Elton John on the chopping block at KLUV

[Robert Bass]

I think there’s one key element missing from this discussion. How much does it cost to listen to OTA radio? It costs no more than the purchase price of the radio itself.

We’ve had portable music devices for decades. Sure they’ve gotten better, but it is by no means new. There are costs associated with the portable devices, the primary one being time. Not everyone has that kind of time on their hands.

As for the topic that everyone’s going to flock to satellite radio services, remember these services cost money. Since we know the services wanted to merge, and since we know they are losing money, how much longer will these services remain available? How long until they literally have to sell airtime to survive?

And finally, show me an Ipod that will inform me about local, and sometimes life threatening situations. It simply can’t be done. I’m not just talking about weather here, either. Back in the early 1990’s, a truck carrying a load of fertilizer was traveling on 635 LBJ here in Mesquite. The truck’s driver fell asleep, and the truck crashed into a freeway sign post and burst into flames. Due to the toxicity hazards of the burning cargo, nearby schools and homes had to be evacuated. Will that little Ipod inform you of this type of situation? I don’t think so.

So the next time you get upset over a chopped up version of a song on OTA radio, remind yourself how much it costs to listen. You get what you pay for.

R

 

[KPLEXCOMPLEX]

Robert the XM Nexus portable allows you to do that which you mentioned. I own one. The traffic channel,weather,news,etc,plus any song I wanted to record is on it,with a simple switch.

On to the other subject of music editing. It displays how CONsultants are just plain arrogant and ignorant when it comes to what people actually want to hear,instead of research questions with projected response. How many times have you, (when the discussion was radio with non radio persons) heard I used to listen to " ",but they don't play my song, or play a song by a particular artist over and over again,and not playing "their" (artist(s)) other hits". The person also remarks,"they chopped up a song I like, that sux". There is a majority out there who have not been conned into a research room,who are just fed up the way radio has forgotten them. Go to a social gathering,dinner,the mall, etc. and when the subject is brought up,the negativity spews freely from NON-radio folks. Those NOT in the research groups are of a very large "silent majority" ( borrowing from a phrase of the late 60's /early 70's). Take the challenge,go find out for yourself,NOT in a controlled research room,etc. Use Casual conversation, the results will pretty much closely echo what I have just said,and many agree with on this thread. Radio is cheating what a majority of listeners truly want. It's very simple,if you have the time.

 

[davideduardo]

To paraphrase Yoda, "This is why you fail, David.".

Fail? I "fail" to see your point. In fact, I gave an example of quality editing enhancing th elistening experience when the CD or "album" version of a song is inappropriate for radio programming.

Many of the radio fundamentals you refer to (and think you "understand") are allowing other media to leave radio in the dust.

I think I have a good understanding and success based on the fact that the audience segment I am most involved with uses about 24 hours of radio per person weekly, overindexing the "general market" by over 25%. In other words, nobody is leaving.

And, the facts are that in 18-54, cume is off by less than 2.5% in the last 10 years, despite the greatest surge in new technology in history. Nobody is being "left in the dust" There is a tiny erosion in cume, and a larger one in TSL, but the usage of radio... terrestrial radio... is still huge and not in a severe decline.

I'm sure you can cherry pick some research that says otherwise (can't every PD, GM, and consultant?),.

There is no need to "cherry pick" as the currency in radio is Arbitron because every ad agency and significant advertiser in the US accepts it. The data I use on radio's cume (circulation) and usage (TSL) come directly from Arbitron market reports. In fact, there is really no other acceptable data available other than Arbitron.

but today we're all blind if we don't see that other entertainment options have become much more...errr... entertaining... than radio..

That is your personal opinion. The vast and overwhelming bulk of Americans continue to listen to radio just about the same way they did before...

The major destination that detracts from the weekly time spent listening to radio is not an alternative delivery system at all... it is gaming. 120 million working gaming consoles exist in the US, and you can't game while listening to radio. People who are looking at satellite and internet as the issue are watching a ball that is not in play.

People IN radio don't listen to radio anymore..

You know this how? What is your sample size on this research project. I suspect that n=1 on this one. Every PD I know listens, airchecks and works with the talent and the imaging... my sample size is probably bigger than yours.

These are the same people who grew up as radio addicts and thus chose careers in radio. It's a chore these days to monitor the competition. It's a chore to monitor your own station. Because the radio blue print is out of date--at least for most music formats. .

Where do you get this idea? I have never heard or seen it before. You can hold this as opinion, but if you actually asked PDs about listening, the experience would be much different.

 

[davideduardo]

There is a majority out there who have not been conned into a research room...
Those NOT in the research groups are of a very large "silent majority" ...
NOT in a controlled research room,etc.
Use Casual conversation, the results will pretty much closely echo what I have just said,and many agree with on this thread. Radio is cheating what a majority of listeners truly want. It's very simple,if you have the time.

