Why does radio play make people hate songs?

[phobiac54]

Hey,

Had an interesting experience recently: I'm sure most of you (one's in canada anyway) know the song "I hate Everything about You" by Three Days Grace.

So my band likes to do one "mainstream" cover at every show. When that song first came out, we covered it, and got an awsome crowd response, everyone was up and rocking out.

We played it again about a month ago; by then it had been played to **** on the radio, and the crowd respose was nada. I think we actually got negative applause for that one.

So whats the deal? Why should a lot of radio play make a song bad. if its good its good. i guess people could be sick of it...but that shouldn't be a big deal

Opinions?

[industrialmg]

Burn up.

[phobiac54]

burn out and burn up?

i don't get it.

[fiveways]

Originally posted by phobiac54
Hey,

Had an interesting experience recently: I'm sure most of you (one's in canada anyway) know the song "I hate Everything about You" by Three Days Grace.

So my band likes to do one "mainstream" cover at every show. When that song first came out, we covered it, and got an awsome crowd response, everyone was up and rocking out.

We played it again about a month ago; by then it had been played to **** on the radio, and the crowd respose was nada. I think we actually got negative applause for that one.

So whats the deal? Why should a lot of radio play make a song bad. if its good its good. i guess people could be sick of it...but that shouldn't be a big deal

Opinions?

Because that is the one month that flash in the pans have to make all the money they will ever see in there lives through music.

[Bad Johnny]

because you may be listening to a band that's been underground for years and years, then they finally make it big and change their image a little bit, then everyone knows who they are. it's not cool to be their fan anymore.

[RUSHFANnLV]

Example: I've been listening to "Rock/Classic rock" stations all my life and I have had my fill of Def Leppard. I love Def Leppard's early stuff and all but I can't listen to it anymore because it's been pounded into my head soooooo much I just can't take it.

[Talent?!]

Mental oversaturation

[idealflaw]

even corgan turns the radio off when 1979 comes on.

[TheGrinnan]

Originally posted by idealflaw
even corgan turns the radio off when 1979 comes on.

Doubtful with his ego.

[joeinthebox1980]

Originally posted by FiveWays
Because that is the one month that flash in the pans have to make all the money they will ever see in there lives through music.

too bad the way record company contracts are... even one hit won't make an artist money.


basically, radio play is often equal to OVER-play. esp. with the trite setlists that are in radio stations these days. (Thanks Clear Channel) and the phenomenon of Pay-for-Play that has been going on for decades. (basically, record labels pay middlemen to get them to get radio stations to play specific songs).

so... basically, a majority of major radio stations are playing songs that record labels WANT them to play.

so what happens is the record labels get radio stations to play the same hits OVER and OVER and OVER again until people simply just hate the song.


f*cking major record companies.

[nickname]

I like that song, it's really quite catchy.
I remember a quote (I think it's attributed to Mussolini): "familiarity breeds contempt." That about sums it up.

[idm13]

Most of the guys I have played with don't even try to keep up with new songs. Whether Rock...Pop...or Country. They like to stick to the classics.

I personally try to blend it all now with my three-piece. A few new tunes...and few slighter burned out ones for flavor...and some classics for back bone.

[Jason Henderson]

well, I know why I hate songs on the radio-they play them over, and over, and over again until you want to shoot the DJ. I never listen to the radio anymore anyways, everything sounds the same now. If I do its going to be like a jazz station or something like that.

[cubby]

Because companies like the Clear Channel don't really give you much of an option and since they are all about trying to sell a product they are not going to try new sounds until Hollywood or MTV tells them it's okay.

**Sigh** Remember the days when you actually had DJ's that could select for themselves. Whatever happened to the Alan Freed's and John Peel's?

[Surferosad]

It's called payola...

