The Alternative Conundrum

[Jersey Maiden]

I live in Central Jersey and as some of you might know, WRXP come back to New York last summer, only to be sold in 3 months by Merlin. However, I noticed that when Emmis sold RXP 1.0, there was a uptick in alternative artists crossing over to AC and CHR. In other words, while rock radio went into decline, it started to creep back into the Top 40. What could be the reason for this contradiction?

 

[chrocket87]

The streaming component to the Hot 100 has really helped Alternative get back to relevance, since programmers can now see that people want to listen to it, since it wasnt selling too well earlier. Contrast with Urban, which hasn't done as well on the Hot 100 and CHR with the introduction of streaming and iTunes data into the chart. It doesn't hurt that there's been more CHR-friendly material (Neon Trees, Fun., Imagine Dragons) than in previous years, where harder artists such as Rise Against and Three Days Grace ruled the charts.

Interesting enough, despite the increased crossover, I haven't noticed much change in the Alternative format's ratings, so that's where I was wondering if people had any possible explanations for discrepancy.

 

[atlantaboy]

In other words, while rock radio went into decline, it started to creep back into the Top 40. What could be the reason for this contradiction?

Alternative listeners switching to CHR

 

[awp69]

In other words, while rock radio went into decline, it started to creep back into the Top 40.  What could be the reason for this contradiction?

Alternative listeners switching to CHR

I think it's more borderline people who just tuned in for the lighter segments of Alternative. Even though I prefer my Alternative without too much of the harder Active rock, I still prefer Alternative to CHR any day.

Just like I hate when people say Alternative is becoming too much like CHR. That's a load of bull. Groups like Fun., Grouplove, The Lumineers, Of Monsters & Men, etc., would not exist IMO if it wasn't for Alternative stations playing them FIRST. They at least weren't as CHR friendly as groups like Train, which interestingly are generally never played on Alt stations anymore. But they caught on, just like Adele was refreshing change from the Katy Perry/Lady Gaga trend. I can see a few of these groups --- particularly Fun. -- dropping away from Alternative playlists at some point (heck, even Adele was on Alternative stations first and is nowhere to be found on them on now).

There was a debate in the South Carolina forum regarding stations calling themselves Alternative "rock" while still playing things like Mumford & Sons. Personally, I think Alternative should be just that....alternative. It doesn't have to be rock. Early on in the late '80s alternative stations played everything from folksier songs to punk to reggae. So, the argument of Alternative stations not playing true rock anymore is bogus. It's just that they probably could drop the term rock from their liners. And just because a few songs jump to CHR doesn't mean Alternative is becoming more CHR-like. It's just the sound caught on. Just like songs from Nirvana and Pearl Jam jumped to CHR during the grunge craze.

 

[hubcity]

I run an alternative station with a relatively tight playlist and a pre-grunge gold lean that does not do active rock, and I did not air three of the four bands you cite (Grouplove made the cut.) I felt the others were clearly using "alternative" as a stepping stone to CHR, and it showed. While I don't mind playing an alternative song with a good "pop" feel (Matt & Kim and Everything Everything come to mind) I simply didn't think what I do is what they were aiming for.

That said, I did play Adele. Some records are just good, her producer/co-writer was responsible for some of the best records of the century's first decade, and she got bonus points for including a Cure cover.

 

[awp69]

I run an alternative station with a relatively tight playlist and a pre-grunge gold lean that does not do active rock, and I did not air three of the four bands you cite (Grouplove made the cut.) I felt the others were clearly using "alternative" as a stepping stone to CHR, and it showed.

With Fun. I can kind of see you're point. But Of Monsters & Men? I really don't think that the band was using alternative as a stepping stone to CHR. They have a sound that is completely different and I don't think they ever would have seen CHR play if it weren't for Alternative first. In fact, it was an Alternative station, Philly's Radio 104.5, that first started playing them.

My point is just that I don't think Alternative should be just guitar-based rock. And I do think groups like Mumford & Sons fit the mold of being not mainstream in either CHR or Country. I wouldn't have forseen the sort of "craze" that's brought a lot of the folksier groups over to CHR. But do think alternative shouldn't be exclusive as far as just playing anything with an electric guitar.

