• 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

Classic Hits/Classic Rock/Jack

S

Steppenwolf

This is my first post on the oldies format page. I've been posting on the Variety Hits format but this is probably a better forum to discuss my ideas. I don't like the Jack approach to programming because it covers too wide of a time period. I DO like the concept of playing a wide variety of hits, but from a shorter time span.

I'm from the second half of the baby boom generation. My perception of oldies stations is that they've only targeted the first half of the boomer generation. Or if the station does seem to want to reach the 2nd half of the boomer generation, it's usually with a classic rock format. Has any station sought the 2nd half of the baby boomer generation by concentrating on music from the late '60s through the mid '80s? Plus, with a wide variety of hits within that time frame? Everything from Sly & the Family Stone to the Who to the Carpenters?
 
Back in the eighties and nineties, there was a station in Boston called Classic Hits 100.7 WZLX. You gave a close description of them. I miss them.

They even had Dr. Demento on Sunday nights.


"We're in it for the music, not for the money, Classic Hits 100, WZLX."


>
> I'm from the second half of the baby boom generation. My
> perception of oldies stations is that they've only targeted
> the first half of the boomer generation. Or if the station
> does seem to want to reach the 2nd half of the boomer
> generation, it's usually with a classic rock format. Has
> any station sought the 2nd half of the baby boomer
> generation by concentrating on music from the late '60s
> through the mid '80s? Plus, with a wide variety of hits
> within that time frame? Everything from Sly & the Family
> Stone to the Who to the Carpenters?
>
<P ID="signature">______________
[email protected]</P>
 
> This is my first post on the oldies format page. I've been
> posting on the Variety Hits format but this is probably a
> better forum to discuss my ideas. I don't like the Jack
> approach to programming because it covers too wide of a time
> period. I DO like the concept of playing a wide variety of
> hits, but from a shorter time span.
>
> I'm from the second half of the baby boom generation. My
> perception of oldies stations is that they've only targeted
> the first half of the boomer generation. Or if the station
> does seem to want to reach the 2nd half of the boomer
> generation, it's usually with a classic rock format. Has
> any station sought the 2nd half of the baby boomer
> generation by concentrating on music from the late '60s
> through the mid '80s? Plus, with a wide variety of hits
> within that time frame? Everything from Sly & the Family
> Stone to the Who to the Carpenters?
>

We used to have a station like that as well, played Sly and The Family Stone all the time, as well as many classic rock artists, and many other good "rockin hits" from the late 60s to the early 80s. Basically, a wide classic hits station.

It was a very good station. Had a hint of oldies, mixed with tons of classic rock, some hits, and more. It was called "Rockin' Hits 104.9 KQH, Timeless" when they went to the format from classic rock, then eventually dropped the "Rockin' Hits" part, and really limited up their playlist that it got worn out. Eventually, the station flipped due to one bad book. It was good while it lasted.<P ID="signature">______________


Moderator, Community Radio board</P>
 
Two songs that stay on my mind from Classic hits 100 WZLX were,

Bell Bottom Blues by Eric Clapton

and

It Ain't Me Baby by The Turtles

They were not scared to play a ten minute version of a song either.


> > This is my first post on the oldies format page. I've
> been
> > posting on the Variety Hits format but this is probably a
> > better forum to discuss my ideas. I don't like the Jack
> > approach to programming because it covers too wide of a
> time
> > period. I DO like the concept of playing a wide variety
> of
> > hits, but from a shorter time span.
> >
> > I'm from the second half of the baby boom generation. My
> > perception of oldies stations is that they've only
> targeted
> > the first half of the boomer generation. Or if the
> station
> > does seem to want to reach the 2nd half of the boomer
> > generation, it's usually with a classic rock format. Has
> > any station sought the 2nd half of the baby boomer
> > generation by concentrating on music from the late '60s
> > through the mid '80s? Plus, with a wide variety of hits
> > within that time frame? Everything from Sly & the Family
> > Stone to the Who to the Carpenters?
> >
>
> We used to have a station like that as well, played Sly and
> The Family Stone all the time, as well as many classic rock
> artists, and many other good "rockin hits" from the late 60s
> to the early 80s. Basically, a wide classic hits station.
>
> It was a very good station. Had a hint of oldies, mixed with
> tons of classic rock, some hits, and more. It was called
> "Rockin' Hits 104.9 KQH, Timeless" when they went to the
> format from classic rock, then eventually dropped the
> "Rockin' Hits" part, and really limited up their playlist
> that it got worn out. Eventually, the station flipped due to
> one bad book. It was good while it lasted.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
[email protected]</P>
 