[face__man]

It's always been about "Payola". Payola has been happening since the 1950's. It's nothing new. As far as radio play goes, a band doesn't suck just because they get played on the radio alot. You just get tired of the song from hearing it so much. There are also many factors why songs get played so much. One reason is simply because people request them. Many of today's youth have very short attention spans, and they're all about quick cheap thrills and whatever is popular for the moment. And for all the people who turn to hating some underground band as soon as they get popular, I think are so dumb. I can't understand why nobody can express any joy over the fact that a band they like finally made it and lots of other people like the band too. I mean thats what its all about, making it. Ask most popular musicians today if they don't like fame and popularity, I don't think you'll have many negative answers.

[Iced Guardian]

Canadian content legislation is responsible for a lot of that in Canada.

Example: The reason you will hear the same popular Canadian band 5 times a day on the radio is because the station fulfills their obligation that way.

Problem: This doesn't do much to help get Canadian music heard because it is easier to play a popular song 5 times rather than play 5 songs from struggling bands.

[industrialmg]

Originally posted by cubby
Because companies like the Clear Channel don't really give you much of an option and since they are all about trying to sell a product they are not going to try new sounds until Hollywood or MTV tells them it's okay.

**Sigh** Remember the days when you actually had DJ's that could select for themselves. Whatever happened to the Alan Freed's and John Peel's?



SSSSSHHHH.....they can hear you...

[Surferosad]

Originally posted by Iced Guardian
Canadian content legislation is responsible for a lot of that in Canada.

Example: The reason you will hear the same popular Canadian band 5 times a day on the radio is because the station fulfills their obligation that way.

Problem: This doesn't do much to help get Canadian music heard because it is easier to play a popular song 5 times rather than play 5 songs from struggling bands.

Yeah, lets get rid of that canadian content rule so that they can play an american band five times a day instead!

The problem runs deeper than that, I think...

[face__man]

the problem definately runs deeper than that

[Iced Guardian]

Of course the problem runs deeper than that, geez. A big part of the problem is that people(Canadians included) are idiots. The music world today is being threatened by the fast-food style marketing and production that gets put behind the flash-in-the-pas bands. This is a whole other debate waiting to happen. Anyways, without Canadian content, we would still hear Nickelback one time too many on the radio. Why? Because most DJ's at major radio stations are idiots with the same tastes/IQ's as their listeners.

To keep this thread alive and healthy, I would like someone, anyone, to name one good thing Canadian content laws have done for Canadian music.

[phobiac54]

you know, i'm too against the canadian content laws themselves, its how its being used that bugs me.

I think canadian music is something we should push and be more proud of in our country here. Without the content laws, our music scene would be overrun by the americans, and our culture would lose out.

Its the Dj's that are making everyone hate the content law. Some else in the thread said it first: Instead of playing 10 songs by 10 different struggling or up and comming bands, they play the same hit song 10 times.

And its somewhat the listeners fault for allowing this to happen. The listeners govern what radio plays, just no one really cares enough to speak up.

[ItCameFrom...]

I can't listen to 'Nevermind' because of brain saturation.

Or 'Seven Nation Army'

Or 'I Believe In A Thing Called Love'

Or 'One Armed Scissor'

Or 'Wombling Merry Xmas'

(oh ****, did I say that last one out loud?)

[ItCameFrom...]

Originally posted by cubby
Whatever happened to the Alan Freed's and John Peel's?

Nothing happened to John Peel! He's still going. In fact, go and listen to his archived shows on the Radio 1 website right now!

www.bbc.co.uk/radio1 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1)

I love John Peel. He makes my legs a-quiver. Erm... in a brotherly way, you understand. *ahem*

[Toddrod]

Originally posted by idealflaw
even corgan turns the radio off when 1979 comes on.

LOL:D Man that song was played into the ground. I greq up listening to 89X in Detroit and you could not listen for 5 minutes without hearing 1979 or Comedown

[Hasting]

I dislike the radio becausee it's the same songs over and over and most of them you really don't want to hear anyways. Plus The way the radio sounds bothers me it takes away from the quality just the way it sounds with its light static which most people don't care about and all the advertising errrrrr. Plus if you don't listen to the radio you don't ever have to deal with all the car advertising saying SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY YOUR LAST BLAH BLAH TO GET THIS CRAPPY DEAL THAT EVERY OTHER DEALER IS DOING TO.

