Classic Hits: Evolution or Revolution?

[oldies76]

Oldies, you're not thinking that the Whitburn and Bronson books sold to a mass audience in the millions or anything, are you?

Of course not. Specialty reference books appeal to those with such interest.

 

[firepoint525]

It might help to keep in mind just who the target listener is.
She was born in 1968.

Silly me. I thought that AC radio was targeted for her. Classic hits is (supposedly) about the '60s (second half of them, anyway) through the '80s.

Come-in-last had 97.1 as "Star 97" with the slogan "the best '80s and more" back in the early 2000s, but in typical Come-in-last fashion, they managed to screw that up as well. They went oldies in 2005 (after Oldies 96.3 became Jack-FM), then proceeded to make all the constant bone-headed changes that we mentioned earlier. (Ironically, by the time that Come-in-last had sold it to K-Love, most of those '80s songs had returned to the playlist.)

(Just as a side note, I should point out even back in 2004-2005, Oldies 96.3 was NOT playing "Jailhouse Rock" or any of those other titles that "Tuner" mentioned earlier, at least not in any heavy rotation. Their playlist was more '60s-centered, and they had even brought '70s, including even late '70s, onto their playlist by then.)

 

[CTListener]

It might help to keep in mind just who the target listener is.
She was born in 1968.

Silly me. I thought that AC radio was targeted for her. Classic hits is (supposedly) about the '60s (second half of them, anyway) through the '80s.

This whole thread is about the evolution of the format. The advertisers don't want people whose peak musical awareness included the Fifth Dimension or the Four Seasons anymore. They are too old. It's 2013 now, and you're hearing less and less Carly Simon and BTO and other early/mid '70s acts in the format because the people whose peak musical awareness included them are approaching, or have reached, the unsellable 55+ demo. The woman born in 1968 is going to be 45 this year. She's probably more likely to be comfortable with Cyndi Lauper and Don Henley on her radio than with Taylor Swift and Bruno Mars. AC's current music mix (except for the rare soft ACs in sleepy, geriatric markets) is for the lower end of 25-54.

 

[firepoint525]

Nice try. Classic "rock" bores me, too. For example: 38 Special. When was the last time that you heard "If I'd Been the One" on classic rock radio? No, it's always either "Hold On Loosely" or "Caught Up in You." I'm tired of both.

 

[CTListener]

Nice try. Classic "rock" bores me, too. For example: 38 Special. When was the last time that you heard "If I'd Been the One" on classic rock radio? No, it's always either "Hold On Loosely" or "Caught Up in You." I'm tired of both.

You're not typical. I'm not typical. Why should radio be programming to our whims? If classic listeners were tuning out en masse when those two .38 Special songs came on, wouldn't you think the research would have caught on by now and the songs would be gone and replaced by other titles? No, not dusty relics like "If I'd Been the One" but more recent songs by more recent acts that are doing well in current testing.

 

[firepoint525]

You're not typical. I'm not typical. Why should radio be programming to our whims? If classic listeners were tuning out en masse when those two .38 Special songs came on, wouldn't you think the research would have caught on by now and the songs would be gone and replaced by other titles? No, not dusty relics like "If I'd Been the One" but more recent songs by more recent acts that are doing well in current testing.

Try again.
"Hold On Loosely" (1981)
"Caught Up in You" (1982)
"If I'd Been the One" (1983)

"If I'd Been the One" is the most recent of the three, so that would make the other two more "dusty" and "relicky" by comparison.

 

[michael hagerty]

Oldies, you're not thinking that the Whitburn and Bronson books sold to a mass audience in the millions or anything, are you?

Of course not. Specialty reference books appeal to those with such interest.

And in the Whiburn and and Bronson books, that's chart freaks, record collectors and DJs (many of whom are record collectors).

Their success is limited.

The general public doesn't know or care about the books or the chart info inside. If they listened to Casey Kasem (and with anyone born after 1968, that's a big "if"...MTV and 4-hour radio countdowns hosted by a guy in his 50s aren't a natural match, and AT40s clearances declined in the 80s), they may remember if their favorite song was #1, especially for multiple weeks, but they haven't spent the last 30 years wondering why the second single from artist A only made #27 when the first went Top 10.

