Atlanta Radio, Really

[davideduardo]

but it does show how small-market stations seem to take more chances.

It's really the other way around. Small market stations don't know the chances they are taking.

Without research, many of those stations program off of the Whitburn books instead of finding out which of the old songs are still hits today.

And listeners used not to have any choice but to put up with it. That's why when I lived in Prescott, AZ and now in the Palm Springs market I stream or use XM/Sirius for music from that era. Even the "deeper" satellite playlists are more focused than gut-feel oldies programming.

 

[wavo]

Because most radio programmers find human behavior interesting. I often find that people who say "there's nothing I like on the radio" have never even tried noncommercial radio. They complain about some stations having too many commercials, yet ignore an entire part of radio that promotes itself as non-commercial.

Agree completely. You can listen to almost anything online if radio doesn't float your float. This is NOT the 1960s.
You have choices. Spotify, Pandora et.al. or live streaming. You always have non commercial radio and if you're plain ol' ordinary you can listen to what the majority of people listen to. There are too many choices if you include online. I would never have time to listen to everything.

 

[wavo]

It's really the other way around. Small market stations don't know the chances they are taking.

Without research, many of those stations program off of the Whitburn books instead of finding out which of the old songs are still hits today.

And listeners used not to have any choice but to put up with it. That's why when I lived in Prescott, AZ and now in the Palm Springs market I stream or use XM/Sirius for music from that era. Even the "deeper" satellite playlists are more focused than gut-feel oldies programming.

Do you think research always trumps gut programming? Do you even believe there is such a thing as "gut" programmers who can just smell a hit or have you found that research is the only consistently successful way?

 

[b-turner]

I'd say there is always an element of gut programming. If anything that growling gut gets proved or not proved by research. I think those who programmed by gut would have preferred some backup like research to support their ideas (or show where they needed to revise their ideas). Those that gut programmed tended to be very in tune to the audience or had some 'edge' they learned. At one point I could hear a hit instantly and was right about 65-70% of the time but that came from working years in a record store, watching what people responded to and what they bought. Anybody could have done as well or better than me if they had that 'edge' I had. I lost my 'edge' after about 10 years...and I think being pushed in to sales destroyed it.

I think those in programming see the trends and are ready for the right research an actual case scenarios they can show to prove the trend is worth of the investment. For example, by mid-1976 to early 1977, I had a strong hunch top 40 was relying way too much on recent gold. I went with recurrents and a tight currents playlist then. I think in 1980, Hot Hits became the trend. Nope, no genius here, just somebody who saw a trend many, many folks saw. It just took time to see the trend build enough steam to become the next big thing. Most top 40s in my area about 1976 and 1977 were playing 40% recurrents and recent gold (up to 5 years old).

 

[davideduardo]

Do you think research always trumps gut programming? Do you even believe there is such a thing as "gut" programmers who can just smell a hit or have you found that research is the only consistently successful way?

There is no way to research new music that is unfamiliar to the audience. If there were new music research that worked, we would not see record companies putting a dozen stiffs for every hit.

But otherwise, a good programmer armed with good research and the ability to interpret it will beat a gut-feel music programmer.

The gut tells you how to put it all together. The gut is the glue that makes a station great.

I began in radio when all we had to go by was record sales and requests. We learned how to use that until formats fragmented in the late 60's and early 70's, and that, in turn, spawned call-out research in the mid-70's and AMTs in the early 80's. Those that used new research methods got better, and those that didn't generally lost.

 

[Tibbs4]

David - you make some interesting statements above, but I may be interpreting part of it wrong. Are the good programmer vs. gut programmer comments reflective of only new music or are you applying that to a well-researched programmer wins vs. a more "go with your gut" programmer (but probably one that has access the research, but relies on it less) on various (any specific) formats?

 

[Tibbs4]

Interestingly, Kensington uses the WHPY call on their Jesus station in the Carolinas. Saves on letterhead printing....

Different folks in Carolima than Nashville, Littlejohn.

 

[davideduardo]

David - you make some interesting statements above, but I may be interpreting part of it wrong. Are the good programmer vs. gut programmer comments reflective of only new music or are you applying that to a well-researched programmer wins vs. a more "go with your gut" programmer (but probably one that has access the research, but relies on it less) on various (any specific) formats?

In current based formats, there is no way other than logic and feel to pick your new adds. We can look at what similar stations are adding on BDS or MediaBase (just as we did with Gavin, FMQB, Hamilton, R&R, Fred and others going back to the 50's) but the call is really based on what we feel is right for our station.

But if we want to know if we picked 'em right, we needed some kind of feedback. That could have been sales and requests and juke box play or callout or, today, MScores. Without guidance, we don't know if what we are playing is right.

And if there is no confirmation on the new songs, many that are stiffs will stay around as recurrents and gold. So, even if we believed in the songs we added, we needed to know if we were on the money and if we were not, we needed to thin the herd.

This applies to all formats from my perspective. About the only format I know that was based on pure feel and texture was Beautiful Music where the art was in the flow as much as the individual songs.

 

[TheBigA]

In the discussion of "good" vs "gut," there is only one truth: What works? What gets results? What gets the results that we seek? If those results are artistic, it's one thing. If the results are financial, they're probably another. But we choose the method we take based on the results we expect to obtain. It's that simple, and that complex.

 

[b-turner]

To answer the question of if gut programming beats research, I'd say research is more accurate simply because as humans we tend to make some mistakes and research helps locate those before that mistake causes too much damage. I took lots of chances in a small market and did fine (and made lots of mistakes). In larger markets I trusted myself less and relied more on research I could get my hands on and watching other stations, if nothing else, to prove or disprove my thoughts/gut. I still took chances on songs but not many. I really had to be sold on it big time as being a perfect song for our station. I had more to risk.

I suppose the real answer is research is not as subject to human error like gut programming is. The gut will eventually lead you wrong but research has too many checks and balances to not be pretty much spot on. And when the GM calls you in to ask about your decisions, it sure helps to say let me show you how I made that decision versus my gut said to do it.

 

[littlejohn]

What I get for believing Wikipedia, Tibbs. It reports both belonged to Kensington Digital Media as of 2012. However, the AM just moved its website to a local Baptist church - indicating it might well belong to someone else now.

 

[Tibbs4]

Wait a sec? Wiki is wrong???? WTH???? Kensington's one station at this point. Like I told David, the stats and facts for revenues are not precise either. It's ok and expected. Not every station is going to report accurate revenues, so the picture is always incomplete and/or incorrect. The formula just get's us all estimates and hopefully the margin of error is within reason. No party foul. It just helps that the facts on here be as honest as possible, with respect to privacy, to make sure the discussion is on tract based on proper data.

I appreciate the great discussion on here about gut vs. research. I just did not want to take David's discussion out of context. I know I will not be able to convey this properly on here, but I also think a station that will basically be limited to a few decades of music (vs. a CHR or current Country format that evolves daily with new music) has to sync itself properly with ebbs and flows of a local market along with the research and trends on the national level. For example, back to Hippie in Nashville. The "format" had been out of the market for a few years. There were obviously songs from the format still mixed in on Jack-FM, The Rock @ 105.9 and Mix 92-9. So all those "old songs" were refreshing to hear when Hippie launched. But five years later, Hippie had to cut out lots of the older songs of the 60's and added a FEW songs from the early 80's to stay somewhat "current" but you still have a massive amount of 70s tunes that have been played numerous times all over town (and the world.) That;s where you can take liberties from the "smart gut" to know when to give the Eagles or Elton John songs a brief rest from decades of plays and add in lesser know hit like "Ah Leah" from Donnie Iris, fully knowing someone out there is "upset" and someone out there is "exuberant." Two of the most hated songs are "Disco Duck" and "My Ding a Ling." We could debate that combination for weeks. People are very vocal about those in particular. But, yet as soon as you say "no" to them, you would literally get requests for those very songs! To me, that is where the gut places the song on a playlist, but perhaps hides it out of main day parts for long periods of time. David or BigA mentioned the dreaded death of a radio station by tune out songs. No doubt. But, in a sense, every listener has different death songs, if you will allow. Joe Walsh tunes may drive me crazy, but I love Lobo. David may love Joe Walsh. BigA hates Lobo. LOL. How do you make everyone happy? It's an endless battle. To me, there are some tricks that ease overkilling over played songs. It definitely includes scores of research data. The fine line is the key. I am not sure there is a perfect combination. As noted, with every format, it's not always the format "we" all would prefer to choose, but you have to take all the moving parts and build a solid business model that can withstand being outdated and weathered.

