"I think i just figured out rap music", a study at work
Actually, i think i figured out rap music as compared to classic rock. unusual comparison, i know, but i think it's valid.
first, let's look at quantity. nowadays, an artist puts an album out about once a year to once in 3 years, the average being somewhere in the year-and-a-half range. in the 60s and early 70s, an artist would put out as many albums as possible. not bad albums, either...good ones. that means that there are 9-1/3 "new" songs per artist per year now, as opposed to 28 40 years ago. a 1:3 ratio. (14 songs/album in both cases. one album every 6 months in the 60s)
Now let's look at genre, and quantity of high-quality artists. back in the 60s and 70s, there were very few genre. mo-town, jazz, rock 'n roll, and folk were basically your pop choices; rock 'n roll being the most common. now adays, there are a bunch of genre and sub-genre filling every void. also, presently, the genre are so drastically different, there's almost not cross-genre listeners. back in the times of the beatles and dylan, you could listen to everything. i.e. folk was a step away from rock, r&b is 500 steps away from skate-punk. you just can't listen to a variety as easily.
figuring the sheer number of genre now, filling each one with the same quantity of good artists is nearly impossible. even if there are as many good bands now as there were in 1966, they'd be spread so thin, there'd be no way to fill the airwaves.
so, time for some math. let's make some assumptions and figure out how many songs you can play on the radio. first, some constants. 1966, ad time took up 12.5% of radio listening time. now, it takes up 25%. songs in 1966 averaged 2 minutes, now they average 3.5 minutes. a station only plays one genre in this model. days are 24 hours, months are 30 days.
so, lets say there are 1,000 good artists at both times, spread evenly over the genre. back then, let's say there were 5 genre. now there are 20. so, there are 200/genre in 1966, and 50 in 2005. we already figured out the song ratio, but lets change the base unit to months instead of years. that means that now adays, there are 38.888... new songs/genre/month now and 466.666... in 1966. in 1966, there were 594 listening hours per station per month in 1966, 540 now. so, there are 9,257 songs played per station per month now and 17,820 in 1966 (remember the song length difference). there were 38.818574... cycles of songs in 1966 versus 238.03714... cycles now. a 1966 cycle lasts 15.3 (15 hrs, 18 minutes) listening hours, now it is 2.269 (2 hrs, 16.4 minutes) listening hours.
now let's look at longevity. let's say you can listen to a song 25 times a month before it's "overplayed." for this, we figure that all songs are played at the same frequency, once per listening cycle. there have been no changes in attention span, and you listen to the same station, 45 hours a week (listening at work and on commute). you hear the same song played 19.83 times a week now (3.97 times a day), and 2.94 times in 1966 (.59/day). days will not go into weeks evenly because of weekends. a song is overplayed in 1.26 weeks now, and could never be overplayed in 1966 (it'd take 8.5 weeks to reach 25 plays).
since songs are overplayed constantly nowadays, you hear ghetto 15 year old say "that was so 6 months ago". this is because their music keeps getting overplayed to the point of death. this is also why classic rap is a niche genre while classic rock is common. no one wants to hear a song they heard too many times during their childhood.
you may think looking at this that i make a lot of assumptions. i do about the 60s, seeing as how beatle mania swept the western world, the beatles would have been played more often than status quo, however, the would have both been played. yes, there were songs that were overplayed, but if you take it on the average, it works out. so you heard "i want to hold your hand" twice as many times as you heard "pictures of matchstick men". still, it averages out.
unfortunately, the totals for today are pretty accurate. almost dead on, infact. i sat yesterday while working within earshot of 100.3 the beat. tallied how many songs i heard in an 8 hour period, and how often. a little math proved i listened to the same song played an average of 4.002 times.
wow...boring days at work lately...
first, let's look at quantity. nowadays, an artist puts an album out about once a year to once in 3 years, the average being somewhere in the year-and-a-half range. in the 60s and early 70s, an artist would put out as many albums as possible. not bad albums, either...good ones. that means that there are 9-1/3 "new" songs per artist per year now, as opposed to 28 40 years ago. a 1:3 ratio. (14 songs/album in both cases. one album every 6 months in the 60s)
Now let's look at genre, and quantity of high-quality artists. back in the 60s and 70s, there were very few genre. mo-town, jazz, rock 'n roll, and folk were basically your pop choices; rock 'n roll being the most common. now adays, there are a bunch of genre and sub-genre filling every void. also, presently, the genre are so drastically different, there's almost not cross-genre listeners. back in the times of the beatles and dylan, you could listen to everything. i.e. folk was a step away from rock, r&b is 500 steps away from skate-punk. you just can't listen to a variety as easily.
figuring the sheer number of genre now, filling each one with the same quantity of good artists is nearly impossible. even if there are as many good bands now as there were in 1966, they'd be spread so thin, there'd be no way to fill the airwaves.
so, time for some math. let's make some assumptions and figure out how many songs you can play on the radio. first, some constants. 1966, ad time took up 12.5% of radio listening time. now, it takes up 25%. songs in 1966 averaged 2 minutes, now they average 3.5 minutes. a station only plays one genre in this model. days are 24 hours, months are 30 days.
so, lets say there are 1,000 good artists at both times, spread evenly over the genre. back then, let's say there were 5 genre. now there are 20. so, there are 200/genre in 1966, and 50 in 2005. we already figured out the song ratio, but lets change the base unit to months instead of years. that means that now adays, there are 38.888... new songs/genre/month now and 466.666... in 1966. in 1966, there were 594 listening hours per station per month in 1966, 540 now. so, there are 9,257 songs played per station per month now and 17,820 in 1966 (remember the song length difference). there were 38.818574... cycles of songs in 1966 versus 238.03714... cycles now. a 1966 cycle lasts 15.3 (15 hrs, 18 minutes) listening hours, now it is 2.269 (2 hrs, 16.4 minutes) listening hours.
now let's look at longevity. let's say you can listen to a song 25 times a month before it's "overplayed." for this, we figure that all songs are played at the same frequency, once per listening cycle. there have been no changes in attention span, and you listen to the same station, 45 hours a week (listening at work and on commute). you hear the same song played 19.83 times a week now (3.97 times a day), and 2.94 times in 1966 (.59/day). days will not go into weeks evenly because of weekends. a song is overplayed in 1.26 weeks now, and could never be overplayed in 1966 (it'd take 8.5 weeks to reach 25 plays).
since songs are overplayed constantly nowadays, you hear ghetto 15 year old say "that was so 6 months ago". this is because their music keeps getting overplayed to the point of death. this is also why classic rap is a niche genre while classic rock is common. no one wants to hear a song they heard too many times during their childhood.
you may think looking at this that i make a lot of assumptions. i do about the 60s, seeing as how beatle mania swept the western world, the beatles would have been played more often than status quo, however, the would have both been played. yes, there were songs that were overplayed, but if you take it on the average, it works out. so you heard "i want to hold your hand" twice as many times as you heard "pictures of matchstick men". still, it averages out.
unfortunately, the totals for today are pretty accurate. almost dead on, infact. i sat yesterday while working within earshot of 100.3 the beat. tallied how many songs i heard in an 8 hour period, and how often. a little math proved i listened to the same song played an average of 4.002 times.
wow...boring days at work lately...