They just know what they like and want to hear today.

 

[CTListener]

You're not typical. I'm not typical. Why should radio be programming to our whims? If classic listeners were tuning out en masse when those two .38 Special songs came on, wouldn't you think the research would have caught on by now and the songs would be gone and replaced by other titles? No, not dusty relics like "If I'd Been the One" but more recent songs by more recent acts that are doing well in current testing.

Try again.
"Hold On Loosely" (1981)
"Caught Up in You" (1982)
"If I'd Been the One" (1983)

"If I'd Been the One" is the most recent of the three, so that would make the other two more "dusty" and "relicky" by comparison.

You missed my point. There's no real difference between a 1981 song and a 1983 song by .38 Special. They were a late '70s/early '80s band. Classic rock stations are now mining the late '80s and early '90s for new adds, not going deeper into 30- to 35-year-old titles. The two songs you cite must still be testing well; otherwise they'd have been replaced by now. And if that were to happen, why in the world would you want to replace them in your playlist with another song by the same act?

 

[bigtom101]

I don't know if it would be possible for you to miss the point any more than you just did here. You mentioned ALL pre-1964 songs, then trot out the same old tired "time-capsule" b.s. when I mentioned the example (a very prominent one at that) of a '70s artist who only got ONE hit played. At least be consistent in your arguments.

What was a "hit" in 1975, or 1962, or 1955 is irrelevant when it comes to what should be on a classic hits (or oldies station) in 2013. That is my argument. Just because a song was #1 nearly 40 years ago has almost no bearing on if it should be played. If that was the case, why isn't K-Earth or CBS-FM playing "Honey" by Bobby Goldsboro (5 weeks at #1)? I'm all for playing as many songs as possible...but as the saying goes "They aren't making new oldies anymore." So the best you can do is do testing on the songs you do have to find out what the target audience wants to hear now , as opposed to what they wanted to hear back then.

Tastes change and people do evolve - using charts from 40 years ago as a programming guide is like using a Rand McNally atlas from 1973 on a road trip in 2013. I'm not against playing a song, but only if it tests well and is what the target demo whats to hear.

Music is a big part of programming - but it isn't everything. CBS-FM, WOGL, K-Earth and all the other Classic Hits success stories do great promotions, have amazing imaging, some of the best jocks to hit the mic, and they play the right music.

Do I own the Whitburn books? Yes...I'm a music freak and they are great reference materials (especially the One Hit Wonders book). But it is only a reference guide, not a bible...especially given what Mike & David has shed light on as far as what was going on with Billboard during the classic hits era.

 

[michael hagerty]

It might help to keep in mind just who the target listener is.
She was born in 1968.

Silly me. I thought that AC radio was targeted for her. Classic hits is (supposedly) about the '60s (second half of them, anyway) through the '80s.

Nope. Classic Hits is about delivering the upper two-thirds of the 25-54 demographic.

AC aims for the full 25-54 or 25-49 depending on the market. That puts your dead-center typical listeners at 40 (born 1973) and 37 (born 1976).

Hot AC aims for 18-49 or 18-34, depending on the market, with centers of 33 (born 1980) and 26 (born 1987).

The Classic Hits 45 year old very likely has an AC and/or Hot AC among the 6 to 9 other stations she listens to throughout the week.

 

[michael hagerty]

Nice try. Classic "rock" bores me, too. For example: 38 Special. When was the last time that you heard "If I'd Been the One" on classic rock radio? No, it's always either "Hold On Loosely" or "Caught Up in You." I'm tired of both.

"Nice try"?

No, just facts about how people use the radio. Classic Hits skews female. Classic Rock skews male. Most people aren't with either or any other station long enough to get bored or burn out on a station. They're looking for favorite songs more than favorite artists.

 

[firepoint525]

You're not typical. I'm not typical. Why should radio be programming to our whims? If classic listeners were tuning out en masse when those two .38 Special songs came on, wouldn't you think the research would have caught on by now and the songs would be gone and replaced by other titles? No, not dusty relics like "If I'd Been the One" but more recent songs by more recent acts that are doing well in current testing.