Most perceptual research is done in one on one interviews, not in a "research room" (whatever that is). The general interview length is from 20 to 25 minutes for phone based projects and 45 minutes to an hour for in person one on ones.

A well recruited and designed perceptual project will very closely mirror the universe and this can be proven via a replication test.

In general, you seem to never have seen a real project be designed, recruited, fielded and analyzed. You also fail to understand that all research is is talking to listeners. A good project just insures that you talk to a proportional and representative sample of the people you are interested in knowing about. Were you to quit demonizing it, it's a fantastic tool for a good PD to understand where listeners stand and what they feel.

 

[SmokeRing]

Nobody is being "left in the dust" There is a tiny erosion in cume, and a larger one in TSL, but the usage of radio... terrestrial radio... is still huge and not in a severe decline.

Well, TSL would be the key indicator, wouldn't it? The decline is underway and will get worse.

Your comment about gaming feeds my argument. Other entertainment options are replacing radio. Gaming is entertainment. Talking to friends on a cell phone during a work commute replaces radio. Surfing the Internet with an MP3 client playing in the background replaces radio. The iPod replaces radio.

 

[KPLEXCOMPLEX]

Careful smokering,he lives for the argument,not the substance of debate,conversation or admitting lack of factual information.

Research groups are" selected",having a conversation on an everyday basis with individuals you know or don't know( especially those outside the industry) produce a more substanial fact.

 

[TheLaffer]

To paraphrase Yoda, "This is why you fail, David.".

Fail? I "fail" to see your point. In fact, I gave an example of quality editing enhancing th elistening experience when the CD or "album" version of a song is inappropriate for radio programming.

Many of the radio fundamentals you refer to (and think you "understand") are allowing other media to leave radio in the dust.

I think I have a good understanding and success based on the fact that the audience segment I am most involved with uses about 24 hours of radio per person weekly, overindexing the "general market" by over 25%. In other words, nobody is leaving.

And, the facts are that in 18-54, cume is off by less than 2.5% in the last 10 years, despite the greatest surge in new technology in history. Nobody is being "left in the dust" There is a tiny erosion in cume, and a larger one in TSL, but the usage of radio... terrestrial radio... is still huge and not in a severe decline.

I'm sure you can cherry pick some research that says otherwise (can't every PD, GM, and consultant?),.

There is no need to "cherry pick" as the currency in radio is Arbitron because every ad agency and significant advertiser in the US accepts it. The data I use on radio's cume (circulation) and usage (TSL) come directly from Arbitron market reports. In fact, there is really no other acceptable data available other than Arbitron.

but today we're all blind if we don't see that other entertainment options have become much more...errr... entertaining... than radio..

That is your personal opinion. The vast and overwhelming bulk of Americans continue to listen to radio just about the same way they did before...

The major destination that detracts from the weekly time spent listening to radio is not an alternative delivery system at all... it is gaming. 120 million working gaming consoles exist in the US, and you can't game while listening to radio. People who are looking at satellite and internet as the issue are watching a ball that is not in play.

People IN radio don't listen to radio anymore..

You know this how? What is your sample size on this research project. I suspect that n=1 on this one. Every PD I know listens, airchecks and works with the talent and the imaging... my sample size is probably bigger than yours.

These are the same people who grew up as radio addicts and thus chose careers in radio. It's a chore these days to monitor the competition. It's a chore to monitor your own station. Because the radio blue print is out of date--at least for most music formats. .

Where do you get this idea? I have never heard or seen it before. You can hold this as opinion, but if you actually asked PDs about listening, the experience would be much different.

but today we're all blind if we don't see that other entertainment options have become much more...errr... entertaining... than radio..

That is your personal opinion. The vast and overwhelming bulk of Americans continue to listen to radio just about the same way they did before...

and that is YOUR personal opinion too.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

So the next time you get upset over a chopped up version of a song on OTA radio, remind yourself how much it costs to listen. You get what you pay for.

This is indicative of the problem. The nature of the statement implies a quality issue with a product. The product is OTA radio.