> Two songs that stay on my mind from Classic hits 100 WZLX
> were,
>
> Bell Bottom Blues by Eric Clapton
>
> and
>
> It Ain't Me Baby by The Turtles
>
> They were not scared to play a ten minute version of a song
> either.
>

Isn't that what classic rock is all about? Playing the long versions of songs?
 
> I'm from the second half of the baby boom generation. My
> perception of oldies stations is that they've only targeted
> the first half of the boomer generation. Or if the station
> does seem to want to reach the 2nd half of the boomer
> generation, it's usually with a classic rock format. Has
> any station sought the 2nd half of the baby boomer
> generation by concentrating on music from the late '60s
> through the mid '80s? Plus, with a wide variety of hits
> within that time frame? Everything from Sly & the Family
> Stone to the Who to the Carpenters?
>


I'm about in the middle of the boomer generation and I was rather put off by the fact that for the longest time oldies radio seemed to focus almost exclusively on pre-1967 music. I didn't really get into music until around the British invasion, yet oldies radio kept clinging to the "Fonzie" era. I for one also welcomed the shift towards 70s tunes.

As far as playing everything from the Carpenters to the Who, I'm not sure most listeners would want that much range of genres on one station ("Jack" defenders notwithstanding). My guess is that the people who liked the more pop tunes of the 70s don't really want to hear the long version of "Won't Get Fooled Again" or "Freebird" mixed in and vice versa. IIRC, classic rock started out mixing in Motown along with Pink Floyd & Jefferson Airplane. Clearly, the audiences didn't respond well to it or they'd still be doing it today.
 
Re: gutted oldies

Now, it's the other way around, rehashing the same boring stuff, only late 60s and early to mid 70s. Very boring gutting the first half of rock and roll out of the equation.

One "oldies" FM I heard last summer - during the 50th anniversary of rock and roll - did a weekend tribute to early rock.

The suck-o station didn't even play ONE oldie during the hour. Just the same late 60s stuff that they play every single day. No Del Shannon. No Four Seasons (not even mid-60s Four Seasons). No Shirelles. Nothing before the overplayed 1964-66 era.

That would be like doing a Motown weekend without playing a single Motown song.

I'm near the end of the Baby Boomer era. I'm put off that this is called oldies while neglecting a significant part of the audience - and music.


> I'm about in the middle of the boomer generation and I was
> rather put off by the fact that for the longest time oldies
> radio seemed to focus almost exclusively on pre-1967 music.
> I didn't really get into music until around the British
> invasion, yet oldies radio kept clinging to the "Fonzie"
> era. I for one also welcomed the shift towards 70s tunes.
>
>
 
Re: gutted oldies

>

[Now, it's the other way around, rehashing the same boring
> stuff, only late 60s and early to mid 70s. Very boring
> gutting the first half of rock and roll out of the equation.

> The suck-o station didn't even play ONE oldie during the
> hour. Just the same late 60s stuff that they play every
> single day. No Del Shannon. No Four Seasons (not even
> mid-60s Four Seasons). No Shirelles. Nothing before the
> overplayed 1964-66 era.
>
> That would be like doing a Motown weekend without playing a
> single Motown song.
>
> I'm near the end of the Baby Boomer era. I'm put off that
> this is called oldies while neglecting a significant part of
> the audience - and music.]

************************************************************************

Welcome to the real world of radio, Doug. We've been told many times on this board that the advertiser is the customer................listeners are only pawns. And advertisers don't want to advertise to anyone who listens to pre-1964 music. May I suggest satellite radio, where listeners are valued. They have great Oldies programming.
 
gutted oldies

You do realize you are VERY unique and unusual in that at your age you enjoy 50s and 60s music, don't you.

Most of the audience who likes pre-1967 music is now 60+ and, sadly, most advertisers don't see that as a lucrative audience. And, without ad dollars,
stations will not survive.
>
> I'm near the end of the Baby Boomer era. I'm put off that
> this is called oldies while neglecting a significant part of
> the audience - and music.
>
>
> > I'm about in the middle of the boomer generation and I was
>
> > rather put off by the fact that for the longest time
> oldies
> > radio seemed to focus almost exclusively on pre-1967
> music.
> > I didn't really get into music until around the British
> > invasion, yet oldies radio kept clinging to the "Fonzie"
> > era. I for one also welcomed the shift towards 70s tunes.
>
> >
> >
>
 
oldies

sorry, Fonz- you statement is not true.

Advertisers have little interest in anyone who's older than their mid-50s.
It isn't the music- it's the age of the listeners that turns advertisers, young GMs and sellers off.



> And advertisers don't want to advertise to anyone who listens to
> pre-1964 music. May I suggest satellite radio, where
> listeners are valued. They have great Oldies programming.
>
 
Re: oldies

> [sorry, Fonz- you statement is not true.
>
> Advertisers have little interest in anyone who's older than
> their mid-50s.
> It isn't the music- it's the age of the listeners that turns
> advertisers, young GMs and sellers off.]


O.K., but you're splitting hairs. Seems to me that most listeners of pre-1964 music WOULD be over 55. Radio likes to think that younger listeners who like this music will simply adapt to another format. I'm telling those listeners not to settle for that. Satellite is the way to go.
 
Re: oldies

> > [sorry, Fonz- you statement is not true.
> >
> > Advertisers have little interest in anyone who's older
> than
> > their mid-50s.
> > It isn't the music- it's the age of the listeners that
> turns
> > advertisers, young GMs and sellers off.]
>
>
> O.K., but you're splitting hairs. Seems to me that most
> listeners of pre-1964 music WOULD be over 55. Radio likes to
> think that younger listeners who like this music will simply
> adapt to another format. I'm telling those listeners not to
> settle for that. Satellite is the way to go.
>
It seems to me that there's another market for Oldies: There is a large group of 18-34s that grew up on the Oldies format and like it! A station with a small playlist should be able to superserve these people. I don't know what it's like in other markets but in this one, our Oldies station was consistently in the top 10 among 18-34 year olds BEFORE they dropped pre-1964 songs!
 
Re: oldies

I'm not splitting hairs at all. There is a big difference in our statements.

You're saying that they have no interest in people who like the music. Ad buyers don't really care about the format or the music- they look at audience delivery. If Oldies could be a competitive 25-54 format nationwide, they'd be all over it. But with most Oldies stations' audiences averaging close to 60 yrs old, it isn't happening.


>
> O.K., but you're splitting hairs. Seems to me that most
> listeners of pre-1964 music WOULD be over 55. Radio likes to
> think that younger listeners who like this music will simply
> adapt to another format. I'm telling those listeners not to
> settle for that. Satellite is the way to go.
>
 
oldies

A noble theory but the truth is that there isn't an Oldies station in a significant market anywhere in the country who has many (if any) consistent listeners under 35. Sure, there are anecdotal cases of 19 yr olds who love Oldies, but it's never been converted into tangible, substantial Arbitron numbers. In many smaller markets, the Oldies station may also double as that market's AC station (not musically but in the demo hole they fill) and may have some 18-34 success, but never enough to make a long-term ratings or revenue difference.


