List of Web-Only Easy Listening/Soft Rock Stations

[passtheword]

I advise you to read the last paragraph of this then: http://www.techlawjournal.com/topstories/2014/0529.asp

And yes, y'all do belittle them. An example of that was when BigA was making fun of how many listeners tune in.

We as internet broadcasters (or "hobbyists" as some refer to us) are offering what listeners want to hear, not that drivel that's being heard on the radio. Broadcast radio doesn't want to live in the reality that many listeners are unhappy with them. They want to cover their ears and go "la-la-la-la" and not heed what listeners are telling them (just go on Facebook, Twitter and other social media and see the disparaging remarks people make about broadcast radio). Maybe broadcast radio needs to do a role-reversal and become the listeners for a change and hear what their audience has been telling them for a long time now. How unhappy are listeners with broadcast radio today? We have an internet station here in Birmingham (Birmingham Mountain Radio) with a AAA format. It is now being rebroadcast on an FM translator, but before it ever moved to FM, Birmingham listeners have voted BMR their favorite radio station for the past several years via a Birmingham News poll, even though at the time the station was still online-only. To me, the fact that listeners here would be willing to vote for an internet-only station as their favorite radio station, when they could have chosen any of the 30+ AM and FM signals in the Birmingham market, speaks volumes. It's just one demonstration of how the general public is dissatisfied with broadcast radio, and that discontent isn't merely on a local level. These people who have worked in radio forever don't "get it" and probably never will (they'd rather troll on pages like this, evidently). I grew up listening to the radio and I am VERY disheartened at how radio has devolved. I refuse to sit idly by and watch these huge radio conglomerates like IheartMedia, Cumulus, and others destroy what's left of it.

 

[davideduardo]

We as internet broadcasters (or "hobbyists" as some refer to us) are offering what listeners want to hear, not that drivel that's being heard on the radio. Broadcast radio doesn't want to live in the reality that many listeners are unhappy with them.

The issue is proportion and perspective. There have been around 5% to 6% of listeners that did not use broadcast radio in any given week going back to the 60's when Arbitron started. Today, its perhaps 7%. Those are folks who don't want to listen, or can not in a given week.

It's a smallish number and not "many listeners".

So it is good that some of those people have somewhere to go. Terrestrial radio can't satisfy small niches that advertisers have no interest in. We are ad-supported, and need to sell commercials.

When a station in New York City... one station... averages nearly a quarter of a million concurrent listeners, and cumes over 45% ove the entire population of them in a month, for a total of around 8 million, you can see the kind of perspective needed here. Please do the math and tell me how much having a quarter million concurrent streams instead of 100 or 200 would cost and how you would pay for it.

As to the polls, I have seen those in many, many markets. The winner is nearly always a station with very few but very passionate listeners who act like a Justin Bieber fan club and "vote early and often" to see "their" station win. Those polls are meaningless as they don't provide data advertisers can use as a metric for ad buys.

 

[Music Lover]

We as internet broadcasters (or "hobbyists" as some refer to us) are offering what listeners want to hear, not that drivel that's being heard on the radio. Broadcast radio doesn't want to live in the reality that many listeners are unhappy with them. They want to cover their ears and go "la-la-la-la" and not heed what listeners are telling them (just go on Facebook, Twitter and other social media and see the disparaging remarks people make about broadcast radio). Maybe broadcast radio needs to do a role-reversal and become the listeners for a change and hear what their audience has been telling them for a long time now. How unhappy are listeners with broadcast radio today? We have an internet station here in Birmingham (Birmingham Mountain Radio) with a AAA format. It is now being rebroadcast on an FM translator, but before it ever moved to FM, Birmingham listeners have voted BMR their favorite radio station for the past several years via a Birmingham News poll, even though at the time the station was still online-only. To me, the fact that listeners here would be willing to vote for an internet-only station as their favorite radio station, when they could have chosen any of the 30+ AM and FM signals in the Birmingham market, speaks volumes. It's just one demonstration of how the general public is dissatisfied with broadcast radio, and that discontent isn't merely on a local level. These people who have worked in radio forever don't "get it" and probably never will (they'd rather troll on pages like this, evidently). I grew up listening to the radio and I am VERY disheartened at how radio has devolved. I refuse to sit idly by and watch these huge radio conglomerates like IheartMedia, Cumulus, and others destroy what's left of it.

Thumbs up to that!

In addition to the internet broadcasters, I also listen to services such as iTunes Radio and Pandora Radio. Like many other people who use such services, the ability to customize stations is a major factor into why I like them. I love being able to weed out stuff I don't like.

Music discovery is another reason why many people like services such as iTunes Radio or Pandora Radio. Being able to hear artists like this girl, who you won't hear on terrestrial radio: http://www.mary-jess.com/

 

[passtheword]

The issue is proportion and perspective. There have been around 5% to 6% of listeners that did not use broadcast radio in any given week going back to the 60's when Arbitron started. Today, its perhaps 7%. Those are folks who don't want to listen, or can not in a given week.

It's a smallish number and not "many listeners".

So it is good that some of those people have somewhere to go. Terrestrial radio can't satisfy small niches that advertisers have no interest in. We are ad-supported, and need to sell commercials.

When a station in New York City... one station... averages nearly a quarter of a million concurrent listeners, and cumes over 45% ove the entire population of them in a month, for a total of around 8 million, you can see the kind of perspective needed here. Please do the math and tell me how much having a quarter million concurrent streams instead of 100 or 200 would cost and how you would pay for it.

As to the polls, I have seen those in many, many markets. The winner is nearly always a station with very few but very passionate listeners who act like a Justin Bieber fan club and "vote early and often" to see "their" station win. Those polls are meaningless as they don't provide data advertisers can use as a metric for ad buys.

Whose to say those of us doing online radio want to make billions of $ doing these stations? You're looking at it from a mega-broadcaster perspective. We're not. btw, these folks at Birmingham Mountain Radio are selling commercial spots, and that was even before the station began simulcasting on an FM HD channel and translator. Evidently, it isn't entirely impossible to sell internet radio, as those in broadcast radio make it out to be. If I were a broadcast station owner and was losing listeners left and right to internet and satellite radio, I'd want to put up a front and put a spin on the idea that my listeners were still satisfied with what I'm offering. The fact remains most listeners are not content with AM and FM radio, and broadcasting companies are deluding themselves into thinking that everything is "peaches and cream". I can't count how many comments I find daily on Twitter and Facebook of people complaining about broadcast radio, local or otherwise, and noting they have begun subscribing to satellite radio and/or listening to internet radio because of it. I know you're throwing out numbers about broadcast radio to validate what you believe is reality. However, I'm looking at what people are actually telling me and posting about on the internet regarding broadcast radio. Also, it would be interesting to determine who actually conducts these studies? I would surmise it's the folks doing broadcast radio. Again...Spin. If you don't believe what I'm telling you about listener dissatifaction with broadcast radio, just view some of these negative comments I see daily on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media. Here's one I found just yesterday, posted on both Twitter and Facebook, right before I even came across the comments on this thread. Bear in mind this comment was made by a local talk show host who works for a Cumulus station here.

https://www.facebook.com/RadioDixonWAPI/posts/858658140823587

Do you seriously believe that these polls are done merely by passionate listeners, "Justin Bieber Fan Club"?? I guess that's why Birmingham Mountain Radio has more followers on Facebook than some of the local FM's...and why 20,000+ people here joined a Facebook page in protest when BMR's predecessor, "Live 100.5" FM was nixed by then-Citadel Broadcasting. (and "no"...that 20000 number is not a typo).

 

[Music Lover]

Spin. That's exactly it.

 

[Music Lover]

Whose to say those of us doing online radio want to make billions of $ doing these stations? You're looking at it from a mega-broadcaster perspective. We're not.

Precisely!

The large web broadcasters - such as AccuRadio or 181.fm or Pandora Radio or Big R Radio - are the ones whose goal is to make profits.

The hobbyists goal is to offer listeners what they want to hear.

 

[Music Lover]

Seabreeze station has started. http://www.radionomy.com/en/radio/theseabreez/index

 

[Music Lover]

To copy over what Han Solo said from the closed thread....

Some small webcasters talking about why they stream: http://forum.streamlicensing.com/index.php?topic=218.0

Like some of them said, they are trying to fill musical voids.

And they also give voice to indie artists who don't get as much promotion as major label artists.

This guy is an indie artist amongst my music collection. www.davidcookofficial.com David started as an indie artist, won season 7 of American Idol, released 2 albums on RCA, and is now back to being an indie artist.

 

[Music Lover]

Back to PassTheWord's question from the closed thread...

What other artists/tracks do you consider obscure that you believe would fit in a traditionally-based soft AC format?

Not obsucre but, David's new single, Wait For Me, would fit in on the format.

 

[Music Lover]

If/when the closed thread is re-opened, I plan to move those two responses back over there.

 

[passtheword]

I'm not sure that the thread will be reopened. I really didn't see the need to close it. I have already emailed the moderator who closed the thread about all of it. I don't see how simply closing that particular thread is going to solve the problem, at least in the long run...

I have not heard the "Wait For Me" single you mentioned, but I will check it out!

 

[Music Lover]

I don't see how simply closing that particular thread is going to solve the problem, at least in the long run...

Agreed. It may help cool things down a bit in the short term but definitely won't help in the long run.