[Jason Henderson]

Some terrible bands:

Hoobastank: Horrible, horrible band (bit of an incubus rip), their new song sounds like he's whining through the whole thing.

Saliva: when the bands name sucks, you know their music will too.

Nickelback: why are they still around?

Crazy Town: once again, the name is just horrifying to the ears.

Puddle of mudd: Nirvana rip-off? with a baseball cap from lip bizkit?

Lip Bizkit: of course

any nu-metal: rap is great, but dont mix it with anything else, please.

blink 182: someone take them out back and shoot them, please



all pure saturated sludge. They sound too familiar to something else and tey do nothing original, and have barely (if at all) musical talent. At least to be played on the radio. I think Tom Petty was right when he released the album "The Last DJ", cause its true, they're all slaves to corporate money. Its sad, but hey, all the good music is now underground, at least for now.

[phobiac54]

whoa man calm down

some of the bands you mentioned brought there various genres to the masses. Limp Bizkit were one of the rap metal innovators back in the day, Blink 182 started a new wave of pop-punk (too bad all they're imitators blow).

Don't diss nickelback, they were "Canada's Rock Band" before they made it big, and the reason people diss them has nothing to do with them, its just the backlash that all bands that big get.

Nu-metal is just a stupid term.

How can you tell people not to mix genres? Thats how new genres are created. Rock wouldn't exist if Chuch Berry and Elvis didn't mix blues with country.

Rap metal can be awsome if done right, its just sooooooo many bands do it badly, so its gotton a bad *ehem* rap.

[Iced Guardian]

Originally posted by phobiac54
Blink 182 started a new wave of pop-punk (too bad all they're imitators blow).

Too bad the originators blow.

[phobiac54]

no need to turn this thread into a debate over weather bands are good or not. its all a matter of opinion anyway; no one's gonna win.

supposed to be a serious discussion about major labels corrupting the music biz.

keep em comming!!!

[Rock A My Soul]

Originally posted by phobiac54
Don't diss nickelback, they were "Canada's Rock Band" before they made it big, and the reason people diss them has nothing to do with them, its just the backlash that all bands that big get.

No, I'm pretty sure it has to do with how bad they are. I never liked them, even before they were popular. My favorite quote from Tough Crowd with Colin Quinn: "Listening to bad music makes people violent. Like, listening to Nickelback makes me want to kill Nickelback." They're a second-rate Bush, which means they're a fourth-rate band.

Anyway, in the Onion's interview book, there was an interesting interview with Peter Frampton (not personally a fan, but he seemed like a cool guy), the posterboy of overexposure. And I quote: "Everybody wants to be on the front cover of People and Rolling Stone. I didn't know that too much coverage is death, overkill."

It all boils down to too much of a good thing, really. I still can't listen to certain Beatles songs, even though they're great songs.

[phobiac54]

you make a very good point.

though i still like nickelback.

its good to see some actually debate a topic rather than just say "no that sucks."

[Rock A My Soul]

Originally posted by phobiac54
you make a very good point.

though i still like nickelback.

its good to see some actually debate a topic rather than just say "no that sucks."

Well, they still suck. But I think that a lot of people who did like that "how you remind me" song now hate it, because it was on every ten freakin minutes.

It can even happen with my favorite cds though. I'll get a new cd and it's amazing and I'll listen to nothing but it for two weeks and then I have to put it away because I'm sick of it.

And then everyone quotes the lines from those rap songs and thinks they're still funny. Like "I love you like a fat kid loves cake", or "shake it like a Polaroid picture" (I really like that song, but I hear it so much, and I don't even listen to the radio that often)

[Jason Henderson]

im not saying ALL genres. I just think raping in rock is horrible. Limp Bizkit is horrible. They always were. Always will. basball caps and "bling bling", horrible...just horrible....

Barenaked Ladies is a much better band than Nickelback, sorry. They have much better music. Something that doesn't make me want to hurt somebody.

