• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Classic Rock: Evolve or Die!

David's comments are valid. His explanation of the evolution of the Rock format is correct. The "Progressive Rock" format started on FM stations no longer simulcasting their AM counterparts. It was where DJs assembled their own playlist and could comment on events going on in the turbulent 60s. It was supposed to be the FM Alternative to Top 40 with its overbearing, always happy-talking DJs, numerous commercials, reverb and jingles. Stations like WNEW-FM New York, KMET LA, WMMR Philadelphia tried hard NOT to sound like Top 40. DJs never talked over the songs, they played several songs in a row without talking and there were no jingles or reverb. They could play anything from Judy Collins to Steppenwolf. But because they were targeted at college students who likely invested in owning an FM radio, they avoided any sort of bubblegum or rhythmic music.

With the success of Progressive Rock, as FM radios became more commonplace, the Superstars format was born. I believe WCOZ Boston was one of the first. They had a set playlist, tightly controlled. I suppose you might say they applied Top 40 music selection to the previously free-form Rock format. I believe it was Radio & Records magazine that coined the term "AOR - Album Oriented Rock." It was no longer "progressive" because the songs were all researched and only the most popular were aired.

Then I believe it was a station in Dallas started the "Classic Rock" format, and an AM station at that. Dallas already had a couple of successful AOR stations. An owner of one of them didn't know what to do with his AM station, IIRC it is today KLIF 570, 5000 watts 24/7. He went with the format that became "Classic Rock" so as not to compete with his more profitable FM AOR station, but sell it in combination. Only the best Rock songs from the 60s and 70s were played. But none of the newer songs that older guys didn't want to hear.

Here's something that nobody has mentioned, as to why I don't see Classic Rock dying anytime soon. When we grew up, we could listen to Top 40, AOR, Country and Urban formats. But unlike Top 40, Country and Urban, AOR was never really driven by new material. On a Top 40, Country or Urban station, you'd expect to hear mostly songs that were currently on the charts, with maybe two or three hits per hour of the recent past. AOR was totally different. Rock stations ALWAYS played mostly library material. Even in the 80s and 90s, The Beatles, Zeppelin, The Who, etc. were still core artists. Maybe after 1990, stations split between Classic Rock, Alternative and Active or Hard Rock. But before then, only a few songs per hour were current.

If you look at the songs played on an average Classic Rock station, you'll see most of the music comes from the mid-60s to the mid-80s, with maybe a Red Hot Chili Peppers or Nirvana song once in a while. In most formats, nobody wants to hear songs whose release date pre-dates their high school years. But Rock is totally different. Your favorite Rock station growing up played PLENTY of songs that were recorded before you were born.

We could debate if it's because that era of Rock was better, or those artists were geniuses, or good Rock and Roll never dies. But for whatever reason, men in their 30s, 40s and 50s are happy hearing The Rolling Stones and Jimi Hendrix and The Eagles and Fleetwood Mac and so many other artists who are older than their dads.
 
Last edited:
So you think every single person in the industry is incompetent. And that ever station owner or group is clueless. And that audience measurement is wrong. You believe proprietary research done for programming decisions is done by boobs and morons. You think listeners don't really tell us what they want.

I never said that. Resorting to such a lame, straw-man argument is the kind of low tactic that I'm too often falsely accused of.

Is there anyone in radio that you think is not an idiot? Please, go ahead, name one or two or three.

Garrison Keillor. Terry Gross. Michael Feldman. David Bianculli. Scott Paulsen. Mara Davis.

...Or are you the only person who really knows what to do?

Did you not read the paragraph below, or was it just that you couldn't understand it?

Now, to steer the subject just a little, the ability to discern and identify a flaw in something is different from the ability to correct the flaw. A baseball umpire doesn't need to be able to throw a 95 mph fastball himself to tell whether or not a pitch has hit the strike zone. A restaurant patron who cannot make a bechamel sauce, or doesn't even know what a bechamel sauce is, can still tell if his Fettuccine Alfredo doesn't taste right. A motorist who cannot rebuild a transmission himself can still tell when his car's transmission isn't working right. And an avid listener of music who doesn't know all the ins and outs of programming a radio station can still tell when the radio stations he hears sound like crap.

Before you answer, here's a clue: when only one person out of tens of thousands believes something, that person is playing the starring role in "The Emperor Has No Clothes."

And according to market research that you swear by, the opinion of one carefully selected person represents the opinions of thousands. And the listening habits of one person with a People Meter reflects the listen habits of thousands of listeners. So, if you want to reverse your stand about how one voice represents thousands when it comes to ratings and research, then what you're saying has meaning. Otherwise, it's just a bunch of blather.
 
Last edited:
You still don't get it. No matter how often attempts are made but executed poorly, and failed because of that poor execution, that only proves that the attempts were poorly executed.

Of course they were "poorly executed." They made a bad format choice at the start. The station was doomed. Popular culture involves more than proper execution. It demands a product that the people will want. You've demanded a station with a bad format, and expect it to succeed. I'm reminded of the British comedians Peter Cook & Dudley Moore. They once did a bit about a French restaurant called The Frog & Peach. Only two items on the menu. You can guess what they were. The restaurant was classy and well run but a failure, because of the menu. That's what you're demanding here. It will, by definition, be poorly executed, because it shouldn't have been started in the first place.
 
I never said that. Resorting to such a lame, straw-man argument is the kind of low tactic that I'm too often falsely accused of.

You have called every program format mentioned her to be bad, every station referred to or used as an example to be bad or a "success by accident", and every programmer and decision maker or progammer to be a suit, worth mentioning only as examples of incompetence. Don't try to say you have not said negative things about every single "real radio" example presented here. Because you have.


Garrison Keillor, Terry Gross. Michael Feldman. David Bianculli. Scott Paulsen. Mara Davis.

Author and humorist and radio personality.
News and Information Host
Radio Personality
TV Critic, author, professor
Radio personality, columnist
Radio DJ (and a very good one)

Not one of them is in a programming management position. A couple have rather tenuous links to radio at all.

The thing that is common to the majority is that they feed from the public trough or public generosity, in radio operations that seem to have larger budgets, more staff and less interest in whether anyone is listening than at any commercial station.

The problem here is that you have been criticizing programming and management, yet when asked to come up with someone you respect or like, you come up with nobody in radio management you feel is doing a good job.

Did you not read the paragraph below, or was it just that you couldn't understand it?

I read it, pasta references and all. The problem is that you hold opinions of the ilk of none I have ever heard before and express them with a negativity towards radio that is supreme.

And according to market research that you swear by, the opinion of one carefully selected person represents the opinions of thousands. And the listening habits of one person with a People Meter reflects the listen habits of thousands of listeners. So, if you want to reverse your stand about how one voice represents thousands when it comes to ratings and research, then what you're saying has meaning. Otherwise, it's just a bunch of blather.

But in a radio market survey, one deviant or aberrant respondent who has nothing in common with any of the other respondents will have almost no effect on the overall survey results. For example, if you had a PPM meter in LA your "different" behaviour would change the results by .00033%.

But your bizarre analysis actually supports my global point: OTA radio only works when there is a consensus. While one meter will not move the rank of a radio station much, but about 1,300 of them in LA made Coast 103.5 and its all Christmas music #1 in the last book. Consensus-generating formats and consensus-appealing songs get listening.
 
Last edited:
Author and humorist and radio personality.
News and Information Host
Radio Personality
TV Critic, author, professor
Radio personality, columnist
Radio DJ (and a very good one)

You asked "Is there anyone in radio that you think is not an idiot? Please, go ahead, name one or two or three." You didn't say it had to be suits. Those are people in radio. I do not think they are idiots. I don't know any suits personally.
 
You asked "Is there anyone in radio that you think is not an idiot? Please, go ahead, name one or two or three." You didn't say it had to be suits. Those are people in radio. I do not think they are idiots. I don't know any suits personally.

Gee, guy. I thought since the discussion was all about programming and management that the context thad been set about 130 posts ago.

And you submitted a list of people that includes many who are, at best, radio part-timers who include columnists and film critics and voiceover performers. If we open all the doors to the barn, I respect Julio Cintrón, José Tolentino, and Pedro Chassi and Gloria Estefan.

They were: 1) janitor at WZNT / WQII, 2) Messenger at WUNO, 3) my bodyguard at Núcleo Radión, and 4) the singer at our remote band at WHTT. All had more day to day involvement with the stations than some of your folks. And like your list, none had anything to do with the actual content... the thing we are discussing... of one of more total radio stations.

In any case, your posts prove my point: you seem to think that some on-air participants, even those with minimal radio involvement are competent, but apparently you find nobody in program management to be similarly competent. Or pershaps, if I state what is obvious from the last 145 posts and ask "are there any radio programmers, music directors, managers or other "suits" that you feel have done a good job overseeing an entire station or group of stations.

I mean people like Bill Drake, Ron Jacobs, Tom Rounds, Bill Tanner, Jay Thomas, Rick Cummings, Marlin Taylor, Rick Sklar, Jack McCoy, Lee Abrams, Betty Brenneman, Norman Wain, Art Kellar, Guy Zapoleon, Jerry Blum, Scott Shannon, Buzz Bennett, Bill Stewart, Gordon McLendon, Todd Storz, Earl McDaniel, Elmo Ellis, Ward Quaal, Cecil Heftel, Jim Maddox, Pio Ferro, John Gheron, Dan Mason, Jhani Kaye, Kevin Weatherly and scores of local station mangers and
 
Last edited:
In any case, your posts prove my point: you seem to think that some on-air participants, even those with minimal radio involvement are competent, but apparently you find nobody in program management to be similarly competent. Or pershaps, if I state what is obvious from the last 145 posts and ask "are there any radio programmers, music directors, managers or other "suits" that you feel have done a good job overseeing an entire station or group of stations.

What I find is that most radio stations on the air today are painful to listen to. I do not listen to any station I cannot pick up on my own radio. I've never claimed otherwise. There might be great radio stations on the air in other markets that I cannot pick up. But though WYDD, WDVE, and WRRK in Pittsburgh were very entertaining to listen to at one time, by the time I left Pittsburgh in 2008, they were no longer worth listening to (one isn't even on the air under those calls!). Since arriving in Atlanta, there was one commercial station that I enjoyed listening to, but it changed to sports talk.

I don't know, and I don't care what the names are of the people responsible for putting crap on the air. If what's on the air isn't worth listening to, then it isn't worth listening to. If I eat a meal at a restaurant and it's overcooked or badly seasoned, I don't care what the chef's name is. I just know that the food was bad. Radio stations are the same in that respect. If the music selection is so boring that I can't bear to listen to it, it doesn't matter why and it doesn't matter who is responsible.
 
What I find is that most radio stations on the air today are painful to listen to.

Painful for YOU to listen to. Which is OK since no one ever promised total satisfaction. You go to a restaurant, and you pay a bill. You listen to a radio station, and your only cost is time. Next time you know not to waste your time.
 
You asked "Is there anyone in radio that you think is not an idiot? Please, go ahead, name one or two or three." You didn't say it had to be suits. Those are people in radio. I do not think they are idiots. I don't know any suits personally.

Gosh wow, you know those people personally? Can you get me their autographs?? :D
 
Mr. Avid Listener...

Perhaps, you should post what a 'sample hour' would sound like on your ideal radio station.
 
Painful for YOU to listen to. Which is OK since no one ever promised total satisfaction. You go to a restaurant, and you pay a bill. You listen to a radio station, and your only cost is time. Next time you know not to waste your time.

I said this to Eduardo, but it applies to you as well.

And according to market research that you swear by, the opinion of one carefully selected person represents the opinions of thousands. And the listening habits of one person with a People Meter reflects the listen habits of thousands of listeners. So, if you want to reverse your stand about how one voice represents thousands when it comes to ratings and research, then what you're saying has meaning. Otherwise, it's just a bunch of blather.

Gosh wow, you know those people personally? Can you get me their autographs?? :D

WTF?

Mr. Avid Listener...

Perhaps, you should post what a 'sample hour' would sound like on your ideal radio station.

I already have, many, many times.
 
Last edited:
I said this to Eduardo, but it applies to you as well.

Maybe you haven't read the pages of posts in this thread. It's not just "research" that has led to these conclusions, but actual experience. You claim they were "poorly executed." My response is they were poorly conceived. Your opinions are not for mass consumption. Be happy with that answer. It's the best you'll get.
 
Well, Mr. Listener, I only have 100+ posts. Perhaps you posted your sample hour when I wasn't here... 2 years ago, 5 years ago, who knows. It was a question of curiousity, not an attack. But, I really don't have time to sift through thousands of posts and threads to look.
 
Maybe you haven't read the pages of posts in this thread. It's not just "research" that has led to these conclusions, but actual experience. You claim they were "poorly executed." My response is they were poorly conceived. Your opinions are not for mass consumption. Be happy with that answer. It's the best you'll get.

Well, then your response is wrong.

Well, Mr. Listener, I only have 100+ posts. Perhaps you posted your sample hour when I wasn't here... 2 years ago, 5 years ago, who knows. It was a question of curiousity, not an attack. But, I really don't have time to sift through thousands of posts and threads to look.

If it's not important to you, why should it be important to me?
 
Fine.
 
Obviously, you've never worked in retail either... :p

I have worked in retail. When working, I get paid. When I'm being paid, I do what needs to be done to get paid. When I'm on my own time, I don't do things I don't want to do.
 
Just wondering...

If we were all face to face, nursing another beer at some watering hole and listening to Avid preach his tired old sermon, I wonder how many rounds it would take before someone kicked Avid's ass?
 
I have worked in retail. When working, I get paid. When I'm being paid, I do what needs to be done to get paid. When I'm on my own time, I don't do things I don't want to do.

But you want people in radio to get paid to do just what you want them to, and the hell with what anyone else wants, because obviously they're all idiots. (Waltz me around again, Willie!)
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom