Grunge. Why?

[adaher]

I've been going over Billboard charts for a project I'm doing, identifying musical trends, tracking the evolution of the pop industry, that sort of thing.

here's one thing that jumped out at me: the record companies and MTV screwed up in 1991 when they switched their focus away from straight ahead melodic rock and towards alternative and grunge. The charts don't lie: grunge went over with pop audiences like anchovies on ice cream.

Here's the evidence: From 1986, when Bon Jovi's "You Give Love a Bad Name" became the first hard rock/metal #1 hit since "Metal Health", the "hair bands" became a constant presence on the charts. Those of us who lived through that wonderful era know this. But then 1991 and "Smells Like Teen Spirit" came, and that was the end, right? Grunge dominated, game over, end of story.

Well, it didn't work out that way. Smells Like Teen Spirit peaked at #7. After Smells Like Teen Spirit, there were still hair bands hitting the top 10 all the way until 1993, when Firehouse's "When I Look Into Your Eyes" became the last top 10 hit in the hair metal genre. Between 1991 and 1993, except for Smells Like Teen Spirit, not a single grunge song cracked the top 10, despite heavy MTV airplay. Only a few, softer alternative hits, like Soul Asylum's "Runaway Train", and Spin Doctors "Two Princes", became genuine hits. Grunge, while certainly popular among rock audiences, had no crossover appeal. The early 90s were almost totally dominated by rap and R&B. Ah, the glory days of "Baby Got Back" and "Whoomp! There it is!".

So what was the music industry thinking? They managed to make it uncool to listen to hair bands, yet the alternative they put forward was never really as popular as it was supposed to be, and pretty much died out by 1995. MTV during that period was pretty much alternative around the clock, and some really weird stuff, too, much of which will probably never be shown again, even on VH1 classic. If you watch and episode of Beavis and butthead, there's some pretty weird videos there. It was a really strange era for music, and while I love experimentation, most of it was garbage and quickly forgotten. Again, what were they thinking? An alternative band gets one #7 hit and that's a reason to dump your whole roster and sign anyone with a pulse from Seattle? Yet Meat Loaf had a #1 hit for five weeks at the end of 1993, and no one saw that as a reason to push more straight ahead melodic rock groups?

Sorry if this seems like "inside baseball"-type stuff, but I just found it fascinating and thought I'd share it with my fellow music fans.

 

[TheLongshot]

I think the whole "hair band" thing was starting to run its course at that time. It was turning into a joke.

But, the abandonment of support for some of those bands at the time made me scratch my head. Def Leppard comes to mind. Personally, I think Slang is one of the best albums the band ever did, but it got almost no push by the record company.

 

[adaher]

Oh, no question, but melodic rock was starting to move away from the whole glam thing anyway. Mr. Big had their best year in 1992 playing timeless rock n' roll with one foot in the 80s and another in the 60s, Guns N' roses was still in demand, Metallica was at their commercial peak, Ozzy was doing great in album sales, Meat Loaf of course had a smash album in 1993.

It strikes me that if MTV hadn't suddenly changed course, that the 80s would have evolved into the 90s in much the way that the 70s evolved into the 80s. There wasn't some massive shift between the rock of the 70s and the rock of the 80s. Rock got big, it declined a little when disco became king, and then it emerged again repackaged. I think the same thing would have happened had the industry stayed the course. Instead, they did a massive 180, and while alternative kept people interested for a little while, when that mini-boom ended rock as an industry was mangled beyond recognition. There was no longer a "formula". Which a lot of people would consider to be a good thing from a creative standpoint, but makes the music less viable from a commercial standpoint. Everyone knows the formula for writing a successful pop, R&B, rap, or country hit, but there really isn't a way to predict what rock will sell and what won't, so the industry is cautious about promoting new rock artists. They just try a little big of everything and a few bands manage to stick.

 

[nomisofsiman]

Grunge did die about 95 or so. It didn't last that long, but it did give the lead to alternative bands such as Greenday, Offspring, etc. While the research you did is interesting, I think you also have to look at the album charts. How was grunge doing in terms of those during that period? That might be the real reason why the companies turned to grunge.

I know I'm in the minority on here when I say this, but to be perfectly honest I prefer grunge to hair metal. I love metal, but that genre of "metal" never appealed to me. The only two bands that are somewhat related to that which I enjoyed were Guns N Roses first and foremost and Skid Row. To be honest though, those two were more like edgy hard rock with classic rock influences. Maybe their look was like that of other hair bands but that was about it.