As for The Lumineers, I'm not a fan of the band, but I still think the same reasoning applies.

 

[hubcity]

Eh, I've been wary of the cynically planned alternative route to CHR stardom ever since my old station enthusiastically played Cutting Crew's "I Just Died In Your Arms Tonight" until we realized it was crap with alternative varnish. Consider it a bias.

 

[Jersey Maiden]

The streaming component to the Hot 100 has really helped Alternative get back to relevance, since programmers can now see that people want to listen to it, since it wasnt selling too well earlier. Contrast with Urban, which hasn't done as well on the Hot 100 and CHR with the introduction of streaming and iTunes data into the chart. It doesn't hurt that there's been more CHR-friendly material (Neon Trees, Fun., Imagine Dragons) than in previous years, where harder artists such as Rise Against and Three Days Grace ruled the charts.

Interesting enough, despite the increased crossover, I haven't noticed much change in the Alternative format's ratings, so that's where I was wondering if people had any possible explanations for discrepancy.

Interestingly, Three Days Grace did make it to CHR with I Hate Everything About you. Personally I think the worst song I heard from them and I can't understand why their better songs didn't make it to the mainstream but that's a different debate. I also find it a little bit random I only heard "Pain" on RXP 2.0 but "Animal I Have Become" was just on active rock (at least in my area).

 

[awp69]

Eh, I've been wary of the cynically planned alternative route to CHR stardom ever since my old station enthusiastically played Cutting Crew's "I Just Died In Your Arms Tonight" until we realized it was crap with alternative varnish. Consider it a bias.

LOL. I can understand that point of view and think there are bands that do perhaps use alternative as a route to CHR. But guess I just think Of Monsters & Men and Mumford & Sons, in particular, are pretty talented groups that I would have considered alternative (granted, more folk/country alternative). I never, particuarly when the tide was turning towards all the Katy Perry and Lady Gagas of the world, would have expected them to cross over to CHR.

But as with everything, even CHR gets burnt out on a certain sound, so it just happened that the groups -- all of which do have a certain crunchier sound and not straight up rock or pop -- were in the right place at the right time and people latched on to them.

I actually think Adele may have been the artist that started to break down the pattern of the more rhythmic sound that CHR was getting stuck in.

 

[Jersey Maiden]

The streaming component to the Hot 100 has really helped Alternative get back to relevance, since programmers can now see that people want to listen to it, since it wasnt selling too well earlier. Contrast with Urban, which hasn't done as well on the Hot 100 and CHR with the introduction of streaming and iTunes data into the chart. It doesn't hurt that there's been more CHR-friendly material (Neon Trees, Fun., Imagine Dragons) than in previous years, where harder artists such as Rise Against and Three Days Grace ruled the charts.

Interesting enough, despite the increased crossover, I haven't noticed much change in the Alternative format's ratings, so that's where I was wondering if people had any possible explanations for discrepancy.

Well in New York at least, it's because both Emmis and Merlin were bleeding money. So in spite of decent ratings, RXP was something both companies had to let go of. Then again, anything that involves Merlin Media isn't your average case. So I was wondering if anyone here had a more national perspective. For other cities that lost alternative stations in recent history, what was the reason? Oddly enough, even though (modern) Urban hasn't done as well on CHR, you don't see companies cutting the number of those stations (the same can't be said for Urban AC). New York still has 2 urban stations after all. Much has been said about the "decline of rock" but the story is a lot more complicated than that.

 

[atlantaboy]

For other cities that lost alternative stations in recent history, what was the reason? Oddly enough, even though (modern) Urban hasn't done as well on CHR, you don't see companies cutting the number of those stations (the same can't be said for Urban AC).

I kind of feel like you're thinking about it backwards...

If CHR and Hot AC now cover Of Monsters And Men, Mumford & Sons, Imagine Dragons, etc., there's less of a need for Alternative stations - whereas other formats don't cover most of the tracks on the Urban chart

Put it this way - if CHR was still back-to-back pop/rhythmic, and Hot AC were still playing tons of Goo Goo Dolls and Matchbox 20, Alternative stations would have higher ratings, since they'd have all those bands unique to their format - but these other two formats have eaten away at their core sound, and most likely their listener base

This is the same phenomenon IMO that happened to Alternative around 1997-1998, when Hot AC and CHR really started to eat away at a lot of the core acts on Alternative - but back then, Alternative stations found a new sound in Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit, Korn, etc. - whereas now, there's not really a new "sound" that Alternative can evolve into to make it a unique format

 

[chrocket87]

Jersey, the difference between Urban and alternative, or any rock, is that Urban corners the 18-34 Black audience. Urban commands fierce loyalty among that demo. It certainly doesn't hurt that CHR P1s will channel flip to Urban when they're in the mood for hip hop. The problem with rock is that it's not the only game in town for an 18-34 White guy, as the format still targets mostly men, as they're also listening to CHR, Urban, Country, Sports, and the various formats rock has splintered into (Active, Alternative, AAA).

 

[atlantaboy]

Jersey, the problem with Alternative is that most of its core artists are currently covered by other formats, whereas the same isn't true for Urban

Any decline in Alternative ratings has very little to do with Country, Sports, or Urban

 

[chrocket87]

Any decline in Alternative ratings has very little to do with Country, Sports, or Urban

This is true, but my post was answering why Urban has survived better than Alternative. When CHR listeners don't tune into Urban as much, Urban still thrives because it still has a large pool of P1s (just about every Black person 18-34 along with a large proportion of Hispanics, especially if there's no Spanish to serve them), so it's not as bad for them. Alternative has the problem of that the White 18-34 male has several other options, so they don't bring in as much of the target demo as Urban does, so bringing in P1s from other formats to build numbers is more important.

 

[carolinaradio]

But as with everything, even CHR gets burnt out on a certain sound, so it just happened that the groups -- all of which do have a certain crunchier sound and not straight up rock or pop -- were in the right place at the right time and people latched on to them.

I actually think Adele may have been the artist that started to break down the pattern of the more rhythmic sound that CHR was getting stuck in.

Agree. With "Rolling In The Deep" in early summer 2011, and we also started seeing CHR open to other pop/rock (not necessarily Alternative) acts around that time. My memory is somewhat spotty, but the first big, true Alternative crossover to CHR I think of in this recent trend was "Pumped Up Kicks" by Foster The People, and then it accelerated going in to 2012. I remember Adele getting some Alternative airplay, as I've said before, but I don't know if she does anymore since becoming so mainstream/popular.

BTW - can't remember if I've asked this before, but when these new groups that have had CHR crossover success release sophomore albums, does anyone think they'll make them more pop-friendly to ensure more CHR/mainstream success instead of trying to cater to the Alternative audience?

 

[atlantaboy]

Any decline in Alternative ratings has very little to do with Country, Sports, or Urban

This is true, but my post was answering why Urban has survived better than Alternative. When CHR listeners don't tune into Urban as much, Urban still thrives because it still has a large pool of P1s (just about every Black person 18-34 along with a large proportion of Hispanics, especially if there's no Spanish to serve them), so it's not as bad for them. Alternative has the problem of that the White 18-34 male has several other options, so they don't bring in as much of the target demo as Urban does, so bringing in P1s from other formats to build numbers is more important.

I see what you're saying - but I feel like it would only make sense if a market was 50% white, 50% black - in other words, if a market is, say 20% black, and, say 70% white, having to share the 18-34 white crowd with a variety of different formats isn't much of a problem - you could just as easily say the market was 20% black, 20% white-CHR, 20% white-Country, 20% white-Alternative, etc.

I think it's more of an issue that Mumford & Sons, Imagine Dragons, Of Monsters And Men, and Muse can be heard on other formats, and the fact that a lot of younger listeners that like these bands also want to hear some pop mixed in, rather than old Soundgarden or Pearl Jam tracks

 

[Saladressing]

IMO commercial alternative has never, ever been more stagnant in the U.S. A singular sound for the most part (light indie folk) mixed with 90s dinosaur rock is not a formula for long term success in my view. For a format that owes a lot of its existence to punk (Sex Pistols etc.) and guitars (Nirvana etc.), a band with guitar distortion cannot get a track on the radio besides the usual suspects (Rise Against, Incubus etc.) and the 90s acts with new music (Soundgarden, Weezer etc). Let alone all of the cool divergent sounds that used to be played back-to-back at the format in the 1990s (techno, industrial, girl bands, acoustic, punk and more).

 

[atlantaboy]

A singular sound for the most part (light indie folk) mixed with 90s dinosaur rock is not a formula for long term success in my view.

I completely agree - and I feel like this is the major problem right now

Mumford & Sons basically brought in a new era to Alternative music, but not enough time has passed that stations can build an entire playlist around that sound, especially when it comes to recurrents/gold - I feel like it's the same situation that occurred when Nirvana broke through in 1991 - the Alternative format didn't blow up in '91 - it took a few years for the music to progress to where a station could build an entire format around the Nirvana sound - in 1991, stations would've had to mix Nirvana with, say, Guns 'N' Roses and Def Leppard, which just doesn't make a good fit - but by 1994, there were enough solid recurrents/gold tracks in the Nirvana vein that Alternative stations could be successful

So, I think it's going to take a couple years before Alternative stations can successfully build a playlist completely geared towards the 2013 Alternative sound - and when that happens, I think we'll see Alternative ratings rise again

 

[justpassingthough]

A musician friend and I were just having this conversation the other night. He has stopped listening to the alternative stations in town because he doesn't like how "soft" they've become- as they play a lot of the bands like Fun., Grouplove, etc. He said he misses some of the harder music. I've started listening to alternative again because I like these group's sounds and I think alternative has sounded more fresh now than in any time over the past decade.

The point being- you're almost never going to please everyone- and since musical is cyclical, who knows how long this current trend of softer, folk and indie based bands will last.

What I don't understand, though, is people begrudging acts that end up on Hot AC or CHR or even country stations after their exposure at alternative. Shouldn't we, as alternative fans, be happy that this music is spreading as it helps to keep the music relevant? I heard Mumford & Sons on a country station the other day, and while it seemed a little odd, it bodes well for alternative that these acts are crossing over to formats that have the potential to draw new listeners to the alternative format.

 

[awp69]

A musician friend and I were just having this conversation the other night.  He has stopped listening to the alternative stations in town because he doesn't like how "soft" they've become- as they play a lot of the bands like Fun., Grouplove, etc.  He said he misses some of the harder music.  I've started listening to alternative again because I like these group's sounds and I think alternative has sounded more fresh now than in any time over the past decade.

The point being- you're almost never going to please everyone- and since musical is cyclical, who knows how long this current trend of softer, folk and indie based bands will last.

What I don't understand, though, is people begrudging acts that end up on Hot AC or CHR or even country stations after their exposure at alternative.  Shouldn't we, as alternative fans, be happy that this music is spreading as it helps to keep the music relevant?  I heard Mumford & Sons on a country station the other day, and while it seemed a little odd, it bodes well for alternative that these acts are crossing over to formats that have the potential to draw new listeners to the alternative format.

I agree with pretty much everything you've said (although I'm getting really burnt out on Fun.). I think bands such as these have actually lit a fire under Alternative and whether you like it or not is your own taste. Alternative may not have ever been truly stagnant, it just took more effort fo find it. Until the last two years, active hard rock pushed onto Alternative stations because many stations felt that they needed it to fill in the gaps with it. But stations like Radio 104.5 in Philadelphia were among the few that stuck with reaching out and playing good alternative music without over doing the active stuff.

Those people who now are bashing the lighter bands on Alternative (and there are still plenty of heavier bands played along side of them), are IMO mainly people who started to associate alternative/new rock with harder rock and that's reallly never been the case. Go all the way back to the late '80s and there were plenty of folksier bands on alternative stations along with the punk and other "alternative" music.

I don't have as much of a problem as some do of all the bands crossover over to CHR. It's good for the bands. And it just happens to be a time when the more rhythmic tide on CHR has started to wane. The ONLY reason why I don't like it is that the bands get to the point over overexposure for those that listen to Alternative and CHR. Since we heard Fun. well before CHR latched on, now it's hard to listen to it for me and not cringe just because I've heard it so much.