Of course - there is nothing unique in putting creative works on the chopping block. OTA TV has done it for decades - a movie runs more than 2 hours with all the commercials - chop it down. An old TV show from an era before the present crushing burden of commercials per hour? Chop it down. Of course we know how healthy OTA TV is - compared to mediums that require you to PAY - like cable and satellite. Of course diversity of programming had little to do with the growth of satellite and cable. And we should ignore that 90% of US households are now watching satellite, cable, DVD's, and video games. That couldn't possibly happen to radio - people won't pay for programming they can get for free. And of course people cared so much about local content on TV that they ignored the diversity of programming on cable and satellite - they wanted to watch local announcers on broadcast channels giving out local information instead of uncut movies and uncut original productions. And remember, OTA TV had HD to rescue it. Too bad that cable and satellite were able to neatly drop HD channels into the same equipment they always used. And radio has HD to rescue it as well - wait HD doesn't mean high definition. It means interference - but people will accept interference to get phase shifts and compression artifacts in stereo on AM. After all, the HD receivers are so cheap - compared to satellite receivers. And people will gladly pay for FM HD radios to get re-hashes of the same tired formats they are already used to. NOBODY in their right mind wants a format that doesn't come out of the minds of highly paid industry consultants and focus groups. Right?!

 

[TheRover]

So the next time you get upset over a chopped up version of a song on OTA radio, remind yourself how much it costs to listen. You get what you pay for.

R

With the caveat that the airwaves do not have to be paid for, because the radio airwaves are already owned by the public. And it is that public's interest that licensees should serve.

DE's arguements that they are not losing listeners, will never answer the "quality" question about what is being played. They "use" the lowest common denominator music as a commodity, to corral in the masses to subject them to their "advertisers".

Whereas, I see good music as art, and expect the public airwaves to be mosre than just the commodity drvien machine that it is now....

 

[Oldbones]

Re: edits

D
I don't think we can use the "this was the hit version 25 years ago" application anymore. The world of music has changed and when our consumers (the listeners) get music, it isn't just off the radio anymore. You download a song, you don't get edits-you get the CD version. This isn't some artsy-fartsy position because "this is how the artist intended it". It's all about the listener and over the year the listeners have bought billions of dollars worth of music they enjoy and (I'm speaking to library-type formats like classic rock, gold-based AC, 60s-70s Oldies, '80s, Jack, etc.) if their radio station expects to have any credibility with their audience, if they want to send the signal that it's all about them (the listener), we should deliver their music in the form they want most, the versions they bought and how they hear it at concerts.

You're forgetting one thing....most listeners (1) don't have the CD, (2) rarely if ever attend concerts (and how often do artists "improvise" when doing a song in concert?) and (3) don't download songs. Most listeners are more familiar with the "radio version" because that's where they mostly hear it. Certainly if you're doing a classic rock format you're gonna hear screams if you edit "Freebird" or play the single version of "Light My Fire", but for pretty much any other format keep in mind that the average listener isn't paying all that much attention to what version of a song plays. Indeed, when I hear "Heart Of Glass" I almost always hear the "greatest hits" version of the song, which is a different mix than either the original album or single were. Does anyone other than a music geek notice? I really doubt it.

You're taking this way too seriously.

 

[davideduardo]

That is your personal opinion. The vast and overwhelming bulk of Americans continue to listen to radio just about the same way they did before...

and that is YOUR personal opinion too.

Nope, that is not an opinion. It is a statement of fact, based on the cume figures for radio over the last decade.

 

[Robert Bass]

Gee that's funny, I was under the impression that Cume Persons is more important than TSL ???

R

 

[davideduardo]

Gee that's funny, I was under the impression that Cume Persons is more important than TSL ???

R

Nope. For sales, advertisers buy AQH persons, not cume. Cume is only used by an advertiser to calculate reach and frequency to determine the optimum schedule on each station.

Share and rating and AQH persons are the same "data" expressed as a percentage of listeners, a percentage of the universe, or as a number of persons. They are the basis for nearly all "transactional" radio ad buys.

For a progreammer, cume is a building block... you have to convert cumers into users with enough quarter hours to be significant.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Re: edits

Most listeners are more familiar with the "radio version" because that's where they mostly hear it. Certainly if you're doing a classic rock format you're gonna hear screams if you edit "Freebird" or play the single version of "Light My Fire", but for pretty much any other format keep in mind that the average listener isn't paying all that much attention to what version of a song plays.

This is an interesting point. Some times, the artist is in control of the song and does their own edit. Or they release multiple versions of the song - to fit different formats or different audience standards. As long as the artist is in control, I don't have an issue with it. How many of us REALLY want to hear the whole instrumental middle of "Light My Fire" or "Magic Carpet Ride"? Both are good, both playable, both played. But there were "single" versions - cut by the artist to fit the 45 - or by the record company consulting with the artist, or perhaps not.

Then there are cases where a long song, that was never shrunk by the record company because 45's were obsolete, chopped down by a station or group of stations with absolutely no consultation with the record company or artist. Done just so the song would fit in a given time slot or in accordance with "25 songs per hour". That practice should be ENDED.

Here is an idea for those of you who defend song chopping: libraries have limited shelf space. I think all books should be edited down so they are no more than one inch thick so that 50 books will fit on each shelf. No doubt there are long winded discussions that could be chopped without hurting the plot of the book.

 

[Robert Bass]

Bruce,

With all due respect, I think you’re making this a larger issue than it really is. I’m going into my fourth year as the music guy, and to date I’ve heard only one listener complaint after switching from a lengthy album cut to the 45 RPM version. The one complaint I did have, the listener stated he had the 45 RPM of this song, and said the ending was a little longer than the version we were using. The irony is he also admitted he hadn’t actually listened to his copy of the song in numerous years! Depending on how many records he had collected, it’s sometimes easy to forget these things.

R

 

[davideduardo]

Re: edits

Then there are cases where a long song, that was never shrunk by the record company because 45's were obsolete, chopped down by a station or group of stations with absolutely no consultation with the record company or artist. Done just so the song would fit in a given time slot or in accordance with "25 songs per hour". That practice should be ENDED.

There are "radio edit" versions on about half the promo CDs I get. It is seldom necessary to edit a new song, unless it is for o/i purposes. And I have never heard anyone, inside or outside a station, ask if the version was approved by the artist. Really, who cares? It's supposed to entertain the listener!

 

[KPLEXCOMPLEX]

[EDIT]
If a song is known to be considered long,then either don't play it or play it in the evening hours,and overnight hours. The botton line is,it's distrubing,and annoying to hear a so called classic(favorite) edited when you expect to hear a particulat drum solo,or guitar rift. All you are doing is hacking off a listener,instead of pleasing them. The "music sweeps"you hear should have a disclaimer" the closest edited music in the metroplex".
If an artist wants airplay ,then let them edit their own song,instead of some "genius"with pro tools,sound forge etc. As stated before, some artists actually used to do that,now they are blind sided by a business that once was called radio.

[EDIT-inflammatory]

 

[davideduardo]

Re: edits

Actually in some cases listeners in Dance formats prefer a 12inch as they were called when i was programming. Extended, Club Remixes, etc that were much longer. Some stations beat others by playing those long ones. On the other hand i've seen those stations get in trouble and play crappy long versions. In some instances the short version is better. It's on a song by song basis.

That is the sort of thing a programmer has to know to create the mood that a format needs to achieve and that includes determining what versions of songs to play. The decision is that of the PD, and should be based on format knowledge based on listener expectations, just as you say. The problem comes when the PD does not know the mood and feel of the format.

 

[snowed_in]

I’m going into my fourth year as the music guy, and to date I’ve heard only one listener complaint after switching from a lengthy album cut to the 45 RPM version.

My days in Dallas were before you started as the music guy at KEOM, but I know back then it had a very strange cut of "Macho Man" that acted like the long version but then inexplicably faded about halfway through. Please tell me that cut is gone.

 

[TheRover]

Re: edits

You're forgetting one thing....most listeners (1) don't have the CD, (2) rarely if ever attend concerts (and how often do artists "improvise" when doing a song in concert?) and (3) don't download songs. Most listeners are more familiar with the "radio version" because that's where they mostly hear it. Certainly if you're doing a classic rock format you're gonna hear screams if you edit "Freebird" or play the single version of "Light My Fire", but for pretty much any other format keep in mind that the average listener isn't paying all that much attention to what version of a song plays. Indeed, when I hear "Heart Of Glass" I almost always hear the "greatest hits" version of the song, which is a different mix than either the original album or single were. Does anyone other than a music geek notice? I really doubt it.

You're taking this way too seriously.

And for "most other formats" besides Classic Rock, ... the listeners are not passionate about music, per se. What you program provides some background "noise" to something else that they are doing.... But, real lovers of music, find that listening to the radio, whem songs they are passionate about, is an activity, in itself. Like someone listening to a Classical Music station. And, they too, would call in to complain if their favorite Mozart or Bach was cut short by some DJ.

Now, certainly what is prevalanlty played on Corporate Classic Rock stations, is not something that arouses my passions. I really have little in common with someone that is satisfied and excited to listen to the same "hits" over and over again.

But, for the rest of us, that love the great "FM oriented" (when that used to mean something) rock music, we expect to hear the best recorded versions, whether they be short or long, or live or studio, and with respect to the artist and the song, we anticipate the DJ loving the music and playing the song to it's end.

But, most DJ's at Classic Rock stations just do whatever they are told, being the good "team" player, even if that means talking over songs, and hyping and playing stuff that they would never intentionally have as their real world first choice of songs by the artists that their corporate station plays. No DJ however jaded is actually that shallow in musical tastes when given their "choice". But, we have consultants to tell these veteran DJ's of Rock Music what would be the cool thing to play would be. [How can they not feel insulted?? I gues they are "real" professionals to not let something as little as that get in the way of doing their schtick...]