• 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 Rock: Evolve or Die!

The Big A, you are absolutely right. For those of us in radio it is a job. And it is deeper than that. In fact it has nothing to do with us personally but what our job objectives are and what our listeners want proven by the resources we have available to us.

I personally am a music fan. I barely took home any of my paycheck working in a record store. That employee discount was way too tempting but I don't play my personal music library on radio.

I manage a station. I do it by the book per my owner so I can stay in my job and turn a profit for my owner who, by the way, is not a group owner.

First, as the music director at a few stations, I had access to music the labels serviced me with and that kept me busy enough (everybody in radio wishes for more time because we have so much to do). I dealt with the record label reps. I added and dropped music per my Program Director's criteria because he took his directive from the General Manager and the General Manager took his directive from the owner. The owner only wanted to not pull money out of his pocket to make up losses.

I actually disliked some of what we played. It would have been nice, personally, to have introduced the audience to other music but that was not my job and to keep my job I had to do it right.

If you went to McDonald's for a Big Mac but were served a Turkey Burger, even if it might taste the same as a Big Mac to some, it is not what the customer ordered and you won't have your job or customers very long serving Turkey Burgers for Big Macs. Would you put your hard earned cash up to invest in a McDonald's that served up Turkey Burgers when one orders a Big Mac? I sure wouldn't.

What we in radio face every day is providing the product our listener orders to the best of our ability. If we get the order wrong or we serve them something else, then we're out of a job. I have a friend that is an interior designer. She was so excited years ago about getting to do this. She has yet to do what she wants in a home. She always does what the customer wants. Maybe that's why she ends up with plenty of jobs.

Avid Listener, you seem to be holding our feet to the fire for not changing things to your liking. We aren't the problem. We are simply doing our jobs to produce the results our owners want. Certainly, if you should be required to have a job to pay the bills, you would do the same. None of us claim the business is perfect or not flawed in any way, but we do want to keep our jobs. And I don't own a suit and even hate it when I have to wear a tie. Jeans and a t-shirt is my preferred attire.

Personally, I seek out those stations that don't play the typical fare. Most of them go under but that doesn't keep me from being a fan of the station while it lasts. But that's me personally and I have yet to have an owner that says they're willing to take that longshot. The only ones that seem to survive are those that have a successful standard fare station or two to keep that longshot afloat. Even with the station I'm starting, we are researching the market, refining the hole we will fill and sometimes gritting our teeth at some of what we will do but we realize it is not about us, but the listener and what they want. Risking much of my savings, you can bet the plan is to eventually return those dollars back to me. I cannot afford to risk the money going down the drain and there is a real risk if we get it wrong or misjudge the market.
 
Try to understand that playing music on the radio isn't a game or a hobby. For us, it's a job. If you just want people to agree with you, you're probably not going to find them on a radio board.

I understand that it's a job. Just as I understand that if someone works in the restaurant industry at a national chain restaurant, the objective is to make every item on the menu taste exactly the same every time it is prepared and served, and at all restaurants in the chain wherever they are located. But that doesn't mean that there isn't room in the world for restaurants with real gourmet chefs who cook wonderful dishes that aren't the same old same old over and over and over.

If you went to McDonald's for a Big Mac but were served a Turkey Burger, even if it might taste the same as a Big Mac to some, it is not what the customer ordered and you won't have your job or customers very long serving Turkey Burgers for Big Macs. Would you put your hard earned cash up to invest in a McDonald's that served up Turkey Burgers when one orders a Big Mac? I sure wouldn't.

But you guys are claiming that every radio station in the United States has to be a franchised fast-food restaurant. Not every radio station has to be a McDonald's! There should be room in most markets for a restaurant that isn't just mystery meat fast food.
 
Last edited:
I understand that it's a job. Just as I understand that if someone works in the restaurant industry at a national chain restaurant, the objective is to make every item on the menu taste exactly the same every time it is prepared and served, and at all restaurants in the chain wherever they are located.