> >
> It seems to me that there's another market for Oldies:
> There is a large group of 18-34s that grew up on the Oldies
> format and like it! A station with a small playlist should
> be able to superserve these people. I don't know what it's
> like in other markets but in this one, our Oldies station
> was consistently in the top 10 among 18-34 year olds BEFORE
> they dropped pre-1964 songs!
>
 
This is getting tiresome.

> O.K., but you're splitting hairs. Seems to me that most
> listeners of pre-1964 music WOULD be over 55. Radio likes to
> think that younger listeners who like this music will simply
> adapt to another format. I'm telling those listeners not to
> settle for that. Satellite is the way to go.

I wish you proponents of satellite would go listen to it and stop posting over and over and over how great you think it is.

We know you like it. Now please shut up.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
Re: This is getting tiresome.

> [I wish you proponents of satellite would go listen to it and
> stop posting over and over and over how great you think it
> is.
>
> We know you like it. Now please shut up.]


We consider it to be a public service. There's a lot of frustration on this board over the state of terrestrial Oldies radio. We're simply trying to relieve some of that frustration.
 
Re: oldies

> [I'm not splitting hairs at all. There is a big difference
> in our statements.
> You're saying that they have no interest in people who like
> the music. Ad buyers don't really care about the format or
> the music- they look at audience delivery. If Oldies could
> be a competitive 25-54 format nationwide, they'd be all over
> it. But with most Oldies stations' audiences averaging
> close to 60 yrs old, it isn't happening.]



Let's put it this way: radio hasn't been able to sell the 55+ audience to advertisers. You stated that most pre-1964 music listeners are 55+. Therefore, radio hasn't been able to interest advertisers in most of the pre-1964 music audience.
 
Re: This is getting tiresome.

>
> We consider it to be a public service. There's a lot of
> frustration on this board over the state of terrestrial
> Oldies radio. We're simply trying to relieve some of that
> frustration.
>

K.M. is right.

Terrestiral radio can not serve 50's and 60's oldies listeners, and does not want to because there is no revenue to be gotten from 55+ stations.

Satellite is a great solution for oldies fans. Going into the 70's is a solution for radio stations. It is as simple as that.
 
Re: oldies

> Let's put it this way: radio hasn't been able to sell the
> 55+ audience to advertisers. You stated that most pre-1964
> music listeners are 55+. Therefore, radio hasn't been able
> to interest advertisers in most of the pre-1964 music
> audience.

Decisions on the age targets of agency advertisers are determined at a lavel where the media has no access. Neither radio nor any other medium can influence this kind of marketing decision by the advertiser.

Radio can not convince agencies to use a demo that the client specifically does not want. Radio is a vendor to agencies, and has to deliver the product agencies have a demand for.

This is not a situation created by radio as an industry, nor can radio resolve it.
 
Re: gutted oldies

> You do realize you are VERY unique and unusual in that at
> your age you enjoy 50s and 60s music, don't you.
>
> Most of the audience who likes pre-1967 music is now 60+
> and, sadly, most advertisers don't see that as a lucrative
> audience. And, without ad dollars,
> stations will not survive.
> >
> > I'm near the end of the Baby Boomer era. I'm put off that
> > this is called oldies while neglecting a significant part
> of
> > the audience - and music.
> >
> >
> > > I'm about in the middle of the boomer generation and I
> was
> >
> > > rather put off by the fact that for the longest time
> > oldies
> > > radio seemed to focus almost exclusively on pre-1967
> > music.
> > > I didn't really get into music until around the British
> > > invasion, yet oldies radio kept clinging to the "Fonzie"
>
> > > era. I for one also welcomed the shift towards 70s
> tunes.
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
I am also at the young end of the Baby-Boomer generation and prefer the '50/'60s type oldie station to the '70s heavy format.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom