Chart Consolidation!? Why so many billboard charts?

[passafistwastaken]

Can anybody tell me why they're are so many different Rhythmic and Rock Charts when they all essentally play the same songs?

For instence, the Main Rhythmic Chart and the Urban Chart are esstially the same. Just as the Alternative and Active Rock charts are the essentially the same. Why not just combine the charts? These formats have very little difference. If you sat down and listened to them would you be able to tell the difference between Active Rock and Alternative (do they even make Alternative music anymore?) or Rhythmic and Urban?

Just curious?

 

[jcolletta275]

Simply because those are the different radio formats. Though the charts don't show it (at least not at first glance... you have to look pretty deep to see the differences between some formats), each format does have it's differences.

For example, if you take a glance at the Active Rock and Alternative charts that are published each week in USA Today, you'll see that most of the songs are indeed the same. However, if you look at the details online (they aren't in the paper), you'll see that the play counts are different, the rotations are different, and outside of the top, say, 30 tracks, there can be more variation in the charts than you're seeing in the paper.

There are also some tracks that would work on an Alternative station that wouldn't work on an Active Rock station; Gnarls Barkley's "Crazy" being the most recent perfect example. In fact, when it comes to tracks like that, I'd almost say that Alternative is Active Rock with a healthy sprinkling of AAA. So while the different charts may seem a bit overkill, there is a difference in each of them, even if that difference only serves to bridge a gap between two formats that are even more different.

Come to think of it, CHR/Rhythmic is another great example, as it serves to bridge a gap between CHR/Mainstream and Urban.

 

[SirRoxalot]

The segmentation of Billboard charts is just indicative of the segmentation of radio. The reason that Country as a format is #1 in a lot of markets is that there are usually fewer stations playing a wider variety of music from the genre. "Rock" (whatever that means these days) is divided into Oldies, Classic Hits, Classic Rock, Variety Hits, AAA, Active Rock, Modern Rock, CHR/Pop, etc. until you have more pigeonholes than an abandoned building next to a big city McDonalds.

As you have observed, there is tremendous crossover between all these formats. That's because listeners don't care about what your format is, they care about what music you play.

 

[ixnay]

I don't believe this is new. Didn't Billboard keep separate Hot 100, C&W and R&B charts for singles in the sixties?

ixnay

 

[SirRoxalot]

I don't believe this is new. Didn't Billboard keep separate Hot 100, C&W and R&B charts for singles in the sixties?

Yup. What the original poster is referring to is that there are now more categories. Billboard is perhaps a poor example because they've whittled it down some, but Radio & Records has over 20 different charts! All Access offers 11 different charts in Mediabase.

 

[only1moore]

I don't believe this is new. Didn't Billboard keep separate Hot 100, C&W and R&B charts for singles in the sixties?

Yup. What the original poster is referring to is that there are now more categories. Billboard is perhaps a poor example because they've whittled it down some, but Radio & Records has over 20 different charts! All Access offers 11 different charts in Mediabase.

I'm not sure you would call Billboard (or their sister R&R) poor examples. In fact I give them and Mediabase (Through FMQB) credit for being a vocal supporter of the Dance scene, even after giving the Dance radio community their own chart. Now who else can boast that?