The Alternative Conundrum

[stevensonair]

Very simplified, in my experience - the people who like the current direction of alternative often abandoned it when it turned into "active" - the complainers are people who have a listening history/frame of reference that is more "new rock" than "modern rock."

Modern rock was always a mixture of left-of-center styles, industrial, new wave, alt-folk, "smart pop", heavier sounds. The hard and heavy, hyper-agressive sound of the format only took hold post grunge. And it's not a really varied or deep base of music to base a format on for decades.

 

[Jersey Maiden]

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

I agree.....to a point. I can easily see this train of thought running through the minds of the CBS guys when they decided to flip RXP 2.0 to Sports. After all, they own Fresh, the Hot AC whichis responsible for the majority of the recent crossover wave in New York. But it doesn't tell the whole story. I remember being surprised by Foster the People on z100 a month after Merlin flipped RXP 1.0 to talk. I'm pretty sure Emmis didn't predict that when they sold the station (they just wanted the cash). This strikes me as a chicken-or-egg kind of situation.

But personally, the folk revival does add a unique sound to alternative that can work. Of course, folk by its very nature, is one of the oldest genres in the world but when was the last time it went mainstream? The 60's. Most subgenres don't take 50 years to come back. It's been under the radar long enough to sound new to a lot of people.

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 stationsbecause 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.

This reminds me of the people who complained about alternative being mixed in with active rock in K-rock and RXP 1.0 playing AC/DC. Most people on the New York boards were pleased that Merlin's version of RXP played more of the "softer" bands because that made a more "focused" sound. Go figure. With rock (and dance)these days being so fragmented, I believe some companies don't want to be bothered figuring out the playlists for these formats.

It's just unfortunate that a lot of alternative fans also happen to be hipsters to abandon their favorite bands once they become famous. What they don't understand is that crossover is good for the genre. That said, I get sick of certain bands (like Fun) when I hear them a million times a day.

 

[Saladressing]

I think the overriding thing is that there used to be plenty of variety in the format and now there are around two flavors, generally speaking: Folk and 90s Grunge. That is incredibly limiting when you look at all of the amazing music being made around the world. Hopefully programmers are going to be allowed to experiment with more sounds at some point.

 

[awp69]

I think the overriding thing is that there used to be plenty of variety in the format and now there are around two flavors, generally speaking: Folk and 90s Grunge. That is incredibly limiting when you look at all of the amazing music being made around the world. Hopefully programmers are going to be allowed to experiment with more sounds at some point.

Well, I don't know if I'd go that far. If you listen to most alternative stations today, there's still quite a variety. More electronic bands like M83 and the Naked & Famous. More rock driven bands like 30 Seconds to Mars or Young the Giant. And bands that have more of a pop sound but maybe are little off kilter like Matt & Kim. It's not all Mumford & Sons and Nirvana.

 

[atlantaboy]

That is incredibly limiting when you look at all of the amazing music being made around the world. Hopefully programmers are going to be allowed to experiment with more sounds at some point.

What sounds are Alternative programmers missing? I really can't think of any...unless you're talking about stuff with bubbly pop lyrics, or recorded in different languages, neither of which are going to appeal to that audience