B
Buddy Shula
Guest
Mike, there is a different listening experience when you compare rock n roll vs adult standards. We are not an oldies rock n roll station. We are adult standards. The sound is very different between the two.
-
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
Mike, there is a different listening experience when you compare rock n roll vs adult standards. We are not an oldies rock n roll station. We are adult standards. The sound is very different between the two.
That may well be... but, those artists were charting still in that specific time frame (let's say early to mid 1960's)... so they were somewhat current. They had new, fresh material. Very different than, say, Carly Simon who hasn't had a current release this decade... and the last charting tune was over a decade ago. And, as far as Paul Davis being anything close to "current", um, he's been deceased for, what, a decade.
And, yes, I agree that WECK *can* appeal to 55 and over. If that is the route to take, then it *can* appeal to 12 and over. Anything is possible.
The fact that you sought out this board, registered for it and make posts mean you're not an "average listener". That's not to diminish your points (which are good IMO) but you're not the same as the grandfather who grew up with Danny Neaverth who puts WECK on while in the car with his grandkids. They're the "average listeners" Buddy is targeting.
It's been established that WECK is targeting the Lawrence Welk crowd. That very narrow target could be problematic, since Death Takes No Holiday. Someone who is 64 grew up with The Beatles, Woodstock, and maybe was a Hippie. They still probably like Rock, Folk, and Soul music. WECK will bore those people.
It's never possible to please everyone. WECK has chosen its "lane" as Buddy said. Many elderly folks probably appreciate it, while others won't. If the format doesn't work, he can always make adjustments...
It's never possible to please everyone. WECK has chosen its "lane" as Buddy said. Many elderly folks probably appreciate it, while others won't. If the format doesn't work, he can always make adjustments...
No, no and no on several counts.
First, the "Lawrence Welk crowd" is much older than the apparent WECK target... 75+ at least.
Those who grew up with the artists and events you mention has often found that the songs they still enjoy hearing are, for example, "Yesterday" and not "I am the Walrus".
And there is a difference betwen Diana Ross & The Supremes and James Brown. You can't classify all soul music in the same way.
Today, 55 to 75 is, perhaps, "senior"... but "elderly is really the remainder of the Greates Generation (or "Silent Generatrion" to some demographers).
Those artists like Al Martino and Sinatra were on Top 40 stations to appeal to slightly more adult segments of the audience and to dispel the image of being "teens only".
The younger portion of the audience, which is today's WECK target, put up with those songs because they knew another good song was next.
The problems occurred in markets that had more than one Top 49; we'd immediately switch stations if a "bad" song came on.
Sorry David, but lots of people like "I Am The Walrus". They also like other Beatle Rockers like "Revolution", and too many others to list. Many 60 somethings may also like newer music from heritage artists. The toothless WECK playlist doesn't represent the tastes of everyone 55-75...
We're all splitting hairs here. There are more than enough folks in the upper half of 55-75 who'd find this music mix appealing, and I wouldn't discount its appeal to the lower half completely. The playlist isn't "toothless," it's soft, with enough zip (including "Rose Garden," which IS uptempo compared to "Yesterday" and some of the others) to avoid being sleep-inducing. I think Mr. Shula has a decent formula for older folks. Yes, people over 75 are likely to tune in as well, but I see several advertisers in that sampling who probably don't mind reaching their ears.
Wrong. The Lawrence Welk crowd died 20 years ago back when WECK was a sister to WJYE.
Yeah, but the classic rock / geriatric rock genre is very different from the more mainstream music and is polarizing.
What Buddy is doing is a better complement for a full service format than Iron Butterfly and Jefferson Airplane.
There is no evidence that "many 60 somethings may also like newer music from heritage artists" as an ongoing proposition. In fact, real evidence exists that people in their 60's listen almost entirely to stations that play only "classic" songs. And when they do listen to a station that plays any current music, it is an AC or comparable format, not a hard driving one.
I'm living proof of that. I'm 62 and consider myself a fan of Bruce Springsteen. But I stopped buying his albums after "Lucky Town" (1992) and haven't found much new music by him that resonates with me since "The Seeger Sessions," which crossed over to the folk music fan in me. I assume that other fans of '70s and '80s Springsteen have evolved similarly, which probably explains why his new material has trouble getting any airplay and why classic rock airplay includes very little of his 1990s/2000s output.
Sure they have. They've added late '80s and '90s to the mix, and soon it will be time to add the early '00s. Some of the '60s and early '70s songs that were the foundation of the format in the '80s remain, but many have been dropped. The change has been so gradual as to have been barely noticeable as it's happened, but it's real.
That does not change the fact that interest in new music declines as a function of age, even if the new music is "like" the kinds of songs that were liked in the past.
While CTListener makes his point about not relating to newer Springsteen material, I can give an opposing perspective. I predominantly listen to new music. Only when I am having a sort of "senior moment" do I listen to stuff from the 50's or 60's or other older decades. And I don't look for new recordings by artists I like in a different era. I find songs I like, play them over and over (I'm a child of Top 40) and then move on. I played Despacito or Bailando a hundred or two hundred times, and now don't want to hear them again.
"Splitting hairs?" Perhaps. But it says here, a 55 year old is not listening for "More Today Than Yesterday," "Walk on By," "Ferry Cross the Mersey" and such. As great as those songs may be, and they are on a number of accounts, they're not in the "55-64 every day wheelhouse." WECK strikes me as "the Vidler's of radio" (an obscure-to-outside-the-market-posters who will just have to look it up to understand the context), along with WJJL, WLVL and WXRL. Nothing wrong with "being Vidler's," as long as what's on the shelf and in stock can be sold.
Beatles songs that you could play with Adult Standards: Yesterday, Fool On The Hill, Michelle, When I'm 64, If I Fell, Something. Sure, many of those are slow, but there are uptempo songs from them you could play... All My Loving, Do You Want To Know a Secret etc.
Here Comes the Sun, Eleanor Rigby, and Penny Lane probably fit, too, maybe even Norwegian Wood. Pickings get a lot slimmer with the two other major groups of the first wave of the invasion. From the Stones, I can only think of As Tears Go By and, perhaps, Ruby Tuesday. Something tells me Angie (1973) wouldn't make the cut. As for the Dave Clark Five, I can't make a case for anything but Because.
C
CAVEMANager
Guest
Since I am the one who started this firestorm I'll toss in a few more comments: I was raised in the frozen wilds of Kenmore and am not a former broadcaster. In fact, like Buddy, I am an owner/manager of a station that plays "timeless hits" though I do country instead of pop. I did not listen to 90 minutes of WECK and did record it and played it back hours later. I do this often to see what my competition is up to. If a fellow radio executive 1800 miles away offered a critique of my station I would be flattered and certainly not offended. My age group is apparently the demographic that WECK is after. When I was a youth I listened to "The Great George L" as Joey used to call him. I still love the rhythm and blues songs from the 1950s and 1960s. I like the Midnighters and Jackie Wilson and early James Brown but hardly any stations on earth plays that anymore. One notable exception is WJJL which is really unique. But they are on a money saving kick and don't stream which is too bad.
If we're looking for old folks why not advertise some funeral homes? Many are basking in cash that could be spent on advertising. On the whole I applaud what Buddy is doing. Unlike most radio stations his idea for programming is more than just keeping the station on the air in the cheapest possible way. But again, the most important question is whether the advertisers are coming out far enough ahead to justify the cost. If they are, WECK will continue to do okay. With no agencies in the mix you'll find out in a hurry if your clients are happy with what they are getting.
If we're looking for old folks why not advertise some funeral homes? Many are basking in cash that could be spent on advertising. On the whole I applaud what Buddy is doing. Unlike most radio stations his idea for programming is more than just keeping the station on the air in the cheapest possible way. But again, the most important question is whether the advertisers are coming out far enough ahead to justify the cost. If they are, WECK will continue to do okay. With no agencies in the mix you'll find out in a hurry if your clients are happy with what they are getting.
Off the point.....
Unlike many others in the bizz, I always found 'KRP to be a rather depressing show. Never really liked it for that reason. It really, IMHO, showed just how subjective, flaky and unstable radio is. Little did I know the real thing was often even worse than what the show depicted. Yes, I did get into the bizz, but never thought of that show as any kind of inspiration. If anything, it should've deterred many from getting into radio.
I was in my teens when that show originally aired, and I likely just tuned in for Lonnie Anderson's amazingly high cleavage.
- Status