After the Demise of WAAF do you think Boston will ever have a station that plays new rock music any time soon
-
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
Rock Radio Question
- Thread starter CassChopper96
- Start date
Only if one of the radio groups finds a winning formula with one of their existing rock stations, and think they can replicate that success in Boston.
Absolutely not. When Audacy decided to flip Amp to Big rather than Alt, that should be a crystal clear sign that modern rock is just not viable in Boston, save for whatever is on 92.5
Rock is dying. It's had a nice long run, but changing demographics and stylistic stagnancy have turned modern rock into a niche genre.
I am going to say that rock is only dying in its present incarnation. I am going to take a bet that somewhere down the road, I do not known when, someone with a guitar, will create something, fresh and new! It will be as such that it grabs other people's interests, and become popular again.
There are many rock stations that are doing well though right now
Most of them are playing classic rock.
I would take it a step further and say "talent" is dying. Rock, R & B, Soul, Country, etc... used to mean that artists had actual talent. Country is a joke now.
Let me be clear. There are still talented musicians, but you won't find them on commercial Radio. The stuff that is mainstream is "Auto Tuned Posers". Garbage like Ariana Grande, Cardi B, Beyonce, etc. is pathetic.
Otis Redding, Madonna, Marvin Gaye, Prince, Michael Jackson, and countless others had success that was well deserved. I don't see anything on Top 40 that is on their level of quality. Album Rock was never Top 40 oriented, so that it is a different category...
Ariana Grande can sing. Miley Cyrus can sing. Pink can sing. All far, far better than Madonna or Prince. Auto-Tune is largely a bogeyman. It exists, but not to the extent that the rock die-hards say it does. Don't go confusing your distaste for current musical styles -- popular music always evolves -- with lack of talent on the part of the performers.
All I can say is there is no accounting for taste. Miley Cyrus? Your credibility is shot...
Chris Stapleton, Luke Combs, Eric Church, Zac Brown, Old Dominion, Lainey Wilson, Miranda Lambert and many others are no joke. They are the vibrant present and promising future of a genre that still respects its past but is not restrained by those old norms and expectations. Sure, there's the empty calories of bro country and boyfriend country, but not everyone who made country music in the "golden age" was turning out great art. Tom T. Hall had a big hit in the '70s with "I Like Beer" and David Frizzell and Shelley West sang "I'm Gonna Hire a Wino (To Decorate Our Home)." Justin Moore had a big hit a couple of years ago with "Why We Drink," and Kelsea Ballerini sang "There's a Hole in the Bottle." Same subject matter, treated equally as cleverly. We have country rap/singing like Toby Keith's "I Wanna Talk About Me" and Sam Hunt's "Kinfolks." The '70s had "Convoy" and "Teddy Bear." Frankly, there's a lot more talent and creativity in the former than the latter, if you ask me. The best of country music has always been about real people and real emotions, and that is just as true today as it was 50 years ago. Ditties will always be with us, but they've never been the whole picture of mainstream country, or even close to it.
Get off my damn lawn ...
I've given my take, which is what is modern and what is classic rock (up to and including 90s) needs to be separated. I think the formula for WAAF was only hurting WAAF and stations like WBOS. I think that when you call yourself "modern rock," you need to be modern. Instead they siphoned off the music that should be classic rock. The older hits keep away any young yet aging audience that doesn't relate to the 90s songs, while the new songs push away the audience who want the 90s songs. That format seems to work in smaller markets, such as Manchester and Portsmouth, NH.
I see the HD-2 WAAF that exists is incorporating more new songs. To me, although Dartmouth College is looking to unload the station, the playlist of WFRD (99 Rock) is a blend of which I would like to see a big company take shot.
Someone on here mentioned the flip of Amp to Big, and not going with Alt, as the telltale sign. Keep in mind, Alt and Rock aren't the same thing. In the grand scheme of time, they blended for a blink of an eye, but modern Alt and modern Rock are two separate formats.
I see the HD-2 WAAF that exists is incorporating more new songs. To me, although Dartmouth College is looking to unload the station, the playlist of WFRD (99 Rock) is a blend of which I would like to see a big company take shot.
Someone on here mentioned the flip of Amp to Big, and not going with Alt, as the telltale sign. Keep in mind, Alt and Rock aren't the same thing. In the grand scheme of time, they blended for a blink of an eye, but modern Alt and modern Rock are two separate formats.
As far as I am concerned, the 90's Modern Rock/Alternative was a drab format. The music mostly seemed to primarily appeal to the college set. In my opinion, regardless of ratings, or there lack of, it was a shor lived format at best. The only exceptions were the songs that became big hits!
Yet in this market, that was modern Rock stations until WAAF was sold. It was a heavy reliance on the 90s. Insiders on this board stated plenty of times "that's what tests well;" much to my belief that it was only hurting these stations.
Currently, 18 to 21 year olds weren't even born in the 90s, and up to 25 year olds were born in 1996. That puts them at three or four years old when we entered 2000. Even if they have had fond memories of a childhood song, we then need to account for the different music styles that existed back then. In other words, perhaps songs from Nevermind now aged out of what we refer to as "modern rock."
Getting to your post, although I liked Alt Rock in it's time, and still like a handful of songs from that era, I find myself disconnected from a "modern rock station" that plays Smells Like Teen Spirit, Under the Bridge, and Santeria many times in it's rotation. I also hold the same view for stations that claim to be "modern rock," yet have Crazy Train, Welcome to the Jungle, and anything by Zepplin playing many times a day. All songs I like, but when I go to the modern rock station, I want to hear new music (find new songs and new bands). I'm fine with rock hits from the last decade, but I prefer to leave classic rock for the classic rock stations. To me, that's how one begins to attract and grow a young audience. I find that to be part of what made modern country become successful, they started to rely on current bands and modern songs.
The "big companies" have no presence in that market. The big dogs are a couple of regionals, Great Eastern and Binnie. And why would Audacy or iHeart be interested in a playlist that gets drubbed by classic rock, country and even VPR Classical every single book?
I hate to break it to you, but some of those people listen to classic rock. In Boston WZLX and WROR are among the most listened to stations in the 18-34 group. In some cities, classic rock is #1 18-34. I'm not kidding. Young people have great respect for older music, even if they didn't grow up with it.
I should clarify that I didn't mean that particular station. I meant a company replicating it here in Boston. Different Markets, also. I have a strange feeling that an R&B/Hip-Hop hybrid wouldn't be as prominent on the NH/VT boarder either. I was referring to the particular playlist.
Notice how WROR and WZLX don't play a heavy rotation of 90s Alt-Rock, like WAAF did prior to being sold to EMF.
Last edited:
But both formats are under the marquee of "rock" and rock has been on a decline for the last 20 to 25 years among demos under age 35 to 40.
Alt is highly fragmented. There are subsets within the Alt banner. AAA is eclectic, and appeals today to mostly 55 and over.
We are not in a rock era.
- Status