What happens to songs not in a station's active playlist?

[davideduardo]

Surely someone must have. There's thousands of presets. Here's one I found that may be close to the CBS processors and their competitors:

Pretty dense preset that reminds me of the old days of AM processing--but HOT - Stereo Tool

But the Audimax/Volumax sucks, being a single band. It's 60 year old technology. Wanting to emulate that is like wanting to emulate vinyl records.
...Oh, right... It's 2026, and vinyl is back.

What mostly sucks about the Audimax and Volumax is that they were analog devices that had to attack waveforms when they were already forming. That meant a lot of clipping or distorted waveforms. With digital, we delay the analog, let the digital decide how and when to limit, and it does it in a much more clean fashion.

One can set an Optimod to do the same thing on every audio band, just like the CBS units. It will stiill sound better because it can look ahead digitally and analyze the audio.

And in the 60's, there were no "equivalents" to the CBS units. The rest were simple AGC units at the studio and peak limiters to avoid over-modulation at the transmitter. For years I had the only CBS units in Ecuador, and everyone wondered by my stations sounded better and louder. The answer was simple. Oh, and I had the CBS dynamic presence equalizer which really had the same effect of multiple band processing before that technology even existed.

 

[AMRadioGuy]

I think there are some circumstances where that would improve the song significantly without affecting listeners' memories of the original.

But my point was -- and continues to be -- that such tweaking should not be an automatic policy. Applied on a case-by-case basis, maybe. It would depend on how aggressive the processing was and how far from the original sound a PD would want to stray.

I think you missed my point, KM. What I'm saying is that modern processing is not going to sound much like 60s/70s/80s processing would, so the song is already going to sound radically different than how the listener remembered it sounding in their childhood.

Aretha Franklin's "Respect" sounds totally different when I spin the 45 through my Audimax/Volumax over AM radio than the stereo version does on the local major market classic hits station. They already sound totally different. Even if the classic hits version was heavily EQ'd and pre-processed and futzed with, someone who has only otherwise heard the song back in '68 through an Audimax/Volumax over AM wouldn't know the difference. Heck, someone with only the original mono 45 wouldn't know the difference. Because the stereo version (stock) would sound wimpy as all get out in comparison, as is typical of records of that era stereo vs mono.


Your 80s station through a modern processor isn't going to bring back the memories a listener would have as to how "Holding Back the Years" sounded from a cart through a Texar Prism on their 80s Corolla's radio when they hear it back on your station today from a digital library through a (likely) modern processor on a modern car stereo. The EQ will be different defacto. The bands of the compressor are different, with different thresholds. A multi band processor can, in effect, re-EQ everything that goes through it, depending on how the thresholds and bands are set up. Depending on the station they heard "Holding Back the Years" on as a current, the high end might've been somewhat muffled if the cart machines weren't religiously aligned. Oh... and that modern car stereo is going to have a different "EQ" than the one in their 80s Corolla, too. If you aren't processing your 80s station to squeeze every last bit of loudness out of it... well... the station a listener heard "Holding Back the Years" on in the late-80s likely did. And that's going to significantly alter the sound.

What I'm trying to say is this: If you're arguing that by changing the EQ of a song or otherwise futzing with the sonic qualities would cause it to sound different than someone's memory of it... That's kind of a moot point unless you're running the same processing, etc. as the station they first heard it on. It's going to sound very different anyway.

 

[K.M. Richards]

A lot of that makes sense, although I often hear from listeners best described as "purists" who think we can somehow recreate that same sound they grew up with. And I still think processing that comes closest to preserving the sound perceived by many is desirable. But it is true that the technology has changed; what I need is a way to explain that to complaining listeners.

BTW, you seized on one of the few 80's songs that I don't play for your example ...

 

[cc333]

@AMRadioGuy I agree!

I grew up hearing many of these 50s/60s/70s songs with modern processing (or little to none at all, in the case of the records, tapes and CDs I've collected over the years), and having discovering how some of them sounded back then, and their mono mixes, I have to say I actually like it better. They sounded more punchy and open, and in many cases the mono mixes were just... better (The Mamas and The Papas' "Words of Love", for example. Growing up, I'd only heard the stereo version, which is kind of weird and has some very obvious editing mistakes, but when I discovered the mono mix, it sounded so much better, it was like a totally different song).

BTW, you seized on one of the few 80's songs that I don't play for your example ...

Maybe that should change....

c

 

[K.M. Richards]

Maybe that should change....

If you knew how much research I do every week to determine which songs are or are not viable and which rotations to put those in, you wouldn't suggest that.

or not.

(Hint: That song ranked #2,173 out of the 3,500 top songs in Classic Hits radio last year. The bottom third is never going to be the absolute biggest hits, and when I get down to that level tempo becomes a deciding factor.)

 

[CTListener]

@AMRadioGuy I agree!

I grew up hearing many of these 50s/60s/70s songs with modern processing (or little to none at all, in the case of the records, tapes and CDs I've collected over the years), and having discovering how some of them sounded back then, and their mono mixes, I have to say I actually like it better. They sounded more punchy and open, and in many cases the mono mixes were just... better (The Mamas and The Papas' "Words of Love", for example. Growing up, I'd only heard the stereo version, which is kind of weird and has some very obvious editing mistakes, but when I discovered the mono mix, it sounded so much better, it was like a totally different song).


Maybe that should change....

c

I'm used to hearing that Simply Red song on the UK classic hits stations I listen to online. Is there something about it that makes it unappealing to an 80s-only station here? It was an AC staple for years and wasn't a chart stiff here or abroad. Just personal taste, perhaps?

 

[K.M. Richards]

I'm used to hearing that Simply Red song on the UK classic hits stations I listen to online. Is there something about it that makes it unappealing to an 80s-only station here? It was an AC staple for years and wasn't a chart stiff here or abroad. Just personal taste, perhaps?

Very simple: Classic Hits stations tend to shy away from songs that were bigger AC hits than they were CHR hits. And listener research proves it to be the correct decision in most cases.

 

[The Hustle]

Oh my god people...most computers systems that store and house songs have a terabyte or 2 of storage. Most songs that are entered nto the computer are given a number, for reference. Like "Man in the Mirror" by Michael Jackson is Song Number 4325. That coincides what the music scheduling software has. Most stations can store 10,000 songs--even if they are wav's--on a 2 terabyte hard drive, along with 40,000 commercials, jingles, sweepers, interviews and more. All things you would hear on a radio station. When a station decides to stop airing a commercial, or a song, it just stays there in the hard drive until its manually recorded over, or deleted on purpose. To the OP, no, most dont ever get rerecorded for sound quality. They are put in once and if that song is never scheduled again, it just sits there. Some one might decide to play it for a feature (like "The All Request 80's Lunch") but mostly it just takes up digital space.

 

[The Hustle]

"And listener research proves it to be the correct decision in most cases." Correct. Most larger stations (or stations with a consultant) and access to research determines what stations play. Same with Sirius/XM. Listen to the 80's on 8. Its 90% familiar and hit driven. Occasional they play an "Oh Wow" (as in "Oh Wow, havent heard THAT one in a long time) but mostly they unfamiliar songs they play are part of the "The VJ Big 40 countdown" when they do the Billboard top 40 chart from a certain week during the 80's, that had songs that dont get played anymore because they were barely hits to begin with. Plus with the care of Simply Red, they were from the UK to begin with, and some groups have more success in their own country than they do in the US.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Occasional they play an "Oh Wow" (as in "Oh Wow, havent heard THAT one in a long time)

You just described my hourly "Forgotten 45" feature which, all by itself, has more songs in its library than the three categories that make up 90% of my hour.

 

[CTListener]

"And listener research proves it to be the correct decision in most cases." Correct. Most larger stations (or stations with a consultant) and access to research determines what stations play. Same with Sirius/XM. Listen to the 80's on 8. Its 90% familiar and hit driven. Occasional they play an "Oh Wow" (as in "Oh Wow, havent heard THAT one in a long time) but mostly they unfamiliar songs they play are part of the "The VJ Big 40 countdown" when they do the Billboard top 40 chart from a certain week during the 80's, that had songs that dont get played anymore because they were barely hits to begin with. Plus with the care of Simply Red, they were from the UK to begin with, and some groups have more success in their own country than they do in the US.

Simply Red's "Holding Back the Years" and Spandau Ballet's "True" have a lot of similarities, at least to my ears. Both Red and Spandau were English groups and fit into the well-groomed, stylish mode of New Wave. Both were big AC and CHR hits in the US. Surprisingly, though, "Holding Back the Years" went to No. 1 on the Hot 100 while "True" peaked at No. 4. Not to bog this thread down any more than necessary, but I'd be curious to know if KM's Eighties Channel plays "True," and why.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Not to bog this thread down any more than necessary, but I'd be curious to know if KM's Eighties Channel plays "True," and why.

Easy to answer. Despite your presumption, Simply Red was never considered to be a New Wave group.

The biggest New Wave hits were memorable and remain part of the foundation for Classic Hits. I have about 30 of them in my power rotation now. (Including "True", which for the record was the 169th most-played song on Classic Hits radio in 2025.)

Also -- and you know this by now already, CT -- it doesn't matter where the song peaked as a current. It matters how much the audience wants to hear it today.

 

[radiofan2023]

I'd be curious to know if KM's Eighties Channel plays "True," and why.

I would have guessed "false"

 

[The Hustle]

"Simply Red's "Holding Back the Years" and Spandau Ballet's "True" have a lot of similarities, at least to my ears."

Thats a normal presumption if you are a music fan. BUT radio stations playing music arent really about "music fans" Most lay people dont realize, commercial radio isnt about "playing great sounding songs". Commercial radio in the US is about "Advertising distribution" Commercials being heard by the largest audience possible to benefit the advertisers. Heavily researched music draws the largest audience, and unfamiliar or bad testing songs are left off the playlist. Every "Stiff" or bad testing song can contribute to loss of audience share, and thus loss of advertising. Maybe you know, but the only way music radio stations make any money is by selling advertising. No stations get paid to lay certain songs. So if a bad testing, or unfamiliar songs causes people to tune away in droves, ratings dip, and other stations are there to quickly pick up the ratings, and thus the revenue. Simple as that.

McDonalds makes money by selling hamburgers. If more people go to Burger King or Wendys and thus buy less McDonalds, McDonalds doesnt make as much money. And shareholders dont like not making as much money.

 

[K.M. Richards]

@The Hustle: If you aren't in the business, you are the most astute listener I've ever seen here.

In Classic Hits, we call what you described there "consensus favorites". Taking into account the documented fact that most listening takes place multiple times per day, in relatively short lengths of time, the programmer's goal is two-fold: Make sure the songs you play are the ones most of your target audience will at least tolerate if it isn't entirely their personal favorites, and schedule them in a way where every time someone tunes in during any given day they hear a different set of songs. (That includes staggering the spins so that those who listen at the same approximate times each day will hear a different set of songs from the day before.)

The advantage of this, for the radio station, is that with those listening patterns you can make a library of 400 songs sound to the audience like over 1000.

And yes, we are in the advertising business, not the entertainment business. What I do is create the "bait" to bring in the listeners, which we then sell to the local business owners. That's why it is called commercial radio.

It won't surprise our friend to know that I have even more Forgotten 45s than I do regular library songs, and I curate those based on research ... when a F45 loses popularity, even as a "ohmygawdIhaven'tnheardthatsonginlikeforever", it's gone. And it also helps to have a produced intro to make a special feature out of it, and always backsell it; the listener who spends the whole song trying to remember who sang it wants to know at the end who it was!

Music fans do not drive radio formats, much as they wish they did. The reason is that most of them want songs played that the real audience doesn't care about.

 

[AMRadioGuy]

A lot of that makes sense, although I often hear from listeners best described as "purists" who think we can somehow recreate that same sound they grew up with. And I still think processing that comes closest to preserving the sound perceived by many is desirable. But it is true that the technology has changed; what I need is a way to explain that to complaining listeners.

BTW, you seized on one of the few 80's songs that I don't play for your example ...

Even though I'm in my 20s, I've listened to enough airchecks to have learned that the on-air sound of radio has changed a lot over the last 40 years. More so if you go further back.

At the end of the day, you can't really re-create that experience someone had hearing a song as a current in 1985 or 1965. Even imaging today sounds wildly different than it did in the 80s. You probably don't have a jock talking up intros and hitting the post with a shout... I'm not sure that's what most listeners are prioritizing anyway. I'd think not.

I'm not surprised "Holding Back the Years" isn't in your rotation. I listen to a lot of different music, but mostly pre-1980. The 80s stuff I do enjoy usually leans more A/C, which means it's not played on classic hits stations. "Classic Hits" seems to pretty much be "Rock-lite" these days. Not my cup of tea, though I realize that's what the research says people want.

You just described my hourly "Forgotten 45" feature which, all by itself, has more songs in its library than the three categories that make up 90% of my hour.

That makes sense. If the same "Forgotten 45s" are playing frequently... are they really forgotten?

 

[K.M. Richards]

I'm not surprised "Holding Back the Years" isn't in your rotation. I listen to a lot of different music, but mostly pre-1980. The 80s stuff I do enjoy usually leans more A/C, which means it's not played on classic hits stations. "Classic Hits" seems to pretty much be "Rock-lite" these days. Not my cup of tea, though I realize that's what the research says people want.

It might help you understand my not playing the Simply Red song if I share that I play Lionel Richie and Billy Joel alongside Prince and Madonna and next to Guns 'N Roses and Bon Jovi.

That makes sense. If the same "Forgotten 45s" are playing frequently... are they really forgotten?

Perhaps a little less forgotten to my listeners. But I wouldn't call my scheduling philosophy "frequently". Songs move in and out of that rotation all the time ... there are 45 in active rotation (yes, that number is coincidental) at any given time, and once a song has played a dozen times in its current active period, it goes to a holding pen where it rests for a minimum of six months before going active again.

 

[AMRadioGuy]

It might help you understand my not playing the Simply Red song if I share that I play Lionel Richie and Billy Joel alongside Prince and Madonna and next to Guns 'N Roses and Bon Jovi.

Oh I understand your not playing the Simply Red song and I'm not necessarily arguing that you should be, K.M. I haven't heard it on the radio, well, ever, aside from on a small market AM (I wasn't around when it was a current).

And I realize that there are some titles that aren't classic rock on most classic hits or 80s stations like Madonna and Lionel Richie. But the classic hits stations I've listened to do sound like "Rock-lite," as in most the less heavy classic rock titles along with a few other 80s tunes to replace the library space where the real head bangin' tunes would be in a classic rock format. In a way, kind of like the "chicken rock" stations discussed in other threads here, just with music from a different era and differing genres a bit.

I haven't listened to your station, so I was making a general statement about "classic hits" formats.

Perhaps a little less forgotten to my listeners. But I wouldn't call my scheduling philosophy "frequently". Songs move in and out of that rotation all the time ... there are 45 in active rotation (yes, that number is coincidental) at any given time, and once a song has played a dozen times in its current active period, it goes to a holding pen where it rests for a minimum of six months before going active again.

Oh that's an interesting philosophy! Thanks for sharing, K.M. Sounds like a good way to keep 'em "forgotten" haha.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Oh that's an interesting philosophy! Thanks for sharing, K.M. Sounds like a good way to keep 'em "forgotten" haha.

More a case of wanting them to stay "forgotten" instead of becoming "burnt out".

 

[AMRadioGuy]

More a case of wanting them to stay "forgotten" instead of becoming "burnt out".

Wait I'm confused... That's pretty much exactly what I said... or was trying to say?