Top 40 radio & the Hot 100 excludes most genres.
It doesn't systematically
exclude them. It's just that country and bluegrass don't sell enough copies to enter the chart. There's a difference.
In the music industry it's hard to be successful. Like, I'm friends with many musicians, from goth and NIN clones to Britpop and GNR covers bands. Only
one of these bands ever got signed to a label, and even after appearing a handful of times on national TV, they never broke the top 20 of the singles chart. You know what I did about it? Nothing. What's the point? It doesn't matter. I didn't sit there crying about it, I didn't launch a campaign to equalize the charts so there was more goth stuff on the radio.
If Top 40 does not play jazz or bluegrass music, then those artists can't chart on it. A jazz artist can only be featured on a jazz chart if jazz radio stations are the only place they are played.
You're basically reinforcing my original point.
- They compile a chart that has the most popular songs.
- Inevitably, some genres will have more songs than other genres, for a variety of reasons, including airplay/exposure
- If jazz doesn't get in, fans of jazz (and jazz label executives) will complain it's not fair, they will want a chart especially for them, with more jazz
- Before you know it, a plethora of superfluous charts get created, which only serve to create confusion, as shown by this thread
I don't see how that is hard to understand. If an R&B artist had to "crosssover" to Top 40, then it's segregated in the first place.
Some people say crossover. Some people say break through. Whatever. It's a fact of life that some music will be more popular than others. It's unfortunate for you if you happen to like a minority genre, but you'll live with it.
Again, if somebody wants to know about/listen to the most popular songs, an unbiased chart is what they need. If somebody wants only R&B, then an R&B station is what they need, same with rock or anything else. The only people who need a rock chart are those in the industry who want to claim their rock song is more popular that it actually is.
Rock radio was majority a white male audience, and it didn't play many female or non-white artists.
I just feel like you're trying to racialize everything. Sure, some music appeals more to different races, but that's just the way it is. There are more white people, therefore "white music" is higher in the chart. It's not some big conspiracy, or something that needs to be fixed.
Rock bands often sold more albums than singles, because a lot of them didn't get Top 40 airplay. Led Zeppelin & Pink Floyd have very few hit singles.
Fully aware of if all this. Last year I bought a Zep album on Blu-ray because it was released in 5.1, 96/24. I also have Dark Side on SACD in 5.1, and The Wall in Dolby Atmos. Plus a friend recently came to visit, and he brought a bunch of Beatles/Floyd/Oldfield stuff with him because it was in Atmos. They were all albums where you had to sit and listen for the full 45 mins (and which, to my knowledge, never even had any singles).
And if they released an MJ album in Dolby Atmos, I'd buy that too. Too bad they won't.