tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3760137241594753268.post4637305381251302819..comments2024-01-30T08:47:44.544-08:00Comments on Rock Hall Monitors: Merit evaluation 2016-2017Philiphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08292012228944104037noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3760137241594753268.post-42560948420320721812017-05-25T06:45:47.779-07:002017-05-25T06:45:47.779-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3760137241594753268.post-3835317669117272282016-11-06T17:42:35.048-08:002016-11-06T17:42:35.048-08:00But again, being foremost in new jack swing isn...But again, being foremost in new jack swing isn't as important being third or fourth along for new wave, because the pond of new wave is bigger than that of new jack. And given that the Moody Blues and Pink Floyd, and I believe King Crimson were all before Yes, it's not a great comparison to bring them in either.<br /><br />Re albums: You gotta remember though, not every album charts. And if it's a new album by a veteran artist, odds are it charts in the low reaches of the charts it doesn't garner many points. Baez had almost as many top twenty hit albums as Jackson had hit albums period. It balances out in that sense. But again, albums charts has to be weighed against singles success, which brought Baez down a bit, and chart success isn't entirely the definition of Impact either, though it's a good metric of it, imo. <br /><br />Commercial success + critical acclaim do seem to be the winning formula these years, but that doesn't mean I have to let my criteria be defined entirely by that either. Philiphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08292012228944104037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3760137241594753268.post-53377414257494339952016-11-06T16:48:47.578-08:002016-11-06T16:48:47.578-08:00I certainly agree new wave is more important than ...I certainly agree new wave is more important than new jack swing, but Janet Jackson is arguably the #1 artist in that genre while the Cars are not as important as Police, Talking Heads, Elvis Costello, Blondie, and probably others, but yeah, it's close. I think I'd have Yes first from classic rock anyway, since I think they are closer to top of prog than Cars is to top of new wave, although admittedly, new wave was also a more important and influential genre than prog.<br /><br />Yeah, I too lament the Telecommunications Act of 1996, sold to the public as a tool for media censorship with the unlimited media ownership sneaked in, that basically helped destroy radio, television, newspapers, and most of the media, helping lead to the intensified polarization that results in the current candidates we have. Oh well. Nothing will change on that front.<br /><br />I just don't think number of albums is a fair comparison when current artists are releasing albums much less frequently than artists of the past, and maybe it would make more sense to take an average of album scores to reflect the entire career. I truly do think that overrates Baez's commercial performance, not that THAT should matter, but it does.<br /><br />Basically, the Rock Hall seems to be decided most years by commercial success + critical acclaim (where innovation and influence aren't looked at nearly as much as they claim they are, although usually those artists will be critically acclaimed), so you could really just go to RIAA certifications and acclaimedmusic.net artist rankings and predict from there...<br /><br />I have to figure most of the artists that are considered to be long-term snubs are those that WERE innovative and/or influential but weren't critical favorites (that must be why Stevie Ray Vaughan wasn't close to first ballot...I was shocked when he was like 800th on the AcclaimedMusic rankings behind even the likes of Bon Jovi, Garth Brooks, and Britney Spears, but maybe that's changed...)Sean Wronahttp://www.racermetrics.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3760137241594753268.post-89951052206273685842016-11-06T16:34:21.647-08:002016-11-06T16:34:21.647-08:00Sean, thanks for the reply. To try and answer all...Sean, thanks for the reply. To try and answer all your questions: Jackson's style was pretty innovative and influential, but new-wave as subgenre had more originality, imo, and is more historically important than New Jack Swing. It was a tough call to make, but I had to give the edge to the Cars.<br /><br />As for Steppenwolf, homogenization of radio ownership, and thus radio formatting is a lot of why that is. For oldies stations, you also gotta balance in soul music, '50s music, British invasion, plus '60s pop. With classic rock, especially of late, they try to shy away more from the '60s and favor the '70s more heavily. Even the Beatles aren't as important to classic rock stations' programming as Led Zeppelin.<br /><br />As for Whitburn's methodology, it's not perfect, but no system ever is. But the quick rundown is that #1 albums get 200 points for the first week and #1, and 20 points for each additional week at #1, 190 points for the first week at #2 and ten points for each additional week at #2; #3 gets 180 for the first week and 5 points for each additional week at #3. If it peaked at 4 or 5, 170 points. Peaked at the rest of the top ten, 160. 