Freejooky did that a few months ago and there’s a TON of great suggestions in it.
Freejooky knows everything about music and is awesome.
We need a Freejooky appreciation thread for all he contributes to every discussion about music. An invaluable asset to the boards, I feel.
That’s the real point of my original question; those bands are more marketable and accessible than what those stations are currently playing.
Let’s take the New Pornographers, for example. Their music is so poppy, so catchy and infectious that it makes Blink 182 sound like John Cage by comparison; each of their songs has about four hooks, each stronger than most other bands’ choruses. They have a ridiculously hot singer, at that - it’s not like they’re Wilco or something. 
So that’s my real question - how could they not see this cash cow in the making? How could they try to stick with something like My Chemical Romance when something like the New Pornos would be a guaranteed thing?
I think it must just boil down to the major label system; though Matador (the new pornographers’ label) is one of the largest indies out there, radio simply won’t play them because of the whole major label payola-based monopoly on radio.
I have to agree… even though music distribution is so much faster, cheaper, and more massive these days, the publicity engine is still the same as it was in the '50s, which keeps the music scene stagnate.
As a side note, I recall when MTV2 was originally launched. At first I was dubious, expecting it to be more crap. After a few late nights of watching, I noticed that they played a lot of off-the-scene videos pretty frequently, as well as classics that never got played anymore, without very much of the “top 10” mentality that MTV has- no, is.
Of course, this didn’t make very much money, so they crappified it, but it was interesting for a while. I picked up several new favorite artists from it. But I believe this shows how the system is set against itself.
Just asserting it doesn’t make it so, and while you make some decent arguments, the evidence really isn’t backing you up here. Time and time again, the music-buying public has shown that they’re interested primarily in bubblegum pop and stuff that doesn’t stray too far from it.
Yeah, maybe the major-label payola system is a factor too. Didn’t Infinity just forbid its DJs from participating in that? I’d be interested to see how that plays out. I’d certainly like to hear more variety on the radio…
That doesn’t really tell you how to find new music on your own, though. That’s a different issue.
Yeah, I would’ve linked to one, but I couldn’t find any that aren’t pop-up hell. I looked over a chart of all the top 40 singles of 1972, and while I don’t really remember if “Billy Don’t Be A Hero” was in there, that’s the sort of stuff we’re talking about.
Somebody on here–I think it was gobear–once said that listening to the radio and complaining there’s no good music out there is a lot like going to McDonald’s and complaining that there’s nothing good to eat in all the world. What are you interested in? Start a thread over in Cafe Society, and you’ll get more recommendations than you know what to do with.
I know that sounds like a cop-out of sorts, but there really are more styles out there today than you can shake the proverbial stick at.
That is a valid point, and a lovely comparison. Props to Gobear.
For the record, I don’t listen to the radio at all, finding it to be dreck almost universally. I hear about new music from happening upon it - in “related artists” guides popular on any music site, or browsing through records at local record stores (actual records, not like Tower Records), or on forums, or on other people’s playlists, or that my friends listen to. One of my problems is that I have a fairly diverse taste in music, and most of that taste lies outside the sphere of what 90% of the planet is willing to even listen to (a list of my my top 25 favorite contemporary artists would probably make eyes roll). Then there are some artists who come soooo close to being good, but are just a few notes off and it ruins the entire thing.
However, in my descriptions of “good music of the 70s” above, I am referring to artists like Hendrix, whose equal hasn’t been seen since. And I’m not looking for something that sounds like Hendrix - I’m looking for something that has that kind of quality.
That’s the first I’ve heard of that, but remember that DJs are not the focus of the current payola setup: it’s the record companies, the radio stations, and the “research groups” that facilitate the transfer of money from one to the other. Forbidding DJs from taking payola would not even be a drop in the bucket in terms of taking songs on their own merits.
My favorite theory as to why there is so little variety in rock music on the radio is that, even given a “free market”, people are lazy and want to keep their job.
– DJs play what their PM tells them to play, they have no choice in the matter.
– PMs play what the “market research firms” tell them to play, since their parent corporations are getting money for it.
– The radio corporations play along with this because, even if they sacrifice some ratings, they will still make more money due to the payola. So, it is emphatically NOT all about what the “public wants”.
– The “research firms” get a cut of this money, so why should they put themselves out of business?
Now we get to the record companies, who are the only people who actually have a financial interest in putting out good music, since if the music is good enough, they won’t have to subsidize it with payola.
I think the record companies and the execs therein are basically following the old “no one ever got firing for buying IBM” strategy, in promoting sound-alike bands.
It’s best to not think outside the box, since if you do and you produce a whopping hit, in a couple years it will be back for “so what have you done for me LATELY?” Whereas if you take a risk and fail you’ll get canned.
So, the reason there is so little choice in rock is because the major labels put out sound-alike music as a conservative money-making strategy, which works because they have control over radio stations playlists through payola.
Market analysis is an integral part of the music industry, and it is fairly conservative. And why not? The setup it has works well for what it was designed to do–to make money for the music industry. I have no doubt that if they had any reason to believe that playing the New Pornographers would make them more money than they’re currently making, they’d be all over it.
Off the top of my head, I can think of a couple stations–KEXP and WWCD–that probably would play them. It would be interesting to see just how they fare compared to their competitors. I’m almost certain that they’re niche stations; that the public at large rejects them in favor of what’s more familiar.
Here, by the way, is a brief discussion on Infinity’s dropping the payola system.
First, how I keep in touch:
Second, I do believe that payola and marketing has a lot to do with this, although every now and again an indie act does manage to break through: Interpol and Modest Mouse come to mind. But it is so much easier for moderately talented big-label acts to dominate. If there was any justice in the world, Ben Gibbard and all of his projects would be the biggest star out there because he makes the most perfect pop in the world (Death Cab for Cutie and The Postal Service). Although both of those acts are just under the surface of the big-time, I would still be shocked to hear them on commercial radio.
I will also posit other factors. The Buggles observed that video kiled the radio star in the 1980s: suddenly, appearances mattered. The record companies scrambled to make the flashiest, most attractive rock stars. That served very well to diminsh the importance and variety of album-oriented radio starting in the 1980s: videos were simply the record companies’ focus now. While the early 90s grunge/“alternative” scene slowed that a little, it has really been an inexorable march. With MTV no longer (or rarely) playing videos, though, the video is dying, and all hail the Internet and now, satellite radio. There are no limits to how dirty or ugly your music can be, and people like Lil Jon and Juvenile and the Dirty South eat that up. On the other end, the Internet is a great equalized in distribution for those interested in different music. So now commercial radio really doesn’t matter, as the record companies are still geared to selling videos and attractive premade pop products like Ashlee Simpson. I bet within a few years, commercial radio will start to come back with a vengance as the focus has left the video and is returning to the music.
Expect satellite radio to go really bigtime like cable TV did in the 1980s. Expect continued bitching from the RIAA about online distribution. Expect more from legal online distribution. And expect reaction from record companies and commercial radio, to try and emulate satellite and online distribution with greater variety, more tailored music shows, and less censoring (especially after 10PM).
I think that due to the corporate consolidation of broadcast radio, the possibility of radio becoming what it used to be, as in somewhat diverse and often open to new things, is probably not going to happen. Or if it does, it will probably take a long, long time.
I agree that satellite radio is going to become big like the early days of cable TV, because smart people with disposable income are going to want more options than just their own record collection.
But even though indie bands break through from time to time, there really can only be one Interpol or one Modest Mouse or one White Stripes at a time for the Top 40 market. However there will soon be plenty of sound-alikes of these bands pulled from bar-band obscurity and turned into much more glamorous, marketable products than the originals they emulate. A few years ago the Hives and the Vines were the “it” bands of the moment, pulled from obscurity and turned into big stars, but the market is fickle and this year we get a few other different “novelty” bands run past the marketing groups and considered “acceptable” for the Top 40 crowd. Trust me, six months from now the used record stores will be full of the recent Interpol and Modest Mouse CDs as the public moves back to their Jessica Simpson and Usher products. (Are Franz Ferdinand CDs filling up the used bins yet?) Because, yes, Jessica and Usher are cuter, friendlier, more manufactured, easy sells, completely predictable, look good on magazine covers, on TV, 13-year-old-girls eat them up, etc.
It is exactly because of the take over of radio stations by national conglomerates and their “one size fits all” play lists that deluge the country with the same songs, at the same time, day after day, that I listen to this radio station. It is a throw back to the early days of FM radio that allows the DJs to play almost anything they want to put on the air. I do think they have a limited playlist of things they have to play, but it is not the ONLY things they air. Unfortunately it is a lower power station and reception is spotty. I can’t pick it up at work, and they aren’t streaming on the net(yet). I’m somewhat of a Luddite and can’t quite force myself to shell out for satellite radio, though I can see it’s appeal.
Pitchfork is a good start.
I think I’ll have to second the recommendation of Allmusic.com as an excellent source of finding music you may like. For each band they list influences, similar artists, and followers, which often gives you dozens of bands to explore. I don’t always agree with their reviews, but they have the most comprehensive cross-linked database I’ve seen. Exploring by genre is also worthwhile, as they seem to reference every random stylistic distinction out there (noise pop? sadcore? psychadelia-pop? post-prog?) and influential artists in each.
A recently discovered time-devourer for me…
And I’ll third it. As you said, very occasionally one of their reviewers misses the mark, but I’d say for the most part, they’re right on (or at least in the neighborhood) of pretty much everything - which, given the sheer amount of information they offer, is pretty impressive. If you’re a fan of a particular genre of music, or are interested in getting into a new one, they probably won’t lead you wrong. Rarely do I find them highly praising a piece of shit or panning a gem…so, overall, I’d say they’re easily the best music site on the net.
Left of Center is a great stream, and I spend about 1/3 of my Sirius time listening to LOC, but I think it’s a mistake to think of it as The Outlet for New Music. They play new music in a few narrow genres, and the dreamy indie sounding stuff like Modest Mouse and Death Cab that makes up much of their playlist isn’t for everyone. Death Cab for Cutie is great at what they do, but the cookie-cutter pablum that makes up most of Alt Nation these days probably appeals to a much broader audience.
Mr2001
I don’t think of LOC as the outlet, I think of it as an outlet. They play a reasonable variety of new music with some older stuff mixed in (Sonic Youth, Pavement). In terms of new rock, they are hard to beat. It just is incredible how having a radio station makes everything better. I listen to my iPod in my car since I don’t have Sirius, but I’ve never even considered listening to CDs or the iPod in my wife’s car with Sirius.
mrunlucky
I disagree. I think that you are looking at a mixture of markets. The 13 year olds, if ever, buy the Modest Mouse or even the White Stripes. Truly great music outside of the mainstream gets noticed and bought (and kept) by later teenagers, college kids, and adults. The cookie-cutter radio stations are using a blunderbuss approach in their playlists – they are trying to appeal to everyone. The White Stripes and groups like them are just the token appeal to the non-preteen crowd. That, and really good music is hard to completely ignore.
The real problem is that the music industry (and radio) is lazy and they don’t follow up on this appeal. So what you are seeing is them going back to making baseline dollars with Ashlee Simpson and other prepackaged stars instead of trying to crack open new markets.
Part of the problem is that radio stations are not set up to be so varied right now, based on all of the media consolidation things discussed above. But it would be an easy change for them – for instance just have some different, focused music shows or just more stations. Like what satellite radio does now. And I think you will see commercial radio and the music industry change, because few are happy with it and its popularity is noticeably declining.
