It depends how you define 'major radio station' then - for me, there are only two, Radio 1 & 2.

 

And Radio 2 has a higher audience than Radio 1.

 

Magic, Smooth and Heart are other radio stations I'd think of as 'major' (though I'm not sure what their audience figures are like) and none of them play a lot of rap.

I'm finding this On Air/On Sale malarky a bit rubbish tbh. Alot of tracks do not seem to be living up to their potential (Bring It, Yeah Right, Set My World On Fire) purely because their not making the upper reaches of the chart and therefore not being heard. Instead, were getting the same songs in the Top 20 week in week out because it's all they're hearing. Just my opinion obvz but that's what I feel is beginning to happen. :(

Bring It and Yeah Right did fine. Yeah, they would have peaked higher from being held back, but at the end of the day they still got top 40. And I expect they sold more in the long run than they would have. Like the article says, people have to start getting used to looking at SALES rather than peak, and also have to start changing their perspective of a "flop". For those kind of acts, low top 40 is a good achievement with that kind of release. I'm not sure how much you would have expected them to be heard, anyway - even if they were held back they likely would have only got top 20 and still would have likely not been picked up by most hit stations (ie. Capital, etc).

 

And do you really think a comeback from The Feeling has potential?! Err, if you say so. About as much potential as a Bitty McLean comeback, I suppose.

 

But yes, you're right the charts are moving slower, and there's going to be less smaller hits in the top 20, and therefore less hits in general. Although some of the people who hate songs that plummet fast after their first week (see: Now or Never for a good example of that, while we're on the subject of Jodie Connor) will say that this is actually a good thing. And in some ways it is - at the end of the day, we're now moving closer to a chart that reflects the genuine popularity of all songs.

And Radio 2 has a higher audience than Radio 1.

 

Magic, Smooth and Heart are other radio stations I'd think of as 'major' (though I'm not sure what their audience figures are like) and none of them play a lot of rap.

 

Radio 2 may have a higher audience than any other radio station I think (and likewize, Heart gets the highest audience of all the commercial stations), but I don't think the people who listen to those stations are very interested in music. Especially the ones who listen to Heart anyway, because listening to Empire State of Mind every few hours for 2 years would drive music fans away from listening to the station, surely? Radio 1's and Capital's music moves along at a similar speed to the chart, so you're not hearing the same songs repeatedly for more than 6 months (bar a few exceptions, like I hear Shake It by Metro Station and Won't Go Quietly by Example of Radio 1 like once a week, still, and Capital are still playing Pass Out all the time).

 

Not only that, but Radio 2 can play songs a lot to these tens of millions of people that listen to the station, but they do nothing in the chart. Capital and MTV get much smaller audiences, so either the people who choose to listen to the music from there are more interested in music, so will actually buy a song if they like it, or the music played on there is better, so it can be played to a much smaller audience, and still more of them will want to buy it. I imagine probably a combination of the two. But very few kids are going to want to listen to a radio station that plays Rumer and Eliza Doolittle all day.

Edited May 7, 201114 yr by Eric_Blob

Bring It and Yeah Right did fine. Yeah, they would have peaked higher from being held back, but at the end of the day they still got top 40. And I expect they sold more in the long run than they would have. Like the article says, people have to start getting used to looking at SALES rather than peak, and also have to start changing their perspective of a "flop". For those kind of acts, low top 40 is a good achievement with that kind of release. I'm not sure how much you would have expected them to be heard, anyway - even if they were held back they likely would have only got top 20 and still would have likely not been picked up by most hit stations (ie. Capital, etc).

 

And do you really think a comeback from The Feeling has potential?! Err, if you say so. About as much potential as a Bitty McLean comeback, I suppose.

 

But yes, you're right the charts are moving slower, and there's going to be less smaller hits in the top 20, and therefore less hits in general. Although some of the people who hate songs that plummet fast after their first week (see: Now or Never for a good example of that, while we're on the subject of Jodie Connor) will say that this is actually a good thing. And in some ways it is - at the end of the day, we're now moving closer to a chart that reflects the genuine popularity of all songs.

I kind of see your point. But if a song is gonna go low Top 40 for one week, it's not gonna be heard by anywhere near as many people as a song that gets Top 10 for 10 weeks, plastered all over the music channels for weeks because of the chart countdowns that are on the radio weekly and numerous times daily (offen cut down to just a Top 20) on music channels. If the songs are frontloaded, then at least with minimal regular airplay, they at least stand a chance of being heard enough to sell their potential.

 

With regards to The Feeling, I've seen people post on Facebook and in here that they really like the song. It needs airplay to do well as Radio 1 probably think they're over so won't playlist them (and probably still won't since they haven't gone straight into the Top 40), hence why (from the moment I realised they weren't frontloading) I could never see it taking off. Bad call IMO.

 

With regards to for every Noah there's a Chipmunk and for every JLO there's a Katy B. Of course there is, that's why I feel to put most songs on On Air/On Sale is not the way forward as I think only hyped songs will get hits through On Air/On Sale as many will fail to get those vital Top 40 plays. Broken Record clearly wasn't popular enough and as with JLO, I don't think either would have sold as much through On Air/On Sale. Noah & The Whale constantly ha Radio 1/2 up their necks so On Air/On Sale worked for them. In The Air had potential, but for his type of artist (see Nero, Tinie Tempah) frontloading is fairly necessary (hence the flop of Flying High and success of Champion).

 

All of course in my opinion, but I honestly thing plinking pretty much EVERY song On Air/On Sale is not the way forward.

strange how the majority of front loaded songs that fall quickly down the chart after a high peak are by british artists...is this a relevant point?

 

 

strange how the majority of front loaded songs that fall quickly down the chart after a high peak are by british artists...is this a relevant point?

 

British acts just don't generally have the same wide appeal American acts do.

I kind of see your point. But if a song is gonna go low Top 40 for one week, it's not gonna be heard by anywhere near as many people as a song that gets Top 10 for 10 weeks, plastered all over the music channels for weeks because of the chart countdowns that are on the radio weekly and numerous times daily (offen cut down to just a Top 20) on music channels. If the songs are frontloaded, then at least with minimal regular airplay, they at least stand a chance of being heard enough to sell their potential.

 

With regards to The Feeling, I've seen people post on Facebook and in here that they really like the song. It needs airplay to do well as Radio 1 probably think they're over so won't playlist them (and probably still won't since they haven't gone straight into the Top 40), hence why (from the moment I realised they weren't frontloading) I could never see it taking off. Bad call IMO.

 

With regards to for every Noah there's a Chipmunk and for every JLO there's a Katy B. Of course there is, that's why I feel to put most songs on On Air/On Sale is not the way forward as I think only hyped songs will get hits through On Air/On Sale as many will fail to get those vital Top 40 plays. Broken Record clearly wasn't popular enough and as with JLO, I don't think either would have sold as much through On Air/On Sale. Noah & The Whale constantly ha Radio 1/2 up their necks so On Air/On Sale worked for them. In The Air had potential, but for his type of artist (see Nero, Tinie Tempah) frontloading is fairly necessary (hence the flop of Flying High and success of Champion).

 

All of course in my opinion, but I honestly thing plinking pretty much EVERY song On Air/On Sale is not the way forward.

I think you overestimate the difference these kind of countdowns of music channels make. I mean, I'm not saying they're completely irrelevant, but I don't think they really give songs that many sales, or at least no more than any other video play slot. But yes, if songs get top 10 then they do tend to get a LOT more support, but I don't see how Jodie Connor would have got that high regardless. With her we already have a precedent to how she can do without on air, on sale, and yes, she managed to get to #14, but she dropped down the charts like a brick, and that was still with the music channels playing her video quite a bit. I think with her, it has to be accepted there's simply not THAT much interest in her as an artist for her to ever have a really big long-running hit on her own. Even Bring It bombed down the chart after peaking which is quite surprising as you'd expect a single that has increased several weeks in a row to descend a bit more slowly than that.

 

About The Feeling, I'm not sure how much difference holding back really could have made for them. Radio 1 would have still ignored them because, as you said, they're deemed to be irrelevant now. They might have picked up a slot on Radio 2 but that often doesn't amount to much (even Corinne Bailey Rae got a lot of airplay on R2, and had a held back release, but still missed the entire top 200). They perhaps might have got top 75 if they were held back. Now they probably won't, but they still might trickle sell enough over the next few weeks (depending on promotion and things like that) to sell just as much as they would before. Does one week in the top 100 at #64 or something really make much difference? They were essentially screwed either way in terms of singles chart success, as sad it is. I think we've seen this kind of story enough times before to know how it goes.

 

I think if a song is popular, it will sell regardless. There have already been songs that have been hits that haven't had a truckload of hype. Like Mann for example. It was released a few months ago at the start of its airplay curve and climbed up the charts steadily because people liked the song. He was just a random unknown rapper from America - yeah, it had 50 Cent on the track but he's not much of a selling power these days.

 

As for your last point, I think you underestimate how much the minor positions add up on the chart. If Katy B was released OA/OS, for example, it likely would have spent weeks building up outside the top 20, probably peaked at #19 or something, and then dropped down the charts. It could have taken 4-6 weeks to climb to its peak, more than likely, which could just as easily add up past the weekly sales it needed to front-load itself to #8. I guess it's all pointless speculation either way but this is the kind of thing the record companies want and expect in terms of songs selling more.

 

In the case of On The Floor, it was actually held back a LOT. Like two months or something. Just imagine how much it could have sold in those 2 months!! If it debuted high, then radio would have picked it up very early, and it could have hung around the top 10 selling notable but not huge quantities every week for months. Just think of something like Love The Way You Lie. It would never have seen the massive 100k+ debut it got first week but I actually think it could have sold more than 400k by now if it was released OA/OS.

 

All that said, I agree that OA/OS isn't the best idea for some acts (e.g. debuting acts, like I've already said previously in this thread).

Edited May 7, 201114 yr by superbossanova

Radio 2 may have a higher audience than any other radio station I think (and likewize, Heart gets the highest audience of all the commercial stations), but I don't think the people who listen to those stations are very interested in music. Especially the ones who listen to Heart anyway, because listening to Empire State of Mind every few hours for 2 years would drive music fans away from listening to the station, surely? Radio 1's and Capital's music moves along at a similar speed to the chart, so you're not hearing the same songs repeatedly for more than 6 months (bar a few exceptions, like I hear Shake It by Metro Station and Won't Go Quietly by Example of Radio 1 like once a week, still, and Capital are still playing Pass Out all the time).

 

Not only that, but Radio 2 can play songs a lot to these tens of millions of people that listen to the station, but they do nothing in the chart. Capital and MTV get much smaller audiences, so either the people who choose to listen to the music from there are more interested in music, so will actually buy a song if they like it, or the music played on there is better, so it can be played to a much smaller audience, and still more of them will want to buy it. I imagine probably a combination of the two. But very few kids are going to want to listen to a radio station that plays Rumer and Eliza Doolittle all day.

 

 

surely the reasoning behind this is social and cultural make up of the audience?mtv viewers are by far and away younger viewers attracted to the videos of artists like rihanna/bruno mars whereas radio 2 listeners are more likely to be over 30s - this transfers into radio2 listeners buying the artists album rather than the single and mtv viewers immediately going online and purchasing the current jlo/riri track after seeing it for the 60th time that hour!!

strange how the majority of front loaded songs that fall quickly down the chart after a high peak are by british artists...is this a relevant point?

 

I've wondered this too tbh. Last year, every #1 by a British artist debuted at #1, and most of them were out of the top 40 after a couple of months. If they were all on air, on sale, the only ones I think could've got #1 were Everybody Hurts, When We Collide, Shout, Love You More and Heroes, because they were charity songs, X Factor songs, etc. Promise This and The Club is Alive would've probably also still debuted at #1, because both those artists have huge fanbases. Pass Out probably would've, because the song was that huge. And Dynamite would've done, but that's basically an American song anyway. The rest wouldn't have stood a chance.

 

People always laugh when I say this, but I genuinely think on air, on sale benefits US artists more than UK artists. At least it will decrease the amount of #1s by British artists, for sure.

 

surely the reasoning behind this is social and cultural make up of the audience?mtv viewers are by far and away younger viewers attracted to the videos of artists like rihanna/bruno mars whereas radio 2 listeners are more likely to be over 30s - this transfers into radio2 listeners buying the artists album rather than the single and mtv viewers immediately going online and purchasing the current jlo/riri track after seeing it for the 60th time that hour!!

 

Yeah, younger people buy singles more, whilst older people buy albums more, which is probably why single sales are increasing, and album sales are decreasing. Likewize, MTV want as many viewers as possible, so they'll show the videos that kids want to see. If a channel starts playing a lot of rock songs, the kids will just go an watch another channel.

 

I know you're exaggerating, but I think because you have difficulty distinguishing between most of the chart hits, that you're thinking the radio stations are actually playing the same songs every 15 minutes, when they're not, they just sound the same to you! :lol: It sounds like Kerrang! keep playing the same song to me, but I assume they're probably not really. :lol: Nobody would ever listen to a station if it played the same song every 30 minutes.

Edited May 7, 201114 yr by Eric_Blob

mmm imean that most chart music is made up of electronic music with rapper singing/rapping over it, thats why it all sounds the same.kerrang focuses on metal and no i dont listen to kerrang - i listen to radio 1 which plays a mix as you can see on their playlist.i like a mix which i would like to see represented in the charts not just the usual electronic/rap stuff that seems to dominate like at the mo....

I've wondered this too tbh. Last year, every #1 by a British artist debuted at #1, and most of them were out of the top 40 after a couple of months. If they were all on air, on sale, the only ones I think could've got #1 were Everybody Hurts, When We Collide, Shout, Love You More and Heroes, because they were charity songs, X Factor songs, etc. Promise This and The Club is Alive would've probably also still debuted at #1, because both those artists have huge fanbases. Pass Out probably would've, because the song was that huge. And Dynamite would've done, but that's basically an American song anyway. The rest wouldn't have stood a chance.

 

People always laugh when I say this, but I genuinely think on air, on sale benefits US artists more than UK artists. At least it will decrease the amount of #1s by British artists, for sure.

I don't think there's any specific country benefit in on air, on sale. Like I said, if a song is popular it will do well. A lot of British acts have unfortunately relied on front-loading for far too long now (going back to the late 90s), a lot of the time to put a low quality record near the top based on fanbase, and mask the fact the songs aren't that popular or good. I'd be happy to see an end to this, to be honest. I do think British pop music is a shambles at the moment and perhaps it'll force the British acts to make better music if it did happen.

 

Plus, you have to remember when people complain about American acts dominating the charts: they are the musical capital of the world, basically. They have five times the population of ours - so, technically speaking, they should have five times the acts. We're not as fortunate to have such a huge machine (although we're still the 2nd most important musical country in the world in terms of influence/worldwide success, etc, of course). Like now, we don't have that many major acts releasing, but America has loads as usual, and they can have that pretty much all-year round because of the sheer size of their music industry. I would like to see more representation from the rest of Europe (although this can only happen when pure dance music makes a comeback, IMO, like 1999/2000 was a golden time for mainland Europe because of the huge popularity of trance) but it doesn't surprise or annoy me too much when America dominates at times.

 

By the way, I hate to be rude and I'm not usually one to be so pedantic (there's usually enough people on this forum to do that) but can you please learn how to spell "likewise". That's like three posts in a row where you've spelt it wrong now. It's not a difficult word to spell. I'm pretty sure they don't even spell it with a Z in America.

Edited May 7, 201114 yr by superbossanova

By the way, I hate to be rude and I'm not usually one to be so pedantic (there's usually enough people on this forum to do that) but can you please learn how to spell "likewise". That's like three posts in a row where you've spelt it wrong now. It's not a difficult word to spell. I'm pretty sure they don't even spell it with a Z in America.

 

I've pointed this out to him at least 3 times in the past :(

 

AFAIA there are no non-obscure words that end in 'wize' even in American English.

Edited May 7, 201114 yr by Bray

Yes, I know Grenade, Someone Like You and Price Tag are all urban, but you know what I mean. They're quite poppy and non-controversial, and the sorts of songs that elderly people might just about be able to tolerate, etc.

Similar to superbossanova, I don't want to be rude, but that is clearly nonsense Eric.

 

Grenada urban, perhaps at a stretch, but I'd say waaaaay more pop than anything else;

Price Tag even less so (the only "urban" bit in PT is the rapping and not all the radio stations play that) and probably 95% pop;

Someone Like You is one of the least urban songs I've ever heard in my life.

 

Or were you not being serious?

 

Wanna know if it's gonna rain where you are in the UK? Try http://www.raintoday.co.uk/

Thanks for that website!

 

It depends how you define 'major radio station' then - for me, there are only two, Radio 1 & 2.

Capital definitely are now too since they went national in January. I think they have a similar total audience to R1 now.

It's the only way to go. It worked before the 90's.

 

BUT it isn't working, WHY?

 

Record labels aren't really doing it? Where are all the new releases? WHY is it that all the songs that I want to download that radio are playing I can't buy. I buy my music but I'm coming close to changing my mind. If they can't be arsed to trust us to pick up on actual good music. You might as well steal, that's what the record labels are telling us they want whilst not making songs available once at radio!!!!!

 

They can't moan about people stealing music if they don't make available the songs people want to buy.

 

OK. So, you have a choice. You hear a song on the radio, do you..

 

1. Wait 3 months until the record label actually wants you to buy it

or

2. Go online in a manner of seconds and get the song for free?

 

DO OR DIE!!!!

It's the only way to go. It worked before the 90's.

 

BUT it isn't working, WHY?

 

Record labels aren't really doing it? Where are all the new releases? WHY is it that all the songs that I want to download that radio are playing I can't buy. I buy my music but I'm coming close to changing my mind. If they can't be arsed to trust us to pick up on actual good music. You might as well steal, that's what the record labels are telling us they want whilst not making songs available once at radio!!!!!

 

They can't moan about people stealing music if they don't make available the songs people want to buy.

 

OK. So, you have a choice. You hear a song on the radio, do you..

 

1. Wait 3 months until the record label actually wants you to buy it

or

2. Go online in a manner of seconds and get the song for free?

 

DO OR DIE!!!!

 

Erm, you realise this is exactly what OA/OS is trying to stop :unsure:

^^ what? Stealing?

 

Indeed it is, but they can't go into it light-hearted. It's a mess and most songs aren't actually coming to be available straight from radio play. As I said, all the new songs I want to buy are not available still. They need to do it 100% or not at all. They are sooooo slow at doing things.....

its the two biggest labels which is like 90% of releases that are OA/OS, the others will follow in time!!

its the two biggest labels which is like 90% of releases that are OA/OS, the others will follow in time!!

 

The sooner the better :)

it will only work though if record companies realise the effects of poor marketing - take lady gagas judas and born this way...both released straight away but without a video release within say a week of the download release the song will fall away quicker than you think and stunt the campaign.

 

price tags release strategy in february should become THE blueprint for record companies to follow in the new OA/OS era to take full advantage!!

Edited May 8, 201114 yr by steve201

Thanks for that website!

 

I was hoping at least one person would appreciate it. :)