11-15 gets 155 points, 16-20 = 150. Then five points fewer for each group of ten places on down the line, ending with 10 points if it peaked between #191-200. Total weeks charted are added in as well. And yes, it does favor artists with many charted albums, which honestly is how it should be. There's nothing wrong with rewarding longevity, as it is something that every artist to some degree strives for. For an artist to consistently chart in the higher reaches of the charts is pretty significant. Baez had 25 charted albums (plus one on the Christmas charts). She's only nine points ahead of Journey in my book, so if you removed the Christmas album that is listed, Journey would probably be ahead. Janet did have a handful of #1 albums, but only nine charted albums total. Also remember, my source is ten years old, so Pearl Jam has probably passed both Journey and Joan Baez. A quick glance at wikipedia confirms this.Philiphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08292012228944104037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3760137241594753268.post-12072723537288042332016-11-06T11:07:30.634-08:002016-11-06T11:07:30.634-08:00I think I meant to say album chart 'presence&#...I think I meant to say album chart 'presence', not practice.Sean Wronahttp://www.racermetrics.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3760137241594753268.post-60999149487311131212016-11-06T11:01:14.297-08:002016-11-06T11:01:14.297-08:00Although they're going to be a first-ballot in...Although they're going to be a first-ballot inductee regardless, I think the big intangible for Pearl Jam is Jeff Ament and Stone Gossard's past history. The first grunge band is usually cited to be Green River, and Ament and Gossard were members from day one, so even if Pearl Jam itself did not innovate grunge, one can argue their members did. Green River split into dueling factions Mudhoney (who did not want a major label deal, considering it "selling out") and Mother Love Bone (who did), and MLB became Pearl Jam after their singer's drug overdose. Of course Kurt Cobain preferred the Mudhoney faction and sneered at Pearl Jam even though they were a direct descendant of an original grunge band and Nirvana were kind of outsiders to that scene...<br /><br />I'd have to argue Janet Jackson did innovate (or her producers, but since their primary successes were with each other, same difference.) Isn't her Control album considered basically the start of and major influence on the New Jack Swing movement, where even her brother Michael followed HER lead on his Dangerous album? New Jack Swing was certainly one of the dominant strains of pop in the late '80s-early '90s, resulting in Paula Abdul and lots of similarly styled junk acts, but still...I think she's objectively #4 (although I think you got the top three correct in the correct order.)<br /><br />How on earth is Whitburn measuring album chart practice? Reading Baez and Journey as the top two album chart acts seemed wrong to me, because I knew Jackson, 2Pac, and Pearl Jam had numerous (a LOT) of #1 albums and Journey only had one and Baez's peak album was a #7 (even Kraftwerk's peak album charted higher than Baez's.) It sounds like Whitburn must be using 200 points for a #1 album down to 1 point for a #200 album so people who have released a lot of semi-popular albums end up being ranked over people who have released several massive albums, because even a #25 album or something wouldn't be seen as that much less popular than a #1 (in terms of the number of points it scores), when I think objectively that doesn't make sense. That scale shouldn't be linear, and Pearl Jam, 2Pac, and Jackson should all be considered bigger album acts given their numerous massive hits when Baez was quite frankly a cult figure. #1 albums should be ranked substantially higher than #2s, with #3s somewhat less substantially lower than #2s, etc... A ranking where the difference between #1 and #2 and the difference between #199 and #200 are the same points-wise (which it looks like it must be based on these results) doesn't seem to have much value. If you're going to use sales as a factor, I think it should be overall sales or number of top X albums or singles rather than Whitburn's formula which seems rather bizarre and simplistic to me. Baez as the most popular album act just does not pass the sniff test, and a Whitburn formula based more on longevity would penalize more recent acts when few people release anything more quickly than every 3 or 4 years these days...<br /><br />When it comes to ELO, I also think about the Elo chess ratings (which Jeff Sagarin also uses for his sports rankings) pretty quickly. Snort, snort. (Pushes glasses up nose)<br /><br />Wow, I was truly surprised Steppenwolf had that many hits. I truly thought they were a two-hit wonder just like the Zombies were a three-hit wonder. I wonder why classic rock stations never, ever play any of the other tracks. Probably because it's the most stodgy radio format out there where even the one hit wonders that are played are practically the same nationwide, while every Led Zeppelin track ever recorded is worthy for the format (even though some of them are certainly bad...) Sigh. Only the Beatles would probably deserve that kind of airplay, yet they seem to be falling out of the classic rock format for some reason...Sean Wronahttp://www.racermetrics.com/noreply@blogger.com