Noticed on one of Sean Ross' columns that several stations have begun decreasing spins of the Sabrina Carpenter song Tears and at the same time increasing the spin count of the year or so song Taste by her. My local pop station is doing that as well. The Spotify spins of that song aren't taking off, but wonder what makes stations do things like that? Does research favorability go up in some months?
-
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
Increasing spin count of recurrent
- Thread starter tall_guy1
- Start date
It depends. Not every song is a hit. Typically this is where the label's promo team calls radio stations and asks for input. Why are they doing this? If the song is getting negative response or there's a better song, the label might reconsider. I've seen singles pulled after a few weeks, and get replaced by another one by the same artist. But my view is that it's not something a radio does on its own. If Sean is writing about it, then it's not just one station.
Taste already came and went on pop radio a little while back. It makes sense for Tears to go down, since that's probably just poor callout or its gone high enough, but don't know why her earlier song is getting more spins again.
As you can see, it's one of her most played songs on Spotify. If they still like it on Spotify, perhaps that means they're not tired of it yet.
The labels can see if a station is cutting back on spins. If a station cuts back on a current, the label rep should send an email to ask why.
Last edited:
Sabrina Carpenter - "Tears" | Pulse Music Board Sabrina Carpenter - "Tears" | Pulse Music Board Here's the data for the song they're cutting back on. It doesn't show how many people are currently listening to either Taste or Tears on Spotify, but Taste has a lot more overall spins.
I read this rather differently than it was intended.
To me, it meant that pop radio used to have better taste in music, and now it doesn't. I had completely missed the fact that in this thread, "Taste" is a song title!
Typical outlier stuff, I'm sure
c
I suspect "Tears" is kinda difficult for radio. 96.1 Kiss in Pittsburgh is playing it (though it doesn't seem like they're spinning it very heavily - I think I've only caught it on there once), but with some lyrics missing. It just sounds weird that way. It's also a lot more blatant than her earlier hits were.
It was an obvious choice for a single, but I wasn't sure how it would do with radio because of the content... I think a lot of stations might have been more hesitant to add it. It took me quite a while to hear it in Pittsburgh on the radio.
It was an obvious choice for a single, but I wasn't sure how it would do with radio because of the content... I think a lot of stations might have been more hesitant to add it. It took me quite a while to hear it in Pittsburgh on the radio.
That's what happened to Lainey Wilson at country radio last year, except the label stuck with "Hang Tight Honey" for 20+ weeks before apparently realizing that it was stiffing somewhere -- either streaming or call-out -- and replacing it with "4x4xU," which peaked at No. 4 in airplay. "Hang Tight Honey" was No. 13 and stagnant when the plug was pulled on it.
Just curious ... are there consequences at the labels for the decision makers and/or the promo people when a pushed song fails to connect as planned, or is it just considered part of the business? It seems to me that, since the let's-take-turns obvious choreography that the labels and radio perform when it comes to the weekly No. 1 airplay song is so predictable, that the failure of a Lainey Wilson single to come anywhere close to that level after heavy promotion by the label might be considered a costly waste of time and effort by the big bosses.
They have to answer to an angry artist, who asks them why their brilliant art wasn't getting played by radio. This is why I say if a label sees this, their rep calls the station and asks them what's the problem. It's part of why some artists don't want to bother with radio at all. It's expensive and can lead to heartbreaking decisions like giving up on a single. The expense is the other consequence. It only makes sense to pay for radio promotion if it gets positive results. If it doesn't, then the bean counters ask why they're doing it. There are bean counters everywhere, including in the music business. These decisions aren't made unilaterally. It's between radio AND record labels. The labels argue for their artists, and radio argues for their audience. They're not always in the same place.
I read the song title Taste and the noun "taste" as a double entendre. The OP has different but complementary meanings depending on which was you read it.I read this rather differently than it was intended.
To me, it meant that pop radio used to have better taste in music, and now it doesn't. I had completely missed the fact that in this thread, "Taste" is a song title!
Typical outlier stuff, I'm sure
c
I just meant the song Taste by Sabrina Carpenter.
I hear it edited a few ways on a road trip. Almost every station edited out the "wet" lyric (think there was one station that left it intact), but seems like it was hit or miss whether they edited "down my thighs." Makes me think Sabrina herself didn't give them a clean version and maybe they edited it themselves.
There could also have been a couple of different edits issued. Even back in the 70s, that happened occasionally (there were two different edits of the Buoys "Timothy," for example).
It very well may have been that she didn't put out a clean version and the stations were making their own. Only thing with that is the backing track was still intact on the station I heard it on. I suppose they could have used an AI vocal remover, but the ones I've heard have left some artifacts. It sounded to me like she was muted on the vocal track during the mixing stage.
Audacy (heard on WXSS) plays an edit that is aggressively bad and cuts out half the damned song; for what it's worth it's still on the 'Bru's Beats' chart (when the voice tracking guy from Chicago plays four most requested songs among his markets at 6pm) and their own top 8 at 8, so people love the song obviously, but the Puritans at Audacy have stuck them with this neutered Kidz Bop trash edit. Somehow it's still popular in spite of it.
I'd say that a substantial percentage of listeners value melody and beat over lyrical content. We old timers remember the "rate the record" feature on American Bandstand, in which the standard response given to Dick Clark was "Great tune and you can dance to it, Dick. I'll give it an 85." Not "Deep lyrics, Dick."
Keep in mind all it takes is ONE complaint from one person to the FCC, and the station is stuck paying a huge fine. One complaint.
Julian Bunetta is one of the producers on the song, and he should know better, given that he works with Christian artists.
How do they edit it?
I doubt that's why the song is falling in the charts though. There's been other risqué pop songs.
This one is risqué in a way I don't think many have been before. It's pretty blatant.
On the one hand, I get that... on the other hand, if I were to complain to the FCC about a station playing Elton John's "The B**** Is Back," would that land them in trouble? Or is it the "untested" nature of this tune (in the complaint sense) that makes it risky to play?
This one is risqué in a way I don't think many have been before. It's pretty blatant.
On the one hand, I get that... on the other hand, if I were to complain to the FCC about a station playing Elton John's "The B**** Is Back," would that land them in trouble? Or is it the "untested" nature of this tune (in the complaint sense) that makes it risky to play?