• 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

ARRRGGHHH!!!! Too much variety sucks!!!

R

Radio_Realist

Guest
OK, I know that those of you who work in radio see things differently from those of us who actually listen to radio. We listeners have a different perspective. But what were the people who program "Bob" thinking when they put these pairs of songs back-to-back?

.38 Special's "Rockin' Into the Night" and Chic's "Le Freak"?

Guns 'n' Roses "Sweet Child of Mine" and Madonna's "Lucky Star"?

The Eagles "Already Gone" and Kool and the Gang's "Get Down On It"?

Or one of the worst of all:

Brownsville Station's "Smokin' in the Boy's Room" and Rufus' "Tell Me Something Good"????

It sounds like they downloaded all of the old songs on all of the various MP3 webites that were in the top half of the "most downloaded" lists, fed them into an iPod, and hit "random play".

In the words of Baby Bob from the fast food commercials, some things are just wrong.
 
> OK, I know that those of you who work in radio see things
> differently from those of us who actually listen to radio.
> We listeners have a different perspective. But what were the
> people who program "Bob" thinking when they put these pairs
> of songs back-to-back?
>
> .38 Special's "Rockin' Into the Night" and Chic's "Le
> Freak"?
>
> Guns 'n' Roses "Sweet Child of Mine" and Madonna's "Lucky
> Star"?
>
> The Eagles "Already Gone" and Kool and the Gang's "Get Down
> On It"?
>
> Or one of the worst of all:
>
> Brownsville Station's "Smokin' in the Boy's Room" and Rufus'
> "Tell Me Something Good"????
>
> It sounds like they downloaded all of the old songs on all
> of the various MP3 webites that were in the top half of the
> "most downloaded" lists, fed them into an iPod, and hit
> "random play".
>
> In the words of Baby Bob from the fast food commercials,
> some things are just wrong.
>

That's not a complaint about variety--that's a complaint about music selection and placement. Look, if 96.9's still being programmed locally, even if a Bob, and they had music problems before, what makes you think it changed?

And that last one you call "worst"--was probably featured B-to-B at some point in 1973/74 on CHR radio then.
 
Too much variety is Great!!!

Personally, I like Bob. everybody has been complaining how Pittsburgh needs a variety music station now that Steel City Media crumbled up and tossed in the trash everything that was Channel 97 or 97 RRK after almost 20 years, and decided to to change Pittsburgh Radio, and we all know Pittsburgh doesn't like change. I applaud what they did I am in my mid-50's and Bob reminds me of the AM radio back in the early 70's which I find rather refreshing, Bravo to Bob

Are the seqways rather extreme, yes. But don't you think that Bob is just flexing his radio muscle just to show us he can then after a while when people are used to the concept then the music will flow more evenly.

I see down the road BobFM being a family oriented all music station, In my house I had Bob on and my son and my daughter both are in their late teens both found it fun to listen to. they are getting the songs that they know along with the songs that I know. transgenerational music has arrived in the 'Burgh I say sit back and enjoy it. but I do wonder if they will have Jocks. Bob needs the 70's type jocks to make this really work

And I know now that Clear Channel and Infinity are just sitting on the side lines waiting to see what the numbers will be so they can bring "jack" in. I say to late if they do they had their chance and passed it up. maybe one of them can go classic rock. which I rather enjoyed but I moved on like they at Steel City Media did
 
> That's not a complaint about variety--that's a complaint
> about music selection and placement. Look, if 96.9's still
> being programmed locally, even if a Bob, and they had music
> problems before, what makes you think it changed?

If you want to nitpick about what the correct "professional" radio term is for bad song selection, go ahead.

> And that last one you call "worst"--was probably featured
> B-to-B at some point in 1973/74 on CHR radio then.

Actually, in 1973/74, I believe it was still called "Top 40". I don't think t was renamed CHR until later in the decade. But regardless, it was that kind of kludgy, hodge-podge programming on the top 40 AM stations that prompted listeners like me to abandon bubble-gum radio and switch over to listening to AOR.

In any case, though I'm not sure what this move will have on the folks at Clear Channel or Infinity, I am sure that the people selling Sirius and XM services in Pittsburgh were breaking out the champagne yesterday. If this trend continues, there will only be half a dozen "professionals" working in local radio.

