever been.

I'll buy the argument that it doesn't affect album sales anymore. mp3 players and iPods have changed the music industry, leading to decreased album sales and radio listening. If alternative is dying, then so is every other format.

On what format can you listen to the Foo Fighters, Amy Winehouse, the White Stripes, Rise Against, and Nickelback? Alternative, that's where. Five artists who wouldn't be caught dead touring with one another. (OK, maybe not to that extreme, but you catch my drift).

My only quip with the current format is that it doesn't circumvent all that was once ginormous on the format (i.e. Lilith, '00s pop-rock and non-grunge early '90s).

[jazklash]

I will try and elaborate further later. But my bone of contention is very simple, really. The reason why Modern Rock radio is in even worse shape than pretty much all other formats has to do - aside from all the changes within the music industry - with one factor at large: it's completely out of touch. In every shape and form imaginable.

[pen]

Completely out of touch with who is the question here. I'm not saying you may not have a point, but it's been my experience that people who present these kinds of theories are also very, for lack of a better term, selfish.