 

[Lotologist492]

Radio formats are pretty locked in the ATL market; very little changes to big signals in a good while. Atlanta is a very young dynamic market; Millennials rule the airwaves (well kind of). Radio companies seem to have found their groove with revenue although there are a few stations that cannot possibly stay on the air much longer, so we think.

Satellite radio was my solution since moving was not viable. There are too many non-radio things about Atlanta I DO like. All good things must end and what some of us perceived to be good radio in this market was apparently one of them!

 

[R.D.P.]

Radio formats are pretty locked in my parts too: very little changes to the signals in a good while. My hometown is an older skewing dynamic market; the older folks rule the airwaves, in a big way. The radio owners seem to have found their groove with the revenue.

I know our OP (Original Poster) would love my local radio dial. It plays songs he would like.

Dan <><

 

[wavo]

HD receiver penetration is gaining in most major markets. The last article I read stated over 1/3 of all new cars sold have HD radio.

Will HD become the FM radio of the 21st Century? Remember when FM was experimental? Would Album Rock ever succeed as a format if weren't for FM stations of the free form variety?
A more basic question is this...are all the radio "formats" already being done? At least ones with mass appeal and which can make money? Of course, there are niche formats galore but I'm wondering is there really anything else, either music or spoken word.
Think outside the box for a moment. What will be the next step in the evolution of radio? How would it be monetized?

 

[TheBigA]

Think outside the box for a moment. What will be the next step in the evolution of radio? How would it be monetized?

No one knew FM would be the next big thing. If they did, they would not have given up a portion of the band for non-commercial educational radio. No one knows the real next step in radio either, or how it will be monetized. What we know about HD is that it's currently a licensed product under very careful control of the license owners. Until that license expires, radio companies will be forced to operate HD radio under the terms set by iBiquity. They're selling it and trying to monetize it. They have a deal with Radio Disney, and are offering Radio Disney programming to HD stations.

 

[wavo]

No one knew FM would be the next big thing. If they did, they would not have given up a portion of the band for non-commercial educational radio. No one knows the real next step in radio either, or how it will be monetized. What we know about HD is that it's currently a licensed product under very careful control of the license owners. Until that license expires, radio companies will be forced to operate HD radio under the terms set by iBiquity. They're selling it and trying to monetize it. They have a deal with Radio Disney, and are offering Radio Disney programming to HD stations.

Any viable format(s), music or spoken word, you can think of that have never been tried before? Have you ever had the "gut" instinct that something would work but never had the chance to try it?
I guess I'm asking those of you who have forgotten more about the radio business than I know...is there anything new under the sun ( or in this case, "in the ether?")

 

[TheBigA]

I guess I'm asking those of you who have forgotten more about the radio business than I know...is there anything new under the sun ( or in this case, "in the ether?")

What makes you think new formats will attract the kind of audiences you need to monetize it? It's still based on numbers.

What some stations are doing with HD is simulcasting AM stations. In Atlanta, you have a few HD stations that actually get ratings.

 

[wavo]

What makes you think new formats will attract the kind of audiences you need to monetize it? It's still based on numbers.

What some stations are doing with HD is simulcasting AM stations. In Atlanta, you have a few HD stations that actually get ratings.

There are no HD channels without translators getting any numbers. No HD channel has EVER shown up in Atlanta without a sibling translator.
WAMU HD2 is the ONLY HD channel I'm aware of that has shown up without an analog signal of some sort in the ratings. There may be others of which I'm not aware.

Everything changes and that includes radio. Do you see the dial as more or less the same 20 years from now? What I mean is will music formats and spoken word formats dominate, same as today? Have we already found the best function for radio in a technology based society?

 

[TheBigA]

There are no HD channels without translators getting any numbers.

What that says to me is that the problem isn't the format, but rather the device.

For the most part, radio formats are about music. Radio companies don't make music. Record companies and musicians do. Ask musicians if they think music will stay the same in 20 years. If some currently unknown genre of music becomes popular, it'll get played on the radio.

Have we already found the best function for radio in a technology based society?

I think AM owners are dealing with that. They're not going to attract audiences in the conventional ways, so unless they can get an FM translator, they will have to find other uses for their frequencies. That may mean targeted information services, or perhaps using AM the way we once used SCA services. There are also a lot of people who are not "technology-based" people. And as I've often said, the one device that is older than the radio is the phone.