Try again.
"Hold On Loosely" (1981)
"Caught Up in You" (1982)
"If I'd Been the One" (1983)
"If I'd Been the One" is the most recent of the three, so that would make the other two more "dusty" and "relicky" by comparison.

You missed my point. There's no real difference between a 1981 song and a 1983 song by .38 Special. They were a late '70s/early '80s band. Classic rock stations are now mining the late '80s and early '90s for new adds, not going deeper into 30- to 35-year-old titles. The two songs you cite must still be testing well; otherwise they'd have been replaced by now. And if that were to happen, why in the world would you want to replace them in your playlist with another song by the same act?

Who said anything about replacing anything? Why not play all three, only at lower overall rotation to avoid burnout.

One of my faves by 38 Special is actually "Second Chance" from 1989, but I am actually NOT asking classic rock to add that one because it is not one of their typical songs. Different lead singer (Max Carl), different writers (I think), and it has more of an AC feel to it. AC played it there for a while, but I believe that even they have moved on from it.

 

[michael hagerty]

You're not typical. I'm not typical. Why should radio be programming to our whims? If classic listeners were tuning out en masse when those two .38 Special songs came on, wouldn't you think the research would have caught on by now and the songs would be gone and replaced by other titles? No, not dusty relics like "If I'd Been the One" but more recent songs by more recent acts that are doing well in current testing.

Try again.
"Hold On Loosely" (1981)
"Caught Up in You" (1982)
"If I'd Been the One" (1983)

"If I'd Been the One" is the most recent of the three, so that would make the other two more "dusty" and "relicky" by comparison.

Only if the audience keeps track of year of release.

And they don't.

A record they forgot about (because they really didn't care) 30 years ago is more of a relic to them than one they want to hear from any year.

 

[firepoint525]

Nice try. Classic "rock" bores me, too. For example: 38 Special. When was the last time that you heard "If I'd Been the One" on classic rock radio? No, it's always either "Hold On Loosely" or "Caught Up in You." I'm tired of both.

"Nice try"?
No, just facts about how people use the radio. Classic Hits skews female. Classic Rock skews male. Most people aren't with either or any other station long enough to get bored or burn out on a station. They're looking for favorite songs more than favorite artists.

I am a 49-year-old white male, so (supposedly) classic rock should be just my thing, right? Yet, I give an example of a song from my heyday, yet I am told that I am "out of the mainstream" for classic rock. Go figure.

They also play more "hair bands" than I like, but I can tolerate that, up to a point.

 

[firepoint525]

Only if the audience keeps track of year of release.
And they don't.
A record they forgot about (because they really didn't care) 30 years ago is more of a relic to them than one they want to hear from any year.

Where I come from, that is called "shooting an arrow at the side of a barn, then painting a bulls-eye around it." To everyone else, it is just revisionist history. Why did certain songs, by the same act, with the same lead singer, from the same time frame, continue to get played on radio, while other songs by the same act, with the same lead singer, from the same time frame, did not? Because radio continued to play some, while ignoring others. So the ones that they have continued to play over all these years are still familiar with listeners, while the ones that they ignored are not. So radio itself was the kingmaker here.

 

[RIN3GUY]

My point here is that, while international charts are woefully inaccurate, the songs that did get play and sales in other countries is totally irrelevant to people in the US.

Specifically with reference to ABBA and the Bay City Rollers, what the international charts tell us is that their considerable success in the United States was a significant understatement compared to their success elsewhere. It also validates the continued playing of their music alongside the best of other Classic Hits artists. Even Blondie, an American artist, had to go to Europe to become successful before they could ever be appreciated here.

The majority of the audience neither knows nor cares whether a song was popular in another country or not.

As for Blondie, fans in the US didn't flock to them because they hit in Europe. Their success in Europe convinced their record label to commit significant dollars to promote them back in the US. It didn't hurt that they got a lot more accessible with their music and their image at the same time. That's what made them.

My point with Blondie's initial US failure is that, as with the British invasion(s), European acclaim can and sometimes has made a difference, first with promoters and programmers, and thereby with listeners in turn.

I'm referring to programmers who are inclined to disparage ABBA or the Rollers (e.g., the "punchline" slam above) and marginalize most if not all of their 'legitimate' hits which peaked at #15 or above. International validation should reinforce the fact that they have no more license to do that any more than if they did it to Fleetwood Mac or the Eagles.

And speaking of the Beach Boys, Michael, they may be the greatest example of the enduring popularity of music that might be classified by some as 'cheese.'

Where I come from, that is called "shooting an arrow at the side of a barn, then painting a bulls-eye around it." To everyone else, it is just revisionist history. Why did certain songs, by the same act, with the same lead singer, from the same time frame, continue to get played on radio, while other songs by the same act, with the same lead singer, from the same time frame, did not? Because radio continued to play some, while ignoring others. So the ones that they have continued to play over all these years are still familiar with listeners, while the ones that they ignored are not. So radio itself was the kingmaker here.

Bingo, Firepoint! My point exactly with Blondie's "Dreaming" vs. "One Way or Another."

 

[michael hagerty]

Only if the audience keeps track of year of release.
And they don't.
A record they forgot about (because they really didn't care) 30 years ago is more of a relic to them than one they want to hear from any year.

Where I come from, that is called "shooting an arrow at the side of a barn, then painting a bulls-eye around it." To everyone else, it is just revisionist history. Why did certain songs, by the same act, with the same lead singer, from the same time frame, continue to get played on radio, while other songs by the same act, with the same lead singer, from the same time frame, did not? Because radio continued to play some, while ignoring others. So the ones that they have continued to play over all these years are still familiar with listeners, while the ones that they ignored are not. So radio itself was the kingmaker here.

And radio made those decisions by finding out how listeners used the medium and what their expectations were, and then meeting them.

Some records are done as soon as they leave the charts. Others have a few months or years left in them. Some have decades of staying power. Classic Hits is in the business of identifying and playing the ones with decades of staying power that the majority of their listeners can agree on as favorites.

It's a simple concept and an extremely complicated task with a constantly moving target (age-in, age-out, paradigm shifts in current culture, events affecting the image and legacy of Classic Hits artists both in positive and negative ways).

 

[firepoint525]

Do I own the Whitburn books? Yes...I'm a music freak and they are great reference materials (especially the One Hit Wonders book). But it is only a reference guide, not a bible...especially given what Mike & David has shed light on as far as what was going on with Billboard during the classic hits era.

So if the Whitburn books are not a "bible" (fair enough), does that mean that Michael and David are prophets?

 

[michael hagerty]

Do I own the Whitburn books? Yes...I'm a music freak and they are great reference materials (especially the One Hit Wonders book). But it is only a reference guide, not a bible...especially given what Mike & David has shed light on as far as what was going on with Billboard during the classic hits era.

So if the Whitburn books are not a "bible" (fair enough), does that mean that Michael and David are prophets?

Only if prophets carry reference books and have an interest in making sure history is reported accurately and people understand present behavior.

In other words, no.

Researchers and prophets are very different.

 

[firepoint525]

And radio made those decisions by finding out how listeners used the medium and what their expectations were, and then meeting them.
Some records are done as soon as they leave the charts. Others have a few months or years left in them. Some have decades of staying power. Classic Hits is in the business of identifying and playing the ones with decades of staying power that the majority of their listeners can agree on as favorites.
It's a simple concept and an extremely complicated task with a constantly moving target (age-in, age-out, paradigm shifts in current culture, events affecting the image and legacy of Classic Hits artists both in positive and negative ways).

Okay, but most of these hits were on top 40 in their heyday, then moved on to hot AC, then to AC, then to classic rock/classic hits, then on to oblivion, apparently. But the same stations were NOT playing these songs for all that time (unless they constantly changed formats to keep these songs active on their playlist). Obviously, top 40 cannot currently play 38 Special, but in a few years, they also (hopefully) won't be playing Lady Gaga.

So classic hits stations are being "handed down" songs from other formats. Classic hits didn't "nurture" these songs for all these years, because they didn't have them then. Other formats had them. So we are basically left with what hasn't already been "cherry-picked" out by the other formats, or otherwise mishandled by them by being overplayed.