Keep telling yourselves that Jack, Bob, Fred, and all the other named formats are the greatest thing to hit broadcasting. You'll all be looking to somehow leverage your radio experience into new careers soon enough.
 
Too much variety

> It sounds like they downloaded all of the old songs on all
> of the various MP3 webites that were in the top half of the
> "most downloaded" lists, fed them into an iPod, and hit "random play".


That's the whole idea. It's supposed to come off as "anti-radio rules" radio
(though that last segue is two songs that just aren't hits anymore).
 
I'll give you the music selection point. And, the back-to-back reference is spot- on.

What's funny is radio people (and junkies) will whine and whine about the "train-wreck" segues and that is a concept ZERO radio listeners can even comprehend. Their only measuring stick is: "I like these songs" or "I don't like these songs". "Train-wrecks" is a radio-only concept.


> That's not a complaint about variety--that's a complaint
> about music selection and placement. Look, if 96.9's still
> being programmed locally, even if a Bob, and they had music
> problems before, what makes you think it changed?
>
> And that last one you call "worst"--was probably featured
> B-to-B at some point in 1973/74 on CHR radio then.
>
 
> What's funny is radio people (and junkies) will whine and
> whine about the "train-wreck" segues and that is a concept
> ZERO radio listeners can even comprehend. Their only
> measuring stick is: "I like these songs" or "I don't like
> these songs". "Train-wrecks" is a radio-only concept.

Spoken like someone who doesn't know diddly about music. Any musician will tell you that how well any song goes over when you play it for an audience is what mood the audience is in. When you're performing music for an audience, and you play a song that puts them into a particular mood, then how much they will like or dislike the next song is extremely dependent on how they reacted to the previous song.

Musicians understand that even when they play song after song at a club date or concert, all of the songs flow together into a unified performance. Musicians understand the concept of the medley, and how important it is to not only play the songs well, it's also important to sequence them properly.

BTW, when Jack, Bob and the other one-name formats have put most of you disc jockeys out of work, how do you think you guys will cope with having to make career changes?
 
> song that puts them into a particular mood, then how much
> they will like or dislike the next song is extremely
> dependent on how they reacted to the previous song.

> Musicians understand that even when they play song after
> song at a club date or concert, all of the songs flow
> together into a unified performance. Musicians understand
> the concept of the medley, and how important it is to not
> only play the songs well, it's also important to sequence
> them properly.

Comparing a radio audience to a live club audience is ridiculous. Concerts draw one large group who, hopefully, are that at the start and end of a performance and, hopefully, appreciate a live, human being performing on stage for a set period of time. Radio draws thousands of INDIVIDUAL listeners who come in and out during "the performance" and also appreciate a live human being. Beyond that the experiences are totally different.

> BTW, when Jack, Bob and the other one-name formats have put
> most of you disc jockeys out of work, how do you think you
> guys will cope with having to make career changes?

Uh, skills like:

-- Thinking on your feet
-- Coping with change
-- Communicating to a variety of types of people
-- Understanding performance metrics
-- Technology appreciation

and about two dozen other things I don't have the patience to name right now are actually tremendous calling cards to woo a potential employer. Most cannot be taught overnight, while other rudiments of a particular industry can be taught quickly.

Unless it's the radio industry and the student is bitter and unwilling to learn from or respect those in it...
 
> > That's not a complaint about variety--that's a complaint
> > about music selection and placement. Look, if 96.9's
> still
> > being programmed locally, even if a Bob, and they had
> music
> > problems before, what makes you think it changed?
>
> If you want to nitpick about what the correct "professional"
> radio term is for bad song selection, go ahead.

Jesus Christ, are you never happy? Why don't you change your name to "Radio Depression".

Music selection is not a professional radio term--IT IS WHAT ITS CALLED. Oddly enough, in English, "selecting music" is also called..."music selection".

Variety is a concept; same as format, and programming, and sales. Variety is what you choose to play, based on what people want to hear--music selection and music placement is the actual playlist.

> > And that last one you call "worst"--was probably featured
> > B-to-B at some point in 1973/74 on CHR radio then.
>
> Actually, in 1973/74, I believe it was still called "Top
> 40". I don't think t was renamed CHR until later in the
> decade.

Does it matter? You knew what I was talking about. Had I said "Top 40" you probably would have found issue with that term. Get out of your "I hate the radio business" shell and take part in these discussions instead of going off on your own in the corner and sulking.

> But regardless, it was that kind of kludgy,
> hodge-podge programming on the top 40 AM stations that
> prompted listeners like me to abandon bubble-gum radio and
> switch over to listening to AOR.

And you know what? You were one of very few, seeing as how Top 40/CHR remained popular well into the 1980s. It was only when a number of further segmented formats (AOR, AC, Oldies, Urban) appeared that Top 40/CHR listening declined.

> In any case, though I'm not sure what this move will have on
> the folks at Clear Channel or Infinity, I am sure that the
> people selling Sirius and XM services in Pittsburgh were
> breaking out the champagne yesterday. If this trend
> continues, there will only be half a dozen "professionals"
> working in local radio.

> Keep telling yourselves that Jack, Bob, Fred, and all the
> other named formats are the greatest thing to hit
> broadcasting. You'll all be looking to somehow leverage your
> radio experience into new careers soon enough.
>

I have NEVER said that. I have no clue how good they are for radio overall. Probably not a savior--but it may be. Who knows?

But please, if you're going to graft an insult upon me, GET YOUR GODDAMNED FACTS STRAIGHT. Read my posts, and you'll see that I have no opinion on Jack. I have kept to fixing lies, misstatements, and blatant ignorance masquerading as "knowledge" when it comes to the Jack formats and prodigy.

And by the way, I have moved onto a better career--in law--that is using each and every talent I used as a jock.

Further, I have performed music in public, professionally. In a band and in a cantorum (choir, for those of you in Rio Linda). Radio is so far removed from the live audience it isn't funny. To garner your emotional response to music, the performer (DJ) must be in the room with the audience. That is impossible--not merely impractical--but impossible with radio. The audience and DJs are separated by electronic fields and air.

You get an "F" for analogies.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Johnny Morgan on 11/02/05 03:37 PM.</FONT></P>
 
> Comparing a radio audience to a live club audience is
> ridiculous. Concerts draw one large group who, hopefully,
> are that at the start and end of a performance and,
> hopefully, appreciate a live, human being performing on
> stage for a set period of time. Radio draws thousands of
> INDIVIDUAL listeners who come in and out during "the
> performance" and also appreciate a live human being. Beyond
> that the experiences are totally different.

Nonsense. People are people. Music is music. Any piece of music creates an emotional response in the listener, a response which carries over to the next piece of music heard.

The funny thing is, the radio pros who defend the hodge-podge kludge of random songs that is found on Bob or Jack stations are in disagreement with other, equally qualified radio professionals who endorse the idea that stations should pay attention to song sequence. That's one of the things that was added to the AOR format in response to a perceived flaw in the Top 40 format. The three or more "stop set" was invented to accomodate the reality that listeners like songs better when they songs are packaged with other similar songs.

> > BTW, when Jack, Bob and the other one-name formats have
> put
> > most of you disc jockeys out of work, how do you think you
>
> > guys will cope with having to make career changes?
>
> Uh, skills like:
>
> -- Thinking on your feet
> -- Coping with change
> -- Communicating to a variety of types of people
> -- Understanding performance metrics
> -- Technology appreciation
>
> and about two dozen other things I don't have the patience
> to name right now are actually tremendous calling cards to
> woo a potential employer. Most cannot be taught overnight,
> while other rudiments of a particular industry can be taught
> quickly.
>
> Unless it's the radio industry and the student is bitter and
> unwilling to learn from or respect those in it...

I was referring more to the snide attitude displayed by a few of the people in here that anyone who isn't currently active in the radio industry is a "wannabe" or some other sort of loser. I particularly wonder how Dr. Detroit will cope with having to make a career change when his station switches to a jockless format. Will he still be such a jerk towards those who moved from radio into other related fields when he's on the other side of the fence?
 
RR:

First, you are right and wrong on the same subject.
Certain stations attempt (actually they really don't or can't due
to diverse music styles within a certain format and/or relying on
computers instead of MD's ears.) But, while I agree in a perfect
world, music should flow, you have to also think that not all stations
should be similar and a station or two that has train wrecks and
no jocks is a sign of diversity that all of us have been wanting
for years. I think it's better to not apply one formula rules here.

Also, if it really did matter about flow of music vs. live events,
we'd have tons of live tracks or segments on the air. I'm all in
favor of radio including different versions of the same songs.
But, that has remained virtually unchanged. I know where your logic
on the live music flow is coming from. I think it's simply to
complicated for radio.

As for people loosing jobs. That's just the bad part of this/any business.
Everyone knows "it's coming." With de-reg, like Walmart vs. Main Street,
fewer people employeed by clusters is the way the corporations justify the
crazy prices for signals. When the FCC upped the ownership rules, look
at how many lost their jobs, VT, and now XM, etc. ANYONE in radio knows,
like makers of typewriters or rotary phones, you are subject to being
let go at any second. Right or wrong, unless a person is that much in denial,
everyone in radio knows today could be their last day.
 
> > What's funny is radio people (and junkies) will whine and
> > whine about the "train-wreck" segues and that is a concept
> > ZERO radio listeners can even comprehend. Their only
> > measuring stick is: "I like these songs" or "I don't like
>
> > these songs". "Train-wrecks" is a radio-only concept.
>
> Spoken like someone who doesn't know diddly about music. Any
> musician will tell you that how well any song goes over when
> you play it for an audience is what mood the audience is in.
> When you're performing music for an audience, and you play a
> song that puts them into a particular mood, then how much
> they will like or dislike the next song is extremely
> dependent on how they reacted to the previous song.
>
> Musicians understand that even when they play song after
> song at a club date or concert, all of the songs flow
> together into a unified performance. Musicians understand
> the concept of the medley, and how important it is to not
> only play the songs well, it's also important to sequence
> them properly.

Aww, come on, RR, don't be such a pouty pants. Train wreck segues can be fun.

I seem to recall on one of the stations in the hinterlands hearing AC/DC segue into Whitney Houston. How could you not prick up your ears after that? The point of things like that is to get your attention and make you keep listening to the station.

And as someone who's gone to tons of live shows around here - yeah, some bands have super thought out set lists, some just play whatever pops into their head next. It all depends on the band and the people in it.
 
Wait a sec-

Several posts championing "change" in format followed by one that champions the playlist is something you'd hear in 1973.

I think it's fair to say nobody can figure this one out.

I hate to see a rock station go, but thankfully they haven't gotten rid of all the rock.

I know I was listening just to see what the fuss was about late last night. Forgive me for not remembering the names of the songs- but I heard one that I felt was something WRRK would traditionally play followed by something you'd hear on a soft rock station.

I immediately changed the dial, to 104.7, and heard Glenn Beck.

Who was doing a bit about how the JACK format would last about another 10 minutes.
 
> Aww, come on, RR, don't be such a pouty pants. Train wreck
> segues can be fun.
>
> I seem to recall on one of the stations in the hinterlands
> hearing AC/DC segue into Whitney Houston. How could you not
> prick up your ears after that? The point of things like that
> is to get your attention and make you keep listening to the
> station.

The point may be to get listeners to keep listening, but the RESULT is to get listeners to hit the station button for a different station.
 
> > Aww, come on, RR, don't be such a pouty pants. Train
> wreck
> > segues can be fun.
> >
> > I seem to recall on one of the stations in the hinterlands
>
> > hearing AC/DC segue into Whitney Houston. How could you
> not
> > prick up your ears after that? The point of things like
> that
> > is to get your attention and make you keep listening to
> the
> > station.
>
> The point may be to get listeners to keep listening, but the
> RESULT is to get listeners to hit the station button for a
> different station.
>
I disagree. People will keep listening to see what they play next because it's so weird. The main reason they'll change is if something gets played they don't like. (I think this was stated above also)
 
> The point may be to get listeners to keep listening, but the
> RESULT is to get listeners to hit the station button for a
> different station.
>

It's been in town for just over ONE DAY! Already you're sounding defeat?

You must have one hell of a diary system.

Get back to us when the demo books come out in a year.
 
