Not to slam 50's on 5 because I like the music they are playing but they seem to play allot of early '60's music. I can think of lots of good 50's songs they aren't playing. Granted all of it wouldn't be considered rock and roll but it would be top 40 stuff.
-
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
50's on 5
- Thread starter Mike Sheridan
- Start date
When XM first came on the air 50s on 5 was much more centered on just the 50s, and 60s on 6 the whole decade of the 60s. But over the years XM made the channels evolve somewhat. 5 now plays 50s and early 60s, 6 plays mainly 1964-69, with occassional early60s hits, but leaving most of them to the 50s channel. Its funny to note that Sirius always had their channel 5- Sirius Gold play the 50s and early 60s, and channel 6 60s Vibrations played 1964-to 1971- reflecting more the sound rather than the decade. Many XM fans made fun of this approach, but now it appears XM has picked up Sirius' approach more so than not. Strange what 6 years will do. 8)
Mike Sheridan said:
What's new about this? This has been going on for the past 2-3 years. The music is more reflective of the pre-Beatles top 40 sound than the actual timeline. I think it makes perfect sense. Early 60s fits better with 50s than late 60s.
My main complaint with the channel isn't the music mix but the terrible audio quality. XM needs to ditch some of the local traffic/weather channels, etc. and give back more bandwidth to the music channels.
I have no problem with mixing 50's with pre-Beatles pop music. It makes sense, but it seems weird to hear a "Fifties on Five" jingle or chant segued with an obviously 1960's song. I suggest re-branding it. I could also use a bit better audio quality. It sounds harsh and strident to me. They could also lose the Rockabilly hour during PM drive time. A little of it goes a long way, and if I were stuck in traffic, I'd rather hear mainstream music.
I agree with the re-branding if they are going with this approach. I'd also like to hear a better MOR mix than "High Standards". I also agree with the audio quality needing improvement. Any time a singer hits an "ssss" I want to cringe. 60's on 6 could also use some compression. I often hear the beginnings of songs get totally drowned out.
I'm willing to pay for XM in spite of the shortcomings. That should tell you what I think of local radio where I live!
I'm willing to pay for XM in spite of the shortcomings. That should tell you what I think of local radio where I live!
Chuck said:
Yep you probably know where I live since I make a lot of noise here on the boards. I'm with you as far as being out of the demo. I have been for some time now but officially I will be out of the demo in a couple of weeks (birthday).
Think of how many radio stations there are in most markets. Wouldn't it be nice if there was a station for every age group rather than just more of the same?
You probably also like more than just 3 songs played over and over again......
"Think of how many radio stations there are in most markets. Wouldn't it be nice if there was a station for every age group rather than just more of the same?"
Well, there's always Canada, where the CRTC sometimes gets involved.
When the CBC abandoned their 50KW non-directional blowtorch in Toronto, the CRTC determined that the 50+ demo was the largest underserved segment of the population. Thus, the winning competing applicant for the massive 740khz signal was CHWO....then a suburban operation with a less-than-spectacular 10kw directional signal on 1250. CHWO is a music station....basically a mix of 50s/60s oldies and more traditional pop standards stuff. A good listen and also available online.
BTW, I agree with Chuck that XM 50s should ditch the solid hour of rockabilly. I personally like the stuff, but would rather just hear a few cuts interspersed here and there. Same goes for the doo-wops.
Well, there's always Canada, where the CRTC sometimes gets involved.
When the CBC abandoned their 50KW non-directional blowtorch in Toronto, the CRTC determined that the 50+ demo was the largest underserved segment of the population. Thus, the winning competing applicant for the massive 740khz signal was CHWO....then a suburban operation with a less-than-spectacular 10kw directional signal on 1250. CHWO is a music station....basically a mix of 50s/60s oldies and more traditional pop standards stuff. A good listen and also available online.
BTW, I agree with Chuck that XM 50s should ditch the solid hour of rockabilly. I personally like the stuff, but would rather just hear a few cuts interspersed here and there. Same goes for the doo-wops.
Mike Sheridan said:
That seems entirely too logical. I guess one of the real problems is the huge price that stations routinely sell for. Perhaps if I had the kind of debt load some of these guys have, I'd go for the big money too. The problem is not everyone can make the big bucks if he pie is sliced incredibly thin.
Over the years, I've made a good living by "doing what the other guy isn't." It isn't a get rich business plan, but you can do well and have a lot of loyal customers (who actually like you) in the process. That ought to work in radio. There are still advertisers out there who do not use national agencies. There is fruit on the tree, but it may take a bit more work to reach it.
Mike Sheridan said:
Yes I do. It is one of the reasons I currently run a small radio station. Our weekly play list is about 1200 songs. New ones rotate on and off on a regular basis. Our listeners seem to like it too, and we have not been having trouble paying the bills, despite having a signal that most people would think was unworkable.
FRR said:
Yes. A more common number is about 400 in the library. Some stations play a lot less than that. It's really nothing new though, "Top 40" was just that; 40 songs and maybe 100 "Flashbacks." We used to like. In fact, I think most people still do. They want to hear a song they like when they switch on the radio. If your format is "Current Hits,” that fairly well limits the size of your play list. Oldies, Standards and "Classic anything" stations will have bigger play lists.
Since XM's channels are decade specific, you'd think they'd have a larger play list. The 50's on 5 actually covers 1950 up to Pre-Beatles 60's stuff. That’s 13-15 years. There were a lot of really great songs that became popular back then. It shouldn't be to hard to do.
You have to understand that between the years 50-55, the current pop playlist only consisted of 10-35 nationwide hit mainstream songs that most people of that era would be familiar with that charted. Plus the R&B chart which had less between those years...even though the industry was growing consistently with small record labels and releases....50's on 5 had to borrow the first 4 years of the 60's which mostly blended in with 50's as far as sound and generation goes. Plus alot of regional records the way that they were played at that time. That would help keep their playlist large enough and comparable to the other decades. Where they can provide a 50's channel without getting stale or a tight playlist.
Starbucks said:
I haven't had much trouble finding several thousand really good, identifiable songs from the era. Admittedly, I lived through the times, "duck and cover," and all. Maybe you didn't? As I recall, Billboard published a Hot 100 list every week for MOR stations. All someone has to do is read it. It puzzles me that XM has had trouble coming us with a deep play list.
I think that was the point of the original posts.
XM doesnt have a problem with being able to offerdeeper playlists, they did for a few years, then a couple years back they hired a consultant/prgrammer named Zellner, who decided to cut back on the size of the playlists of most decade, and classics channels- becoming more terrestrial like in approach to presentation and depth. 60s on 6 used to have 2000 plus songs in their regular playlist, they cut that in half, still deeper than terrestrial, but nothing like it used to be- and I have had XM for 6 years. :-[
I think Chuck has a good point here. Maybe it is fine for local radio to use tighter playlists, but it has been my experience that those of us willing to pay for sat radio really want a wide playlist or we would just listen to the crap on local FM with their 300-400 songs. I hope XM doesn't loose sight of the fact that many of us like a wide list and don't care if we can't hear My Guy every 2 hours of the day. We want songs that may have been played, but never broke the top 20. Besides, it is surprising how many songs make it to "oldies stations" that may have made to top ten, but other songs that actually charted higher are never played. As an outsider to the business I don't know why that happens. Guess it is all about what consultants are hired.
So.....
Let me see if I understand this....
When I became and XM subscriber three years ago they had deeper playlists and better audio quality than they do today.
Then they "improved" their product by clipping bandwidth on existing channels while they flooded my receiver with new ones. Then a "genius" programmer comes along and slashes the number of songs in their decades channels rotations.
Now that I get more stuff and better audio quality from web radio (and from my ipod), why, exactly, am I supposed to continue re-upping with the satellite guys????
Let me see if I understand this....
When I became and XM subscriber three years ago they had deeper playlists and better audio quality than they do today.
Then they "improved" their product by clipping bandwidth on existing channels while they flooded my receiver with new ones. Then a "genius" programmer comes along and slashes the number of songs in their decades channels rotations.
Now that I get more stuff and better audio quality from web radio (and from my ipod), why, exactly, am I supposed to continue re-upping with the satellite guys????
- Status