Music is always an expanding cosmos, but the record industry is picking out the worst, poppies bands ever to the masses just to make money. Im not saying all canadian bands suck, and im not saying all rap/rock bands suck, but alot of whats on the radio and on mtv does.

im sure theirs a way better rock band in canada than nickelback.
Blink 182 was an imitator too, they came out after the whole punk movement started from (a much better band, still pop though) Green Day. every time I listen to either of those bands or anything that has followed them....It reminds me of how punk has died.

"how you remind me" was a desperate attempt to do something like "staind", cash in on the same thing. The first time I heard the song I thought it was a Staind song, actually.

[phobiac54]

everyone is entitled to their opinion, and you have very valid points, but you can not say "how you remind me" sounds like a staind song.

i like nickelback, but I am a HUGE staind fan. Staind is one of my favorite bands, and I must say "how you remind me" sounds nothing like a staind song.

[NoteBOOM]

Originally posted by ItCameFrom...
Or 'One Armed Scissor'

Man, that song NEVER gets old for me!

[Jason Henderson]

thats right, everyone has their own opinion.

well, it is a different band, so it can't be COMPLETELY like staind. i was just saying its more like a rip-off of staind, going with the same ideology of "im hurt, and its your fault...whine".

[Jason Henderson]

and Staind is a much better band, by the way. especially their early and acoustic stuff.

[entrada]

Although it seems like you guys have moved on to another topic, I think two of the best songs that were killed by too much radioplay are
Fastball-"The Way" and
Cardigans-"Lovefool"
Both are really well written fun songs that I still like to this day.

[Iced Guardian]

Originally posted by entrada
Although it seems like you guys have moved on to another topic, I think two of the best songs that were killed by too much radioplay are
Fastball-"The Way" and
Cardigans-"Lovefool"
Both are really well written fun songs that I still like to this day.

Being a metaller this kills me but, I agree with you completely. :o

[Doctor J]

Originally posted by Jason Henderson
Music is always an expanding cosmos, but the record industry is picking out the worst, poppies bands ever to the masses just to make money.


There seems to be some kind of misconception that record labels exist for some other purpose than to make money. They don't.

[grunge grl]

You guys are right... when a song receives to much airplay, you get sick of it just like what if you had to eat the same food everyday for breakfast lunch, and dinner. That's enough to make anybody go crazy.
One thing that gets me about the songs that are usually played on the radio is their lasting quality... songs disappear so quickly these days and then you never give it a second thought and nobody remembers it the next month. It's the songs themselves... they've seem to lose a lot of meaning and quality.
Probably when a band makes it after being underground for so many years and then you lose interest in them is because people who you know wouldn't like them in the first place now love them to death. Just like when Staind drew popularity, my friend couldn't bear to stand beside teeny boppers in a staind concert.
I think real punk is dying. Most of the bands or artists that consider themselves punk aren't really punk, like Avril Lavigne who comes loaded with the "punk attitude", skateboards, and wristbands but when you listen to her songs there's nothing punk about them.
As far as rapping in rock... sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't. Limp Bizkit just doesn't cut it for me, when I listen to their music, I don't learn anything or feel that rush when you're listening to a good song. Sometimes it does work a little bit, although Linkin Park has gotten a lot of diss, I think their music is very original in that no one has come close to mixing electronica, rock, and blended rapping with catchy melodies. I was kind of disappointed with their recent album... I really liked Hybrid Theory, I liked it more before DJs started playing all their songs 24/7.

[commuter]

this is sort of on topic, sort of off topic...

when someone mentioned canadian content laws it made me think of all the funding programs for music up here, mostly FACTOR. you can get a variety of loans and grants from the government to record, tour, showcase, make videos, etc.

at face value it's pretty great, but i think that the way it has been working sucks.

first off, most of the bands who get the recording loans (50% of your budget, up to 35,000.00) are the ones who don't need it. it's bands like the tea party getting it. they've sold a bunch of records, they tour quite with some success - they don't need the money. the problem is that much of the panel deciding who gets the money is making the decision based on their own personal business objectives - the panels give the money to their own or related projects. how else do blackie and the radio kings get the maximum every year?

furthermore, the loans and grants have produced a weird sense of complacency in both the artists and the labels. people won't bother to do anything anymore unless they get FACTOR money for it. the attitude is "why should i spend my money?", which is so backwards. it should be hard to make an independent record, it should takes tonnes of work and negotiation, it shouldn't be easy and it shouldn't be bureaucratic.

this complacency extends to sales. people don't work as hard to sell the records that get made because they don't have to. they won't lose any money because they didn't put any money into it in the first place.

what i do support is a reduction of the recording funds available, but an increase of the funding for marketing and promotions. that's the area that we can't compete in compared to the americans. you should be able to make a record on your own and then beg the government for money to take out ads, find US distribution, pay for independent radio promotions and the like.

i would also support tax breaks for private investments in the arts. you, as an individual, should be able to fund / invest in a recording and receive a tax break. why not give a break on something like that if it is stimulating both the economy (studios, record stores, etc.) and the arts? it would also be cool because it would help take some of the decision making power away from the mainstream industry - the person with the bucks, be they an eccentric millionaire fan or whatever, gets to make the call on what is good, not a friend of the tea party's manager.

sorry for all that. it was probably too long and too incoherent.

[cubby]

I guess I should have actually said that radio doesn't make people hate songs - it just plays songs I hate. Excepting, of course, the odd college radio station. I need to get one of those satelite radio deals...

[Iced Guardian]

Originally posted by commuter
this is sort of on topic, sort of off topic...

when someone mentioned canadian content laws it made me think of all the funding programs for music up here, mostly FACTOR. you can get a variety of loans and grants from the government to record, tour, showcase, make videos, etc.

at face value it's pretty great, but i think that the way it has been working sucks.

first off, most of the bands who get the recording loans (50% of your budget, up to 35,000.00) are the ones who don't need it. it's bands like the tea party getting it. they've sold a bunch of records, they tour quite with some success - they don't need the money. the problem is that much of the panel deciding who gets the money is making the decision based on their own personal business objectives - the panels give the money to their own or related projects. how else do blackie and the radio kings get the maximum every year?

furthermore, the loans and grants have produced a weird sense of complacency in both the artists and the labels. people won't bother to do anything anymore unless they get FACTOR money for it. the attitude is "why should i spend my money?", which is so backwards. it should be hard to make an independent record, it should takes tonnes of work and negotiation, it shouldn't be easy and it shouldn't be bureaucratic.

this complacency extends to sales. people don't work as hard to sell the records that get made because they don't have to. they won't lose any money because they didn't put any money into it in the first place.

what i do support is a reduction of the recording funds available, but an increase of the funding for marketing and promotions. that's the area that we can't compete in compared to the americans. you should be able to make a record on your own and then beg the government for money to take out ads, find US distribution, pay for independent radio promotions and the like.

i would also support tax breaks for private investments in the arts. you, as an individual, should be able to fund / invest in a recording and receive a tax break. why not give a break on something like that if it is stimulating both the economy (studios, record stores, etc.) and the arts? it would also be cool because it would help take some of the decision making power away from the mainstream industry - the person with the bucks, be they an eccentric millionaire fan or whatever, gets to make the call on what is good, not a friend of the tea party's manager.

sorry for all that. it was probably too long and too incoherent.

Wow. I didn't know about any of that. Thanks man. Good post.

[King Buzzo]

ya its a shame that ppl will just start hating bands because there mainstream:(

[Matt]

Originally posted by King Buzzo
ya its a shame that ppl will just start hating bands because there mainstream:(

i listen to a good many mainstream bands:)

[Skuzze]

Limp Bizkit didnt innovate jack ****; Anthrax and Public Enemy brought the noise of "Rap-Rock."

[numchuckbitch]

Without mainstream, there would never be any pure, underground music, the good stuff, and so lets be a little thankful.