 

[passtheword]

In response to your post about the Soft 'N Easy Facebook comment...I concurred with whoever asked about "Water From The Moon". It's a really nice song (one of my favorites by her, actually) but not one of Celine's bigger hits. I don't have it in the rotation on Lite 99...yet. "Ever Changing Times"...we don't have that particular one in rotation, but we do have Siedah Garrett's version of that song. "Sunrise"...an interesting song with the Hall & Oates theme running in the background. I've heard it played mostly on smooth jazz stations. "Cruisin"...we have the version you mentioned and the Smokey Robinson one as well.

 

[frankberry]

Agreed. It may help cool things down a bit in the short term but definitely won't help in the long run.

I agree. There is no long-term solution until the "professionals" and the "listeners" learn to respect each other.
The constant "us vs. them" is not productive.
I will re-open the thread. If I continue to see unproductive insults, I'll close it.

Frank

 

[Music Lover]

The problem is that the listeners want to have a conversation like this, talking about what stations we enjoy, what songs/artists we love: http://www.amazon.com/forum/music/r...dPage=1&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=TxPXQ9487Y7JOZ

And the consultants want to brag about their testing, sales, ratings, etc.

Since they want to talk about business stuff that is of no interest to listeners, then they need to do so in a separate thread. I think that could help with less of the "my station is better than your station" fighting.

 

[davideduardo]

I agree. There is no long-term solution until the "professionals" and the "listeners" learn to respect each other.

The problem is that there is a group of "listeners" here who are not typical of the millions of people who enjoy our radio stations each day. They have unusual tastes, a greater interest in music discovery and are likely never going to be satisfied with what OTA radio stations do musically.

But instead of understanding that they are a tiny sliver of the population, they believe that they are more
numerous and that stations would do well to serve their peculiar interests.

As a broadcaster and programmer, I understand these people and respect their longing for stations that serve them better. What I reject is the insistence of some that we are wrong in doing things in the manner which gets us the most audience and the most revenue.

When we try to explain why things are done as they are, we get folks with no radio, research and sales experience telling us that all these systems are defective. There is no way to respect those individuals as they are simply ranting because they are not getting a station programmed just for them.

 

[passtheword]

I understand you believe what you feel is true. Question is: Why is it SO important that you consultants continue to go on and on ad nauseum about it? You all have your viewpoint. We have ours. Regardless of who is right or wrong, we're all in agreement that we're not going to agree. So...why continue to bring it up? It's not going to change your viewpoint, and you won't change ours. We're tired of these threads being taken over and the topic constantly being changed away from the original subject matter. These off-topic posts don't provide anything constructive to the theme of the thread, and they only serve to create more dissension within the board here. Why do you think the moderator had to temporarily close the other thread? I am like musiclover. If you consultants want to discuss those type of matters on another thread...go for it. And we'll shut up and not say anything to you. These unrelated comments that continue to surface on these threads is no less than trolling. I've already reported these posts that are off topic to the administrators here, and I will continue to do so as long as this kind of behavior persists.

 

[Music Lover]

I wouldn't say my tastes are "peculiar", I would say they are mainstream yet a bit conservative. That's simply an influence from my parents and other older family members. They made sure that what music I heard on radio didn't go beyond PG. I'm trying to do the same for my child. With AC being more risque' than it was when I was a kid, the only option I have to turn to on my car's FM dial is Christian AC. I can tolerate that but I'm much more into secular music and would prefer a less edgier AC in my neck of the woods.

 

[davideduardo]

I understand you believe what you feel is true. Question is: Why is it SO important that you consultants continue to go on and on ad nauseum about it?

There you go with the "consultant" thing again. It's like Avid with his demeaning and insulting "suits" term.

These off-topic posts don't provide anything constructive to the theme of the thread, and they only serve to create more dissension within the board here.

But this is not a music board. It is a radio board. When music fans begin to criticize the way radio operates, rather than let you all create a self-perpetuating image that you are right, some of us step in to try to set the record straight.

If you consultants...

There you go again.

These unrelated comments that continue to surface on these threads is no less than trolling. I've already reported these posts that are off topic to the administrators here, and I will continue to do so as long as this kind of behavior persists.

My feeling is that if you want to talk about unreleased music from Namibia, you are in the wrong place. But go for it as long as you don't call us all "consultants" and "suits" and criticize what works in the radio business while suggesting we do things that we know from experience will cause the stations we are responsible for to crash and burn.

 

[davideduardo]

I understand you believe what you feel is true. Question is: Why is it SO important that you consultants continue to go on and on ad nauseum about it? You all have your viewpoint.

I don't know why you refer to "you consultants" when most of the opinions contrary to yours come from station programmers or past programmers, not consultants.

That said, keep in mind that this board has a long, long history of being focused on radio stations and not music. Even the format boards are about stations that play certain kinds of music and how they do the selections and such.

This isn't the first time a music-lover thread has "invaded" the boards (smooth jazz, essentially a dead radio format, has had quite a few of them) but it is the only one I recall where hostility towards traditional radio has been part of the discussion of interesting songs or favorite tunes or whatever.