> I disagree. People will keep listening to see what they
> play next because it's so weird. The main reason they'll
> change is if something gets played they don't like. (I
> think this was stated above also)

Exactly my point. A listener will like a particular song IF THEY ARE IN THE MOOD FOR IT. If they aren't in the mood, then odds are that they won't. It's not an absolute thing, but when you deal in mass marketing, then you play the odds for maximum return. In my original example, I personally liked two out of the three second songs listed, for the most part. If I heard them in the context of other songs that had the same basic vibe, I'd actually enjoy them. But in the context in which they were played, they would have sounded like crap. Had I heard them instead of looking them up on yes.com, I'd have switched the station button.

And, had I been listening to a station where those second songs were appropriate, and they followed with those first songs, I also would have hit the button. It's all a matter of songs in context.

Play a song that's a "train wreck", and you significantly increase the chance that the listener won't like it AT THAT MOMENT. Play that same song in context with other, similar songs, and then the odds are that the listener will like it, at that moment.

Like I said earlier, I like spaghetti sauce. But I won't eat it if you put it on top of chocolate ice-cream. Train-wreck segues are to music what putting spaghetti sauce on chocolate ice cream is to food. A few people might enjoy the weirdness of such a concoction, most of us won't.

What really gets me is that back when I advocated stations that played any nostalgia format like WRRK expanding their playlist with "deep cuts" and/or new songs by the old artists, the response was "If you play one bad song, the audience will hit the station changing button, so you can't do it". Then, when I suggest that train-wreck segues do the exact same thing, the response is "Not at all. Listeners like hearing a song that they don't expect".

Either listeners have quick fingers for hitting station changing buttons, or they don't.
 
> Radio is so far removed from the live audience it
> isn't funny. To garner your emotional response to music,
> the performer (DJ) must be in the room with the audience.
> That is impossible--not merely impractical--but impossible
> with radio. The audience and DJs are separated by
> electronic fields and air.

If one don't doesn't have enough experience at getting those live responses and learning from them enough about audience taste to be able to predict with reasonable accuracy how songs fit together, then one has no business being in a position where selecting the sequence of songs to be played is part of your job responsibility. The task of successfully selecting the sequence of songs requires one to have a certain talent, a certain intuition, a certain empathy for what an audience will or won't like. Some people have it, some don't. If one doesn't, then one shouldn't be programming songs for a radio station.
 
> It's been in town for just over ONE DAY! Already you're
> sounding defeat?

But train wreck segues have been chasing away audiences for a long, long time. There was a time when the "experts" at programming radio paid great attention to the sequence of songs. There was a time when if you interviewed expert programmers, the majority of them would tell you that train-wreck segues were guaranteed audience chasers.

But now, what was once regarded as holy writ by the broadcast industry is now heresy, and what was once heresy is gospel.

The truth is, it's all a crap shoot.
 
> > Radio is so far removed from the live audience it
> > isn't funny. To garner your emotional response to music,
> > the performer (DJ) must be in the room with the audience.
>
> > That is impossible--not merely impractical--but impossible
>
> > with radio. The audience and DJs are separated by
> > electronic fields and air.
>
> If one don't doesn't have enough experience at getting those
> live responses and learning from them enough about audience
> taste to be able to predict with reasonable accuracy how
> songs fit together, then one has no business being in a
> position where selecting the sequence of songs to be played
> is part of your job responsibility. The task of successfully
> selecting the sequence of songs requires one to have a
> certain talent, a certain intuition, a certain empathy for
> what an audience will or won't like. Some people have it,
> some don't. If one doesn't, then one shouldn't be
> programming songs for a radio station.
>

I don't disagree at all. (To an extent--provided we understand that the music selection is not TOTALLY in the hands of the PD, but based on research and the actual scheduling is the art form we're looking at).

A music PD is different from, e.g., a talk PD. There can be good ones in both (the late Michael Spears was one), but you cannot take talk concepts and automatically apply them to music formats.

If that is what's happening here, then (a) the PD is doing the MD position, and doing it badly; or (b) the MD should re-examine his "art form" and/or Q-Tips his ears; or (c) maybe it will all work and we'll look like doofuses.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom