My Feelings on the Active Rock Industry

Moderator: moe

Post Reply
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2014 5:36 am

My Feelings on the Active Rock Industry

Post by revevilunion51 » Tue Mar 24, 2015 8:34 pm

My Feelings on the Active Rock Industry


Established songs by established bands of the 1990s and 2000s are fine because I grew up with them in elementary and middle school. But new songs by established artists?, seriously? I can understand by the audience ratings, but honestly many of the established artists that we are promoting new songs for do not fit on the active rock format anymore, especially anything from a "post-hiatus" band.

Speaking of "post-hiatus" bands, when Slipknot returned from hiatus with the sexy album cover and the creepy ballad "The Devil in I", I myself started getting nightmares of the skeleton chick and the band members dancing as the song played, and had to wake up crying and blasting my iPod, eventually deleting the song permanently from my iPod playlist. Now we got another post-hiatus song from established band Breaking Benjamin, ugh, "Failure" is not a good song, especially without guitarist and bassist Aaron Fink and Mark James Klepaski in the band.

I can't even play an active rock station on iheartradio anymore because the station will play a new or current song by an established band rather than a younger band.

First of all, what an active rock station is supposed to do from a manager's point of view is deliver ratings whatever it takes (and that's perfectly fine with me), but it's the new songs by younger bands that should take the highest positions of the charts, not the new songs by established bands. This is because the younger band has always been the main face of active rock radio for many, many years, especially during the heyday of post-grunge, Nu Metal and metalcore in the early and mid 2000s. The younger bands have also made huge records during this time, many songs between 1997-2003 that stayed at number one for sixteen weeks and over were set by younger bands, not established bands.

Of course we have lots of new songs breaking into the active rock chart soon (but Zac Brown Band? Seriously, no way they are going to hit #1 this year). We have songs that I think should hit #1 on active rock radio like:
"New Wave" by Islander
"Baptized in the Rio Grande" by Sons of Texas
"Downfall" by From Ashes to New
"Lydia" by Highly Suspect
"How to Rob a Bank" by Those Mockingbirds
"In Between" by Beartooth
"With Fire (Comes Absolution)" by The Bloodline
"Hope Within Hatred" by Shattered Sun
"Blood Stop and Run" by Kill it Kid
TBA by Red Sun Rising
TBA by Monks of Mellonwah
And many more to come...

Can we go back to placing new songs by younger bands on the highest positions of the active rock chart, I don't mind a younger band who mimics classic rock music every now and then, but can we focus on new songs by younger bands and established songs by established artists. It was always that way, it stays that way, even if one is not as known as the other.

In fact, you never know if these younger bands may only get airplay on active rock radio, but also on CHR/Top 40 radio as well. Who knows, maybe a band like Red Sun Rising or even The Bloodline or Shattered Sun can get heavy airplay on a station like Z100, KC101 or Hits 1 and start a movement of younger bands creating an active rock-to-CHR/Top 40 plan. Just think about bands like Staind, Puddle of Mudd, Default, Trapt and Crossfade and the heavy CHR/Top 40 airplay they received during their heyday in the 2000s. That could be now.

Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 1:40 pm

Re: My Feelings on the Active Rock Industry

Post by bigbadbri » Fri Mar 27, 2015 9:35 am

Active rock is a dying format for one reason: NEW Active targeted bands are just that - targeted. Like 80's corporate suck-hards like Bad Company or Boston on steroids. Nickleback-ish or derivative of all the bad rock from the 00's.

Active became a player in the format wheel because it played the Alternative the Mainstreams wouldn't in the 90's. They stopped and now Alternative shares just as many with the Top 40's as they do Actives.

Yes, the new Breaking Benjamin sucks, but so did the old one. Even the mildly interesting new active bands are mundane compared to the music you get on classic rock or alternative stations. There is a reason those formats are doing much better than actives. The active rock music has no appeal accept to a very few.

Perhaps the biggest problem with rock is there are hardly any great ALBUMS, just a couple of good songs you can by on iTunes here or there.

Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:07 pm

Re: My Feelings on the Active Rock Industry

Post by countryboy » Mon Mar 30, 2015 7:31 pm

The active rock industry doesn't care about radio airplay. It's obviously not a priority. They don't sign artists with the thought of getting airplay. The bands don't court radio airplay. They don't understand the connection between airplay and the live show. Radio stations have lots of genre choices when it comes to picking a format. When they do, they want a music partner who'll give them something they can work with. Of all the genres, Active Rock brings the least to the table. They are the least organized. They do the least for radio. A&R is non-existent. There's little mass excitement for the music, and as a result, very little consensus around who are the stars and what are the hits. If you don't have stars or hits, and the audience is splintered into a million individual pieces, how do you build a radio station? Radio is about community, and there is no real active rock community. Just a bunch of fan groups for specific bands. That's why Active Rock is in trouble.

Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2014 5:36 am

Re: My Feelings on the Active Rock Industry

Post by revevilunion51 » Fri Apr 10, 2015 5:01 am

I totally agree with you countryboy, what you're saying should be reversed, and active rock should be just like the other radio format, I agree.

Post Reply