Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!gds
From: gds@mit-eddie.UUCP (Greg Skinner)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: Re: They don't write them....
Message-ID: <1267@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 14-Feb-84 23:17:58 EST
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.1267
Posted: Tue Feb 14 23:17:58 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 17-Feb-84 04:55:26 EST
References: <1333@stolaf.UUCP>
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 45

(These are my personal views on why "good bands" don't make the top40.
Not too many flames, please, or you're likely to burn down the whole MIT
EE/CS department.)

I have listened to top40 for at least 16 consecutive years of my life,
starting with WABC in New York and eventually branching out into FM
circa 1976.  I am not ashamed of this: I have been ridiculed in person,
by phone and by electronic mail for this.  I happen to enjoy top40
because it is the kind of music that can lift your spirits after a hard
day, or make you smile and remember good times in the past when you hear
a golden oldie.

Anyway, on to the main point.  I'd like to define a "good band" (for the
purposes of this newsgroup) as a band which puts out music which is
highly acclaimed by this newsgroup.  Some examples of this (that I have
seen on this newsgroup) are the pre-90125 Yes, the Stones, Genesis
and before Peter Gabriel left.  Conversely, some "no good bands" are the
current Yes, Duran Duran, Genesis led by Phil Collins, Asia, Loverboy,
... the list is endless.

Pop music is, by definition, music which is popular.  The popularity of
music (not the quality, mind you) is determined by the rate and volume
at which it is purchased, the rate and volume at which it is played on
the air, and the frequency with which the artists do concerts and how
much their concerts gross.  The "good bands" tend not to do well in
these categories, whereas the "no good bands" do.  You might ask, why?
The "good bands" generally put out a certain brand of music which is
independent of the time and current style of other bands.  However, the
"no good bands" put out music which sounds generally the same as the
music which the popular bands are putting out.

I do not mean by this article to bad-mouth bands which do not put music
out on the top40 consistently, neither am I praising those who do.  I am
merely trying to explain why "good bands" don't make the top40 a lot,
yet that takes nothing away from their quality.  The key point here is
that top40 ratings are a measure of popularity, not a measure of
quality.  The true measure of the quality of a band must be ultimately
determined by those individuals who repeatedly purchase the albums and
see the concerts of their respective "favorite" bands.

-- 

--greg
{decvax!genrad, eagle!mit-vax, ihnp4}!mit-eddie!gds (UUCP)
Gds@XX (ARPA)