BREAKING ALL "THE RULES"...AND I'M LOVING IT!

[eatspaste]

You also brought up another item that had been missing from the local FM airwaves--time checks! At least we know they're "live!"

Breaking news: any *good* (key word) voicetracker can give the current time!

 

[fang39]

You also brought up another item that had been missing from the local FM airwaves--time checks! At least we know they're "live!"

Breaking news: any *good* (key word) voicetracker can give the current time!

Key word noted, which is why it is generally avoided.

 

[tk]

No Kevin, it's not a novel idea to give the year a record was a hit, especially in an "oldies" format. It was something that had been intentionally done away with by the station's programmers, pre-flip. In 2004, I had submitted an aircheck to them and was told as much when contacted by the PD. In critiqing my work, it was also suggested that announcing the age when doing a celebrity birthday list would make the listener feel old, so leave out the digits. It's just silly.

It's a stupid way for PD's or Consultants to put their "mark" on the station. Trust me...I've put with their silly ideas for years. And every one of them has a "new" idea that completely contradicts the last one. It's so funny how when you've
been in the business for 25 years...you look back and see just how dumb some of the programming philosophies were.... and still are! Be real...have fun...that's pretty much it!

TK

 

[OldiesCat]

It's not because the jocks saying the year of the song "makes listeners feel old". It's because THEY DON'T CARE. If it's a song they love, they automatically tie it to a certain time in their life. If it isn't, mentioning the year doesn't matter.

It has nothing to do with programmers or "consultants" (the oh-so-easy whipping boy on these boards), it has to do with (read this carefully, please) THE LISTENERS. It is all about them today, not what some blabby jock wants to do 'cause he's always done it.

 

[adma]

It's not because the jocks saying the year of the song "makes listeners feel old". It's because THEY DON'T CARE. If it's a song they love, they automatically tie it to a certain time in their life. If it isn't, mentioning the year doesn't matter.

It has nothing to do with programmers or "consultants" (the oh-so-easy whipping boy on these boards), it has to do with (read this carefully, please) THE LISTENERS. It is all about them today, not what some blabby jock wants to do 'cause he's always done it.

Back in my youth, I learned a lot about music history through jocks giving song dates. (Though yes, that was back when alternate resources were few.)

If you think it doesn't matter (especially with something as "date/history specific" as oldies), you truly are a miserable, peevish pr*ck; or else it reflects how degradedly barrel-bottom "THE LISTENERS" the industry's generated have become.

Yeah, "doesn't matter". Like, what they don't know won't hurt them. Great alibi for male chauvinist pigs to keep their Stepford Wives perpetually in Stepford...

 

[fang39]

It's not because the jocks saying the year of the song "makes listeners feel old". It's because THEY DON'T CARE. If it's a song they love, they automatically tie it to a certain time in their life. If it isn't, mentioning the year doesn't matter.

It has nothing to do with programmers or "consultants" (the oh-so-easy whipping boy on these boards), it has to do with (read this carefully, please) THE LISTENERS. It is all about them today, not what some blabby jock wants to do 'cause he's always done it.

Yeah, I'm sure listeners "don't care." The only interraction they want to hear from a "blabby jock" is "did you see what happened on American Idol or Dancing With The Stars last night?" Or the latest (pick one) Paris Hilton/Britney Spears/Lindsey Lohan gossip. That's what listeners today REALLY care about, right?

And since nobody wants to hear the "trappings" of the "oldies" format, then why even bother playing the music? Just give 'em the same 200 "well tested" songs played over and over. It doesn't matter--it's "acoustic wallpaper" anyway--just as long as the radio's on, right?

 

[junior]

I am just curious out of the people currently posting in this thread how many are working on air. I mention all these things on air just as I said in my earlier post. If my PD told me not to I wouldn't. Thats my job. My PD doesn't tell me to leave out years and ages because as someone else mentioned I tie it to a memory of that time. Then your listeners have something to relate to. Remember that ? Relating to listeners. I try to speak to the listeners the way I would speak to my friend if I was in the passenger seat of his car while we are driving. Isn't that what we're supposed to do ? Hell thats the way I see it. My buddies and I always make fun of each other for getting older so I don't get the controversy here, it just seems like too many people with too much free time. But what do I know I'm only a jock.

 

[OldiesCat]

It's not because the jocks saying the year of the song "makes listeners feel old". It's because THEY DON'T CARE. If it's a song they love, they automatically tie it to a certain time in their life. If it isn't, mentioning the year doesn't matter.

It has nothing to do with programmers or "consultants" (the oh-so-easy whipping boy on these boards), it has to do with (read this carefully, please) THE LISTENERS. It is all about them today, not what some blabby jock wants to do 'cause he's always done it.

Back in my youth, I learned a lot about music history through jocks giving song dates. (Though yes, that was back when alternate resources were few.)

If you think it doesn't matter (especially with something as "date/history specific" as oldies), you truly are a miserable, peevish pr*ck; or else it reflects how degradedly barrel-bottom "THE LISTENERS" the industry's generated have become.

Yeah, "doesn't matter". Like, what they don't know won't hurt them. Great alibi for male chauvinist pigs to keep their Stepford Wives perpetually in Stepford...

Why DO you think it matters that jocks mention song dates? Is it our job to teach music history? If listeners tell us this sort of thing, basically minor radio-speak trivia facts, matters zero to them (and they DO think that and have for years), why cram it down their throats? You rail against the seeminly "bottom barrel" radio's in, yet you put your likes and interests above what listeners tell us they want. Is it that the only thing you know how to talk about on-the-air is useless facts you've done for a couple of decades and have no real skills at actually connecting with your listeners on things they're truly interested in?

I think you reveal yourself a lot with the "back in my youth" talk. And, I believe I said THE LISTENERS is all that matters, not sniffling, washed-up radio hacks who never made it and take their frustration out on those who have.

 

[argytunes]

junior...

YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD when it comes to bringing back a musical memory?

The only obstacle you're up against is a program director or consultant who has a desired audience or age demographic in mind! This is the reason why so many jocks who can't relate to the music and work cheaply ARE HIRED to announce the tunes and keep the stopsets brief!

Overall there seems to be a conflict between the older demographic audience that can RELATE to some of the music...while the younger demographic (for the most part) doesn't seem to care one way or the other?

argytunes

 

[OldiesCat]

It's not because the jocks saying the year of the song "makes listeners feel old". It's because THEY DON'T CARE. If it's a song they love, they automatically tie it to a certain time in their life. If it isn't, mentioning the year doesn't matter.

It has nothing to do with programmers or "consultants" (the oh-so-easy whipping boy on these boards), it has to do with (read this carefully, please) THE LISTENERS. It is all about them today, not what some blabby jock wants to do 'cause he's always done it.

Yeah, I'm sure listeners "don't care." The only interraction they want to hear from a "blabby jock" is "did you see what happened on American Idol or Dancing With The Stars last night?" Or the latest (pick one) Paris Hilton/Britney Spears/Lindsey Lohan gossip. That's what listeners today REALLY care about, right?

And since nobody wants to hear the "trappings" of the "oldies" format, then why even bother playing the music? Just give 'em the same 200 "well tested" songs played over and over. It doesn't matter--it's "acoustic wallpaper" anyway--just as long as the radio's on, right?

Oh, yeah. That's what I've been saying all along. ???

(twit)

 

[oldiesfan6479]

Now let's add a processor setting called "cue burn"...(snip)...and maybe some random crackles or head-alignment phase distortion.

Don't forget the sound from a still open cart pot where the tape goes over the
splice just before it cues up, and the "ka-ching" sound of the relays when you
start a cart in a Gates Criterion machine.

 

[OldiesCat]

junior...

YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD when it comes to bringing back a musical memory?

The only obstacle you're up against is a program director or consultant who has a desired audience or age demographic in mind! This is the reason why so many jocks who can't relate to the music and work cheaply ARE HIRED to announce the tunes and keep the stopsets brief!

Overall there seems to be a conflict between the older demographic audience that can RELATE to some of the music...while the younger demographic (for the most part) doesn't seem to care one way or the other?

Yes, God forbid we target a demo then serve it by relating to them on THEIR terms. Excuse us for doing everything we can to appeal to and connect with listeners instead of just reading factoids out of radio books and calling it "show prep". Happy 66th birthday, this hit #6 in July of 1965, reverb and talking up intros-THAT is your idea of great radio. And you guys have the gumption to call the rest of the radio biz pathetic and trash. Honestly, for the #1 radio market in the U.S., this board has to have more insecure, frustrated, mediocre board-ops & DJ wannabes than any other in the country.

The 70s suck, the 80s suck, target demos suck, music testing sucks, "consultants" REALLY suck. If this business is so darn bad, then please get out and save us from being bored to death by your incessant whining, complaining, bitching and excuses.

In closing, please give this concept some consideration. I think most of us would agree that Michael Jordan will probably go down in history as the greatest NBA player ever. Has it occoured to you nimrods that Michael Jordan had coaches (PDs), a workout routine (put together with his coaches and teammates), actually plays diagramed and called for use in games (programming strategy and tactics), specialized game plans tailored for each opponent AND he was the first to show up at practice, went 150% every day and was the last to leave? He didn't just freelance- he was part of a TEAM PLAN, complete with a vision, strategy and tactical execution. And it was ALL those things that helped make a guy who got cut from his junior high team A WINNER.

Think about it.

 

[adma]

The 70s suck, the 80s suck, target demos suck, music testing sucks, "consultants" REALLY suck. If this business is so darn bad, then please get out and save us from being bored to death by your incessant whining, complaining, bitching and excuses.

And if the business is so darned good, why are you griping about being bored to death?

To further my Stepford analogy, here's a paraphrase: "If this marriage is so darn bad, then please get out and save me from being bored to death by your incessant whining, complaining, bitching and excuses". As a rule of thumb, I find guys who talk like that to be ugly, angry, and insensitive if not outright abusive. Hey, women: if that's what your husband sounds like, follow his instructions and dump the jerk. He didn't think you'd actually *do* it, did you? And now, *he'll* be the one incessantly whining, complaining, bitching, etc, esp. since no woman with half a brain will pick up where you left off.

If that's what the spokespersons for "this business" are like, well, things ain't as rosy as they indicate...

 

[OldiesCat]

And if the business is so darned good, why are you griping about being bored to death?

Because pretenders like you never have solutions or ideas, only complaints. No fresh, innovative ideas; just old cookie-cutter blurbs from "back in the day" and pushback to new ways of doing things. The same people who cry and whine that radio is too pre-fab, too template are also first to protest when change and forward thinking is mentioned.

 

[Tom Wells]

Well, then have they got the gumption to play Underwater by the Frogmen, because it's still cool?
Or will it be same old/same old?

 

[adma]

And if the business is so darned good, why are you griping about being bored to death?

Because pretenders like you never have solutions or ideas, only complaints. No fresh, innovative ideas; just old cookie-cutter blurbs from "back in the day" and pushback to new ways of doing things. The same people who cry and whine that radio is too pre-fab, too template are also first to protest when change and forward thinking is mentioned.

What you're advocating sounds more like "downward thinking" than "forward thinking". Especially in an age where "change" and "forward thinking" and "fresh, innovative ideas" involves younger/smarter demos veering away from radio altogether. They don't want to deal with what they feel to be peevish, tasteless jerks like you. (Heck, even *you're* promoting said "change and forward thinking" by referring your critics to iPod, satellite, et al. Think of that--effectively, you're wearing your medium's own second-rateness on your sleeve.)

Consider that less as a persistent complaint, than as a persistent reminder. Like, to further my analogy below, I'd view the abused wife seeking to step beyond Stepford as embodying "change and forward thinking" far more so than her abusive husband. And likewise, the urge to hold said hubby's behaviour up to discredit might be argued as "change and forward thinking"...

 

[TheLaffer]

Heh, I'm just an average listener who doesn't know squat about the music business and sometimes it's fun too see what the insiders think is good and not good too do.

Personally, as an average listener, I don't see the big deal of advertising the year the song was recorded, or that a certain celebrity is a certain age. So long as the music is good, I'll listen, so who cares?

You're right. Those rules are PD rules which usually is off target

 

[OldiesCat]

And if the business is so darned good, why are you griping about being bored to death?

Because pretenders like you never have solutions or ideas, only complaints. No fresh, innovative ideas; just old cookie-cutter blurbs from "back in the day" and pushback to new ways of doing things. The same people who cry and whine that radio is too pre-fab, too template are also first to protest when change and forward thinking is mentioned.

What you're advocating sounds more like "downward thinking" than "forward thinking". Especially in an age where "change" and "forward thinking" and "fresh, innovative ideas" involves younger/smarter demos veering away from radio altogether. They don't want to deal with what they feel to be peevish, tasteless jerks like you. (Heck, even *you're* promoting said "change and forward thinking" by referring your critics to iPod, satellite, et al. Think of that--effectively, you're wearing your medium's own second-rateness on your sleeve.)

Consider that less as a persistent complaint, than as a persistent reminder. Like, to further my analogy below, I'd view the abused wife seeking to step beyond Stepford as embodying "change and forward thinking" far more so than her abusive husband. And likewise, the urge to hold said hubby's behaviour up to discredit might be argued as "change and forward thinking"...

Please do not put words in my mouth regarding how I define "forward thinking"- I've have not brought up iPods and Satellite as forward thinking. Based on your reply, it's plain you have absolutely no concept or vision for where radio needs to be and needs to go to survive and succeed.

[EDIT]

[EDIT-inflammatory]

 

[wgliradio]

If you've been listening to CBS-FM since the flip, you'll note that they've been doing several things that go against current programming convention and have been deemed as no-no's in previous posts from several of our esteemed contributors. Included are:

• Front/back selling the YEAR a particular record was a hit (i.e.-"a big hit for the group back in 1964")
• Announcing the AGE of celebrities during birthday segments (they're actually featuring the music of the Rolling Stones today in recognition of Mick Jagger's 64th Birthday)

Comments?

All of this is fine. For those interested in it, it gives them something extra from cookie-cutter oldies formats. For everyone else, it's no big deal. It's not a make-or-break point for a radio station, but small touches that can set itself apart from being wallpaper.

 

[OldiesCat]

All of this is fine. For those interested in it, it gives them something extra from cookie-cutter oldies formats. For everyone else, it's no big deal. It's not a make-or-break point for a radio station, but small touches that can set itself apart from being wallpaper.

But that was my point, wgli. Most regular everyday radio listeners are not interested in all of that; goodness, they've been hearing the same tripe over and over again for years on end. It IS wallpaper (not my opinion- this is what radio listeners say).