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)