The difference is that radio is not one chain. Do you understand that? Lots of chains under the banner of radio. There are 14,000 radio stations with thousands of owners. Some are commercial, some are non-commercial. Different rules, different approaches, different audiences, and different formats. Understand?

If you want something custom, built specifically for you, that is not mass media. You want a personalized music device. Radio is a mass medium, by definition. Look up Marshall McLuhan.
 
Even the chain restaurants have regional items on their menus.

That's correct, to a point. But it only applies to the illustration/example, not the real thing the illustration was illustrating. I was comparing fast food restaurants to one-of-a-kind restaurants.

Modern radio stations compare to each other the way that chains like Applebee's, T. G. I. Fridays, Chili's, Outback, Olive Garden, and the other national chains compare to each other. Minor regional variations notwithstanding, visit any national chain restaurant anywhere, and it's going to be pretty much like any other outlet of the same chain anywhere else. And modern radio stations are the same, so similar as to be almost indistinguishable, despite maybe a few minor (and subtle) variations. Compare that to a dining experience like Chef Michael Symon's Lola, or Emeril Lagasse's Tchoup Chop, or Aarón Sánchez' Paloma. That latter sort of restaurant would be comparable to the sort of station I'm talking about.

Sure, but they don't offer personalized gourmet chefs who create something specifically for you.

I'm not talking about a private caterer or private chef as a comparison to a non-chain radio station. I'm simply talking about a radio station that's unique, not almost identical to all other restaurants. It still has a more-or-less fixed menu, though daily specials usually depend on what's the best available from the food purveyors. For a radio station, that would mean excellent music, but not necessarily a boringly predictable mix of music. And of course, I'm talking about a type of music that's so unique compared to the over-tested, burned out crap on formula radio that even a less-than-popular song won't chase listeners away, because there would be nothing similar on the air to switch over to.
 
Last edited:
I'm not talking about a private caterer or private chef as a comparison to a non-chain radio station. I'm simply talking about a radio station that's unique, not almost identical to all other restaurants.

I don't get paid extra for being unique. I get paid for being #1. I get paid for beating everyone else. I don't care if I do it playing the same song over and over. If that's what gets more people to listen, then that's what I do. Your complaint is with other people who have more pedestrian taste. More people want hamburger than sushi. I cater to the hamburger crowd. Call me a capitalist, and I'll say you're right.

You want unique? Listen to non-commercial radio. They don't have to hustle for advertising. They just have to play what attracts donations. Or just listen to your own personal music collection. I'm not trying to sell you on what I do. You're not in my target.
 
Again, you ignore the fact that turns of phrase or figures of speech are not necessarily literal. Technically, by your pedantic interpretation, "classical music" could only refer to very old works of music .

I double checked "pedantic" in the dictionary, and aside from finding your picture there, I found that Mr. Oxford defines it as "A person who is excessively concerned with minor details". To wit:

But to musicians who specialize in symphonic music, even a recent composition that has the same sound as "classical music" is accepted as being "classical music". No one disputed that Aaron Copeland's "Grand Canyon Suite" was classical music when it was first written and performed.

In the larger repertoire of classical music, Aaron Copeland and the pre-W.W. II composers are a footnote. They were the last stragglers in a parade that goes back hundreds of years. I guess when the remnants of the European regals were subjugated or annihilated in The Great War, the support for indigent composers sort of died off.

Likewise, "classic rock" began its existence as certain kinds of rock music that stood the test of time, but in short order it came to mean a genre of music that had a particular sound. It evolved into a specific genre of music.

This is a cart-before-the-horese argument. The term "classic rock" came from the stations that evolved into the eponymous format. The term either came from listeners who started calling the big late 60's and 70's rock "classic rock" as it aged, or from stations that thought the name would be a good positioner. However the name evolved, it stuck.

But when Steppenwolf or Jefferson Airplane or Bon Jovi or The Allman Brothers were in the studio, they did not think they were making "classic rock". They were just hopin' that one of the trax would be a hit. A current hit. Not a "classic" hit.

As for sales potential, anyone with a lick of sense recognizes that without radio airplay, it's almost impossible to achieve mass market sales. The fact is, since downloading is replaced purchasing hard copies of recordings, and when hard copies are purchased it's usually through an online vendor who ships the product via common carrier, the is little need to persuade American brick and mortar record store chains to stock your product.

The big record labels have more product than they can release in any area. So, even if it is in English, they don't routinely release all material in the US. The record companies have to be able to give the promotional support to any release that is needed to bring it home. That is not just radio... it is getting on the featured release list at iTunes and the equivalent in other on-line sellers. They still have to get presence at retail in WalMart and other retailers that sell just the big albums. They have to spend time doing US-focused videos for Vevo or YouTube. They need to advertise to the trade, too. They can't fill the channels with everything they could release, so they are selective on non-US material.

The same thing happens elsewhere... not every album released in Mexico is released in Colombia. In fact, less than 15% of Mexican releases are also released anywhere in South America. Why? Regional differences, accent, style and inability to manage such a large catalog.

In all of this, radio is barely a consideration. It's about the economics of running a record company.

I don't give a damn what the labels or the radio industry suits want to classify a song as. In the context of "Classic Rock" Evolve or Die", the evolution of classic rock will either move in one direction, in which case it will live, or in another direction, in which case it will die. Your pedantic nitpicking just doesn't matter.

As a radio format, and not a self-proclaimed genre of music, all depends on whether there is a group of listeners slightly younger than today's classic rock listeners who will join the party if a younger group of "classic rock hits" is aired. In the case of many formats that have died, all efforts to lower the average age might just fail. Not due to radio "suits" but to the absence of listeners for harder rock oldies.
 
Compare that to a dining experience like Chef Michael Symon's Lola, or Emeril Lagasse's Tchoup Chop, or Aarón Sánchez' Paloma. That latter sort of restaurant would be comparable to the sort of station I'm talking about.

While Lola is a rather standard menu at par with Cleveland's taste, and Tchoup Chop is appropriate for unique dining in a tourist location and Sánchez' establishments are Mexican food for non-Mexicans, all these restaurants are places where a couple can dine nicely for $150 with a glass of wine. They are not mainstream, and do not depend on much more than the one-percenters (which I guess is what we call the carriage trade today). They are not mainstream. They are not nice. They are ultra-niche.

A radio station with a musical menu that emulates the edible menu of those restaurants would get, well, less than 1% of the audience. A lot less.

You picked a bad analogy and are, as a result, hoist by your own petard.
 
I don't get paid extra for being unique. I get paid for being #1.

And in every market, there can be only #1. But that doesn't mean stations that come in at numbers 2 down to 20 can't be profitable enterprises.

radio station with a musical menu that emulates the edible menu of those restaurants would get, well, less than 1% of the audience. A lot less.

If they manage to get an attractive niche audience, and know how to market that niche market to niche advertisers, then they can be very profitable enterprises.
 
Actually the McDonald's Big Mac comparison was to, rather poorly, demonstrate that the radio listener that wants a Big Mac is not happy with a Turkey Burger and if that's what you serve them they won't be back. You, Avid, want us to serve up what the bulk of listeners don't want. Perhaps you should buy your own station so you can be a suit and play what you want radio to play.
 
#20 is a very bad place to be in a rated market. Any advertiser that can spend enough to make it worth your while to sell them goes through an agency and being #10, #15, #20 or lower means zilch in ad dollars. The exception might be Sports Talk.

If you are buying an FM with decent market coverage and spend, say $10 Million are you going to strive for #20 or #1 in the market? And when the investor wants that monthly payment, how do you produce it?

I was doing sales at a station in a major metro that could only get the small advertiser. Not only did it cost about what we got advertising dollars, we tried. If they stayed on with a regular schedule, we could make it. Our audience was so small, several thousand out of 5 million, that there were never enough listeners in a single business location trade area to produce results. We started selling blocks of time to various ethnic groups because they'd pay $160 an hour back then and in about 6 months we were in the black.
 
And in every market, there can be only #1.

Actually, there can be -- and are -- multiple #1s in any market, because advertising is purchased by demographic breakdown. Client wants to reach younger women? Find the station that's #1 in 18-34 females. Older men? See who's #1 in 25-54 males. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

I know that's a simplistic way of describing the process, but the basic underlying policy is there, meaning that "#1" can legitimately be used, with the appropriate qualifiers, by more than one station in every market.
 
Actually the McDonald's Big Mac comparison was to, rather poorly, demonstrate that the radio listener that wants a Big Mac is not happy with a Turkey Burger and if that's what you serve them they won't be back. You, Avid, want us to serve up what the bulk of listeners don't want. Perhaps you should buy your own station so you can be a suit and play what you want radio to play.

No, I'm suggesting that if the "bulk of listeners" want the same thing, so the bulk of the stations in any given market carve up the "bulk of listeners", that leaves a pile of unserved listeners who are outside the mainstream, but who comprise a profitable niche if anyone had the will to pursue them. Even when "the bulk of listeners" want one thing, that still leaves another bunch of listeners who want something else.
 
And in every market, there can be only #1.

We're talking about what motivates a commercial enterprise. Striving for quality only matters when you can charge a premium price. Advertising is based on numbers, not quality. Advertisers want the lowest cost per thousand. So any business based on advertising isn't going to have chefs creating unique treats. If you want chefs, you have to pay for them. With your money.

Even when "the bulk of listeners" want one thing, that still leaves another bunch of listeners who want something else.

But what we find is their definition of "something else" isn't the same. So the number within each sub-niche is too small to serve efficiently with a mass medium. Then you also have to examine the demographics of those sub-niches. If they're over 55, there's not much interest in them by advertisers. The conclusion is those people are either better served by paying for satellite or some other customized service. If they can't afford it, that's their problem.

This is not to say that no one "has the will to pursue them." Some do, but the compromise is they have to pay their staff crap, or cut costs in other ways, and they probably can't afford to be based in big cites, unless they have income from something else. That's the trade-off.
 
Last edited:
No, I'm suggesting that if the "bulk of listeners" want the same thing, so the bulk of the stations in any given market carve up the "bulk of listeners", that leaves a pile of unserved listeners who are outside the mainstream, but who comprise a profitable niche if anyone had the will to pursue them. Even when "the bulk of listeners" want one thing, that still leaves another bunch of listeners who want something else.

The problem with the outliers is that there is no consensus among them and it is more like 5% of listeners who want 250 different formats. That "bunch of listeners" has no significant commonality.
 
If they manage to get an attractive niche audience, and know how to market that niche market to niche advertisers, then they can be very profitable enterprises.

No, they can't. Because what is eclectic and exciting to you is not what rings the bell on another group of "malcontent" listeners. Not all dissatisfied listeners want a more varied rock format. In fact, in some markets as much as 75% or 80% of the audience wants nothing to do with rock. So, for every currently viable format, there is a small fringe that thinks they should play deeper cuts or newer music or European releases or something like that. That cupla' percent of discontented listeners probably subdivides into hundreds of very different subsets, none of which is compatible with the others.
 
And in every market, there can be only #1. But that doesn't mean stations that come in at numbers 2 down to 20 can't be profitable enterprises.

For about 20 years, WFAN was the #1 billing station in New York. But in 12+ it seldom got above 14th to 15th. But those listeners that made them 15th were very desirable, so they billed well.

There are similar stories of how there can indeed be a dozen or so "number one" stations in a market if the ratings are compressed and each station brings a different slice of the market to the ad buyers.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom