Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2015 16:32:22 GMT -5
I am a true chart watcher and I couldn't care less what people internationally think. I live in the USA. Just as I don't care about charts elsewhere and nor would I expect others elsewhere to care about that.
Now, I am really sick of this argument you try to make. The country didn't engage in a conspiracy to hold hip hop down! I wanted a chart that reflected what I heard on the radio, A LOT OF WHICH WAS HIP HOP!!! When you could no longer readily buy a single of the songs you heard on the radio, the chart skewed towards music I did not hear on the radio. So, I along with many others no longer gave a crap about the Hot 100. I wasn't going to pay $10-$12 for an album I may not like because 1 song I did was on it. Nor were a lot of others. And even if we had, album sales weren't figured into the Hot 100, only those singles were so it wouldn't have mattered..
|
|
|
Post by 80sat40fan on Sept 14, 2015 16:56:56 GMT -5
Paul... The country may not have engaged in a conspiracy to hold hip hop down but many Top 40 programmers didn't want rap played on their radio stations. Many stations who did feature rap wouldn't play rap songs until after 3:00 during the week as kids wouldn't listen to the radio until after school was dismissed. In some markets like in St. Louis where I lived in the 90s, Top 40 stations didn't play any rap until 1997 or 1998. For me, I believed Casey's Top 40/Radio & Records was much more accurate or more in line with my taste in music than Billboard. By 1995 or 1996, I didn't recognize half of the songs on the Hot 100 yet I knew many songs listed on the Adult Top 40 and Modern Rock charts.
Also, the fact that Rick Dees' Weekly Top 40 would routinely skip rap songs during its countdown meant that many Top 40 stations didn't want rap played on their stations.
I think there's a difference between hip hop and rap. I think there are a number of 90s hip hop songs which could be played today but not rap. Unfortunately, many stations think rap and hip hop are the same.
Finally... I think rap and hip hop songs did better in the 90s on the charts than rock as most hip hop fans would buy the single, whereas most rock fans would buy the compact disc. In hindsight, many rock songs which didn't hit the Top 10 are still being played today while many rap and some hip hop songs which hit the Top 5 haven't been played in years. Maybe Billboard should give some weight to album/CD sales when determining the Hot 100.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2015 17:11:02 GMT -5
Paul... The country may not have engaged in a conspiracy to hold hip hop down but many Top 40 programmers didn't want rap played on their radio stations. Many stations who did feature rap wouldn't play rap songs until after 3:00 during the week as kids wouldn't listen to the radio until after school was dismissed. In some markets like in St. Louis where I lived in the 90s, Top 40 stations didn't play any rap until 1997 or 1998. For me, I believed Casey's Top 40/Radio & Records was much more accurate or more in line with my taste in music than Billboard. By 1995 or 1996, I didn't recognize half of the songs on the Hot 100 yet I knew many songs listed on the Adult Top 40 and Modern Rock charts. Also, the fact that Rick Dees' Weekly Top 40 would routinely skip rap songs during its countdown meant that many Top 40 stations didn't want rap played on their stations. I think there's a difference between hip hop and rap. I think there are a number of 90s hip hop songs which could be played today but not rap. Unfortunately, many stations think rap and hip hop are the same. Finally... I think rap and hip hop songs did better in the 90s on the charts than rock as most hip hop fans would buy the single, whereas most rock fans would buy the compact disc. In hindsight, many rock songs which didn't hit the Top 10 are still being played today while many rap and some hip hop songs which hit the Top 5 haven't been played in years. Maybe Billboard should give some weight to album/CD sales when determining the Hot 100. There were also many CHR stations that were Rhythmic and didn't play a lot of the other CHR type songs. There were also many that played it all. Dees's show eventually became based on the rhythmic chart for awhile. And until then I feel they did the smart thing business wise by not playing stuff they believed would make the show less appealing to the broader radio audience. Remember, this was an era of 3 4 hour radio shows battling for airtime not to mention 2 or 3 more 3 hour shows. Did I LIKE the decision not to play them? No. Did I find radios definition of rap and hard rock haphazard at best? Yes. But do I think there was a concerted effort across radio to keep hip hop down? No, I don't. Radio stations are going to format based on their listenership. That's where my disagreement really comes. If you are going to champion 1 that's skewed in favor of one style of music since the others aren't on anywhere near a level playing field, don't gripe when others are either doing the same thing or are on a much more level one.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Sept 14, 2015 17:19:20 GMT -5
However, R&R was more accurate on what was being played on stations (it being an airplay chart) and that was a more accepting choice to Program Directors with the fragmentation and demise of CHR at the end of the 80s. There's both truth and falsehoods to this. The falsehoods come as far as "accuracy". During the 80s, R&R's Pop chart could be more-or-less comparable to the Hot 100 Airplay chart (in the playlist era, it was printed in Billboard from October 20, 1984 through June 1, 1991). And that's one major nuance to keep in mind - comparing R&R to the Hot 100 is NOT apples-to-apples. Once you compare R&R and Hot 100 Airplay, the only real difference that would likely exist is in the reporting panels of stations to each magazine. While there'd be a LOT of overlap (meaning, stations who reported to both magazines' charts), there no doubt were plenty of stations that only reported to one or the other. As someone who currently tracks both the Mediabase CHR/Pop chart and Billboard's Mainstream Top 40 chart closely today, I can tell you that reporting panel differences still exist, and likely always will. The difference isn't very large today, but it's there. BUT: Does this make either one's chart more or less accurate than the other? I would say, no. As we moved into the 90s...Billboard began monitoring airplay. R&R would as well, but did not begin this until a few years later. I have a good idea as to why R&R may have waited: In the first few years, Billboard's monitored radio panel was quite smaller than its overall radio panel had been at the time of the 1991 methodology switch. Between a third and half of the 220-some stations, all of them in larger-end markets, were the starting monitored stations. The technology was simply not further advanced, yet, to expand beyond that sooner. It also must be noted that smaller-to-unmonitored-medium markets continued to submit playlists to count towards the Hot 100, in the meantime, until of course they converted to monitoring. Why do I make the point about monitored airplay? Well...to better explain exactly what you're dealing with whenever you compare Billboard's airplay chart to R&R's, during the 90s. R&R would still have had a fuller scope of stations, whereas Billboard's officially-designated airplay chart (used for AT40 during 1992) consisted solely of larger-end market station monitored airplay. Smaller stations continued to submit playlists to count towards the Hot 100, but these did NOT count towards the Hot 100 Airplay chart. As strange as that sounds, that is exactly how it was set up post-1991. Again, IMHO, During the 90s, the Hot 100 was NOT the better chart because airplay did not have to come from single releases. Billboard really messed up by requiring a singles release for inclusion on the Hot 100 up until 1997-98. They should have instituted that policy a lot sooner. A good time to have done it was during the Nov. 1991 shakeup. If Billboard had, they would be the better chart data wise and it may have kept a lot of the rap and country from overtaking the chart during the 90s. The Hot 100 could have been more of a true "POP" chart as it was before. Yes, and no. I'd be inclined to disagree with you on Billboard lifting the "single release" restriction right away in 1991, but only to the extent that at that time, singles were still very much prevalent. By the time labels began cutting back on "single" releases even just a few years later, then yes, that would absolutely have been great timing to ax that rule. Certainly, waiting until December 1998 to do it was all kinds of foolish. But then again...having that restriction removed right from the get-go probably wouldn't have been a big deal had they done so in '91. One other thing to consider, though - non-"single" airplay at that time largely came from stations playing other album cuts purely of their own volition. At best, this consisted of future true "singles" getting earlier starts on their airplay. Songs that were never destined for single release, for commercial sale or promotion-only (I'm NOT talking about the "Don't Speak"s of the world here), would ultimately see their airplay only go so far. Therefore, while such airplay could have reached a threshold high enough to allow appearing on the Hot 100 (if able)...such songs would only go so high there (ultimately, not very high, I have to think). As far as "keeping rap and country off the chart" - simply put, NO. Records that sold like mad - the "Indian Outlaw"s and Puff Daddys of the world - would have had no business being kept off, the Hot 100's status as a "Pop" chart be d**ned.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Sept 14, 2015 17:22:31 GMT -5
Maybe Billboard should give some weight to album/CD sales when determining the Hot 100. Album sales are so abysmal these days that to suggest that they should be integrated into the Hot 100 is flat-out ridiculous. As it stands, the reverse is actually going on - streaming counts toward the Billboard 200 album chart, and the formula includes a way of integrating individually-streamed tracks into that. To give just an example, the massive success of "Uptown Funk" this year is what's kept its respective album at the levels it's been at on that chart.
|
|
|
Post by 80sat40fan on Sept 14, 2015 17:31:17 GMT -5
Maybe Billboard should give some weight to album/CD sales when determining the Hot 100. Album sales are so abysmal these days that to suggest that they should be integrated into the Hot 100 is flat-out ridiculous. Mike... had Billboard incorporated album and CD sales into the mix in the 70s, 80s and 90s, we wouldn't have had ridiculous songs like "If Wishes Came True" by Sweet Sensation hitting #1 and "Baby Love" by Regina hitting the Top 10, and songs like "Carry On Wayward Son" would have easily been Top 10 and maybe Top 5 with other his like "The Boys Are Back In Town", "Rock & Roll All Night", and other rockers hitting the Top 10. In making my comment, I forgot about sluggish album sales today but you have to admit, including album/DC sales back in the day would have produced a chart that was somewhat more reflective of the era then... not to mention what is played on heritage radio today.
|
|
|
Post by 80sat40fan on Sept 14, 2015 17:43:50 GMT -5
Back to trekkielo's original question... if Radio & Records' charts were featured on the shows listed below, it had to be considered at least a noteworthy chart during the 80s, 90s and early 00s. This information is listed on Wikipedia's page for Radio & Records: Use in countdown shows: Countdown America used the CHR/Pop chart in the mid-1980s for this four-hour countdown show hosted by John Leader and Radio & Records writer Dave Sholin. Casey Kasem used the Radio & Records Charts for his countdown shows in the latter part of his career: - The CHR/Pop chart was used for "Casey's Top 40" (January 1989 – March 1998) and "American Top 40" (March 1998 – October 2000, and August 2001 – January 2004).
- The Hot AC chart was used for both "Casey's Hot 20" and American Top 20".
- The AC chart was used for "Casey's Countdown"/"American Top 20".
Rockin' America Top 30 Countdown also used Radio & Records charts in the mid to late 1980's, with Scott Shannon as the host of this Westwood One's weekly show. The TV Show Solid Gold used the CHR/Pop Chart. The Country chart was used for CMT's Country Countdown USA, Jeff Foxworthy's "The Foxworthy Countdown" and "Bob Kingsley's Country Top 40," but these have switched to Mediabase 24/7 chart data. Radio & Records also supplied information for past syndicated country music countdown programs (including "The Weekly Country Music Countdown" (1981-early 2000s), and it was the source used on the syndicated daily radio program "Solid Gold Country." Rick Dees Weekly Top 40 (1985-1995, 1997–2005) Red Letter Rock 20 Weekend 22[6] The Urban Contemporary chart was used for "The Countdown", a two-hour program hosted by Walt "Baby" Love.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Sept 14, 2015 17:51:29 GMT -5
Album sales are so abysmal these days that to suggest that they should be integrated into the Hot 100 is flat-out ridiculous. Mike... had Billboard incorporated album and CD sales into the mix in the 70s, 80s and 90s, we wouldn't have had ridiculous songs like "If Wishes Came True" by Sweet Sensation hitting #1 and "Baby Love" by Regina hitting the Top 10, and songs like "Carry On Wayward Son" would have easily been Top 10 and maybe Top 5 with other his like "The Boys Are Back In Town", "Rock & Roll All Night", and other rockers hitting the Top 10. In making my comment, I forgot about sluggish album sales today but you have to admit, including album/DC sales back in the day would have produced a chart that was somewhat more reflective of the era then... not to mention what is played on heritage radio today. I can only shrug at the latter, but as to the former: Oh well? Wishing that one's favorites would have been able to rank higher isn't good reason to suggest that the chart would have been better if configured in such a way as to reflect so. There's plenty of big hits that just won't be all that likeable - that song "Uptown Funk", that I mentioned? Yeah, a #1 hit for 14 weeks. And I've never been able to stand the song at all.