I loved grunge and identified with it. Granted, part of it probably was the time I was growing up in though. However, I liked the sound and most of these bands honestly were very different from each other. Yeah, Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, AIC and STP were all from the same geographical area and the singers had a similar style, but that's about all they had in common. Nirvana had punk influences, Pearl Jam had classic rock influences, Soundgarden and AIC dabbled in metal territory as well as some classic rock and STP also had a classic rock influence in conjunction with a Beatles influence.

 

[adaher]

Grunge did do better in album sales, this is true,but that's true of rock in general. Hair metal is often perceived to have dominated the charts in the late 80s, but it really didn't except for the power ballads. Bon Jovi and Guns N' roses were the only bands that could get their harder rocking singles way up there consistently. True heavy metal like Maiden never charted, metal was strictly an album sales phenomenon. That being said, from about 1986 to 1991, there was usually at least a few hard rock singles getting good airplay on the top 40 stations. MTV of course led that trend just as they led the grunge trend. I think MTV may have been trying too hard to be trendmakers, rather than just giving music fans what they wanted to see. I think that this mistake is part of what led them to show less and less videos as time went on. It was during the grunge era that MTV really started to lose interest in music videos.

One thing the Hot 100 measures as opposed to the album charts is crossover appeal. Even people who aren't rock fans tend to know these songs and can dig them. I don't know how many times I've looked in a friend's CD collection, consisting almost entirely of pop and rap albums, but somewhere in there is an 80s power ballads compilation. What the industry lost when they made the big switch was that crossover appeal. Rock became a niche market again almost immediately.

 

[adaher]

Yeah, Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, AIC and STP were all from the same geographical area and the singers had a similar style, but that's about all they had in common.

Oh definitely. I remember that Kurt Cobain used to slam Pearl Jam for having guitar solos. That time was just weird. The alternative crowd was even more crazy about "being authentic" than metalheads. It was like if you did a guitar solo you were some kind of sellout.

I can see merit in some of the bands from that era now. What I have less respect for is how the labels signed a zillion bands that were nowhere in the neighborhood of Pearl Jam or STP's talents, which probably helped to kill grunge so fast. I also don't respect how a lot of 80s bands for awhile tried to stay relevant by playing a more modern song. Huge mistake. They lost their old fans and didn't gain any new ones. Plus many of them went out of their way to diss their past work. I'd love to ask Bruce Dickinson today about Skunkworks and the things he said about his past work during that time. He even criticized his own singing style. Didn't take him long to rediscover the virtue of that style, did it?

 

[nomisofsiman]

Grunge did do better in album sales, this is true,but that's true of rock in general. Hair metal is often perceived to have dominated the charts in the late 80s, but it really didn't except for the power ballads. Bon Jovi and Guns N' roses were the only bands that could get their harder rocking singles way up there consistently. True heavy metal like Maiden never charted, metal was strictly an album sales phenomenon. That being said, from about 1986 to 1991, there was usually at least a few hard rock singles getting good airplay on the top 40 stations. MTV of course led that trend just as they led the grunge trend. I think MTV may have been trying too hard to be trendmakers, rather than just giving music fans what they wanted to see. I think that this mistake is part of what led them to show less and less videos as time went on. It was during the grunge era that MTV really started to lose interest in music videos.

I think you're right on in terms of MTV. They tried to force feed whatever was knew when people wanted to listen to different things.

 

[J. Golden]

I done think grudge popularity had anything to do with charts. It was a youth based movement much like punk rock in the late 70s and early 80s. Billboard and radio wasn't helping that happen and there was no MTV.
I remember kids quickly moving away from whatever hair bands that might have listened to at the time and hiding they fact they ever did. My girlfriend when I was sixteen tried to hide the year book picture of her with big hair and a Def Leppard shirt.
The "alternative" thing spread as quick as harpies. It was made popular by teens who were not really "into" anything before, grudge hooked them at the right time. Just like with metal then and now, punk rock, or whatever it did not need charts to dictate it's growth and popularity.

 

[adaher]

Yep. And keep in mind this isn't intended as a slam on grunge so much as a slam on the decision to almost completely jettison what was working in favor of something new. Imagine if in 1991, MTV had also decided to quit playing R&B videos, because well, R&B is old and tired and rap is the new big thing, so we'll just play rap now.

And the funny thing is, R&B IS old and tired. Rap is innovative, it's been evolving constantly since the late 70s. R&B hasn't changed much in 30 years, and thelyrics haven't been about anything new since 1960. Men sing about getting a woman to sleep with them and women sing about how their man's a cheatin', lyin', broke freeloader. But it's still popular as hell.

 

[Diabolik]

I done think grudge popularity had anything to do with charts. It was a youth based movement much like punk rock in the late 70s and early 80s. Billboard and radio wasn't helping that happen and there was no MTV.
I remember kids quickly moving away from whatever hair bands that might have listened to at the time and hiding they fact they ever did. My girlfriend when I was sixteen tried to hide the year book picture of her with big hair and a Def Leppard shirt.
The "alternative" thing spread as quick as harpies. It was made popular by teens who were not really "into" anything before, grudge hooked them at the right time. Just like with metal then and now, punk rock, or whatever it did not need charts to dictate it's growth and popularity.

I agree completely.....lots of people were scared to admit they came from the glam rock / hard rock genre once Grunge and punk resurfaced. Once punk became popular again to the new generation around 93-95, it was filled with people who were jumping off the grunge bandwagon and they would even act like they were never even into that. That is why I am always weary of hipsters who are now into metal. I work with some and see them around the city...to them metal is funny. Kind of like a big inside joke to them and even though some play it in ther bands....they will be on the next big thing once it rolls through.

Didnt know HARPIES were still around. I always thought they were a myth from the acient times.

 

[J. Golden]

I agree completely.....lots of people were scared to admit they came from the glam rock / hard rock genre once Grunge and punk resurfaced. Once punk became popular again to the new generation around 93-95, it was filled with people who were jumping off the grunge bandwagon and they would even act like they were never even into that. That is why I am always weary of hipsters who are now into metal. I work with some and see them around the city...to them metal is funny. Kind of like a big inside joke to them and even though some play it in ther bands....they will be on the next big thing once it rolls through.

Didnt know HARPIES were still around. I always thought they were a myth from the acient times.

I don't recall punk as "popular" unless that means Green Day.
Hipsters into metal yeah I follow you there and agree...Hey didn't Tribunal just put some hipster metal out? HAHA

 

[nailz]

some really weird stuff, too, much of which will probably never be shown again, even on VH1 classic. If you watch and episode of Beavis and butthead, there's some pretty weird videos there. It was a really strange era for music, and while I love experimentation, most of it was garbage and quickly forgotten.

The 90's were by far the best musical era of my life. Hate to tell you, but the radio stations, at least in phoenix, play Alt Rock all the time, and the scene, while underground now and just rediscovered by me, seems to be still pumping out some fantastic bands. It's not grunge, it's Alternative Rock. A day doesn't go by I don't hear Smashing Pumpkins, Bush, Eagle Eye Cherry, Pearl Jam, Nirvana, or the like on the radio.

 

[adaher]

I was referring to the B-list bands like Belly and Letters to Cleo.

Pearl Jam, Nirvana, STP, etc. will always get airplay. And on VH1 classic, even a lot of the more obscure 80s bands show up, like Trixter.

But I think it's safe to say that youll probably never hear a Letters to Cleo song on your radio, or see a video, unless it's on Youtube.

 

[J. Golden]

I was referring to the B-list bands like Belly and Letters to Cleo.

Pearl Jam, Nirvana, STP, etc. will always get airplay. And on VH1 classic, even a lot of the more obscure 80s bands show up, like Trixter.

But I think it's safe to say that youll probably never hear a Letters to Cleo song on your radio, or see a video, unless it's on Youtube.

Man I have not thought of them in a long time. I remember the video a lot on MTV but don't recall it much on the radio. I did go so them once. It was really odd. Great show the odd thing was the singer wanted to meet me afterwards. So we hung out for a long time after the gig. Still never found out want the whole wanting to meet me thing was about...Yeah I did not get it either.

 

[adaher]

Interestingly enough, Letters to Cleo is still plugging away, so give them props for not disbanding as soon as their 15 minutes was up. It should be all about the music, with fame as a byproduct if you're good and lucky. Looks like Letters to Cleo took that seriously.

Then you've got Timo Tolkki, his band fails to take off after two albums so he takes his ball and goes home.

 

[Jasonic]

First off, I don't know why so many of you get hung up on "what was popular on the radio" and how "grunge / alternative killed metal" bla, bla, bla....

Good metal, good punk, and good grunge / indie / alternative etc, has ALWAYS been there and WILL always be there.

What is trendy or acceptable via the masses through MTV and radio will always change.
If a band who has commercial success can't survive through such changes, then they weren't very good (or smart) to begin with.

So while you may or may not like Pearl Jam, they are one of rock's smartest bands of all time.
They became more of a live band than studio band following their initial success.
They have a die hard following who travel to see them.
They, like the Dead, are known for playing many nights straight with very few repeat songs.

I know this reply is a little off tangent from your original post, so I will quickly address that.

The masses can more easily relate to grunge than hair metal.
Grunge historically is very DIY.
Not about the flash or glamour and you dont have to dress like your sister to play it and get noticed.

Much of glam, whether glam fans want to admit it or not, was form over substance.

Lollapalooza too, esp here in the States, certainly aided in the rise of grunge / alt rock on the charts.

 

[adaher]

I only focus on it because I'm wondering what MTV and the labels were thinking. There was no reason to stop playing traditional hard rock, but they did it with only a few exceptions.

It's very unusual behavior for the industry to just summarily end what worked for 20 years and then switch to something totally different. And although it isn't written about much, I think they did realize their mistake, because around 1998 we resumed what I'd consider a normal evolution of the pop music industry.

Hanson, N'Sync, Britney, and the Backstreet Boys came out, and all of a sudden the industry realized, "Hey, they still do love shallow, happy, poppy, sugary pop!"

That 1991-1995 period is just such an aberration, it's as if the whole music industry and quite a few fans went insane for no particular reason, rejecting everything that had come before and becoming totally devoted to what became a pretty short fad.

Nowadays, a rock fan can proudly be a fan of Deep Purple, Bon Jovi, Nirvana, AND Shinedown. Wasn't that way for awhile there, as a couple of posters have pointed out.

 

[Jasonic]

The mainstream industry has never concentrated on one genre for any given length of time.
It's always changing.
Always has.
I mean, when's the last time you saw disco on the charts?

It's nothing new.

No offense to you or others who question this regularly, but as fans of underground music, why are you even concerned?

Good music is good music. Band who are form over substance won't last, regardless of how much mainstream success they have.

Let's take punk, as a somewhat recent commercial success story.
A band like Green Day was popular and well known in the underground scene for many years before they broke big with Dookie.
It was no surprise to anyone. They had the sound.
They earned respect in the genre from touring like crazy and having a good live show.
That work ethic and attitude carried on into their commercial era and exists still today.

So, with any breakout genre come the clones.
Every genre has them. The bands that never heard a lick of the genres music before it came a household name.

Labels even put together bands like this to make a buck. Remember that crap band GOLDFINGER anyone???

People see through bands that are "acts" and not even true to themselves.

As you mentioned, true "pop" music goes in cycles for this reason.
Even the most die hard fan of bubble gum pop grows in age and realizes how dumbed down the music is, almost insulting musically and lyrically.
I mean, it's music, it's entertainment. If you like it you like it.
Though I still will never consider most pop music a respected art form, considering about 95% of pop music was written by someone other than the artist / band performing it, but that's a whole other topic.

This thread proves why heavy metal is the greatest genre of all time.
It defies all odds and trends. The true survive, and its largely due to its die hard followers who care more about the music than anything else.

 

[Cheiron]

First, the 'industry' doesn't choose what is popular. People do. They are presented by choices, and then industry latches onto it, and then everybody tries to get their piece of the pie. Its just like the movie industry. If there's a popular flaming mushroom movie, every studio will go and get a flaming mushroom script and make their version. They don't care how long a trend lasts, just that it sells. Grunge sold. But it sold in a way the industry didn't expect. It took off on its own, and then they latched onto it. It sold albums, t-shirts, and live events like crazy. You can't really blame it for dieing. Not when you had a lot of post-grunge bands starting to succeed, while the grunge bands were all facing internal issues (e.g. shotguns, and drugs). Bands like Bush, Foo Fighters, and then later Creed, made up for things.

It also wasn't until Nevermind became the #1 album that Grunge really started to get pushed by all studios full-ahead. But its not as if you didn't have popular altenrative music before then, such as REM, and U2. Grunge, and its offshoots, became a part of the larger alternative rock genre.

 

[AirGuitarLoonhouse]

A lot of the initial grunge era bands rose to success by doing the college campus tour approach. So essentially they were underground bands that had this new vibe that a lot of college kids were able to identify with. I remember getting Pearl Jam Ten and Smashing Pumpkins Gish in college the fall of 1991 before either band was getting pushed by media outlets. In fact those two and Chili Peppers played my college together in a ballroom that held around 2-3,000 people. I recall going to other universities in the midwest to visit friends and I was constantly hearing new alternative music at bars and parties. And much of this was happening at the same time Nirvana basically brought the whole scene to a national level.

Also, in the summer of 1991 I saw Alice in Chains open for Van Halen. This is another example of the bands getting exposure prior to the big push by MTV and the media that then occurred for all of them.