|
|
|
Post by djjoe1960 on Sept 14, 2015 18:48:41 GMT -5
As some one who worked in radio from 79-85, I can tell you that the radio industry preferred Radio & Records because it was an airplay ONLY chart and clued you into what other stations that were your same format were playing (A/C, CHR, Country, Soul). The reason that so many countdown shows used the R & R charts was two fold: 1) no fees paid to use the charts & 2) the countdown shows would more accurately reflect what radio was playing in any given week. However, I will say that Billboard & Cash Box in the 1980's probably more accurately reflected the general public's musical tastes--as both magazines used both air play and sales data to compile their weekly charts. I get into discussions with a friend of mine about this and we both agree that a true rank of popularity is really reflected in how many copies something sells--not just if people want to hear it played 'for free'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2015 19:03:37 GMT -5
As some one who worked in radio from 79-85, I can tell you that the radio industry preferred Radio & Records because it was an airplay ONLY chart and clued you into what other stations that were your same format were playing (A/C, CHR, Country, Soul). The reason that so many countdown shows used the R & R charts was two fold: 1) no fees paid to use the charts & 2) the countdown shows would more accurately reflect what radio was playing in any given week. However, I will say that Billboard & Cash Box in the 1980's probably more accurately reflected the general public's musical tastes--as both magazines used both air play and sales data to compile their weekly charts. I get into discussions with a friend of mine about this and we both agree that a true rank of popularity is really reflected in how many copies something sells--not just if people want to hear it played 'for free'. But if said item is not for sale as a single...
|
|
|
Post by djjoe1960 on Sept 14, 2015 20:11:38 GMT -5
Paul, (McCartney?)
During the 1970's & 1980's there were very few songs played on the radio that were not issued as singles, although I know it became more common after I got out of radio (in the late 80's and beyond). I also know that singles sales dwindled but how do you judge a song's popularity if it doesn't equal sales. In the business we used to call certain hits as 'turntable hits' meaning that people liked to listen to certain songs on the radio but did not actually go out and buy them. I also recall that around the year 2000 there were a few lists that indicated the most played songs on the radio but not all of those songs were big sellers. I guess the real question that this forum raises is 'who are the charts for anyway'? The industry or the music fans.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2015 4:25:04 GMT -5
I'm not talking about the 70s or 80s. I'm talking about the 90s. I judge a songs popularity because I am of the belief if songs are constantly played on the radio and they aren't liked by the audience; the audience will turn the station off.
To answer the last question, I believe primarily it is for the industry, not fans. If were for fans, the charts wouldn't have even published in trade publications that discussed the ins and outs of the business and charged the high sub rate they did.
|
|
|
Post by blackbowl68 on Sept 15, 2015 10:09:37 GMT -5
Paul, the original premise of the thread was why chart information from Radio & Records trekkelo was supplying was being rejected from revisions to Wikipedia articles. Posters were just giving plausible explanations as to why this was happening.
While you may find this airplay-only based data important because you live in the USA, the articles in question are read by people from all different countries who value sales-based data more. And many of these US airplay-only hits WERE released as singles in these countries. Billboard already has charts data that will suffice for their US chart performance since it is respected worldwide. Radio & Records data comes off redundant & inferior from an international perspective.
|
|
|
Post by trekkielo on Sept 18, 2015 9:45:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by blackbowl68 on Sept 18, 2015 11:53:49 GMT -5
I read that talk page. No offense, trekkielo, but it looks like your motive to include R&R chart data is to give the impression to Wikipedia readers that the Electric Light Orchestra had a #1 song in the USA. I still feel this info should not be included because its source does not use sales data.
|
|