-
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
C
content
Guest
sorry to disapoint you, but..
bigger playlist = lower ratings
below 200 is an exageration, but aside from a couple of examples, tight playlists get ratings.
bigger playlist = lower ratings
below 200 is an exageration, but aside from a couple of examples, tight playlists get ratings.
taylorengineer said:
Haha. I brought back an old ID from the 1970s that's now in rotation...
*bird noises*
Left channel: How monotonous the sounds of the forest would be if the music came only from the top ten birds.
*bird noises*
Right channel: We give all the birds a chance. W-R-E-K, Atlanta.
*bird noises*
Keep in mind, the 8,200 figure I quoted consists of music entirely digitized into the system by station staff, not downloaded from the Clear Channel central servers. We've been adding music to the system (and retiring some) for six years now. We're entirely live all except overnights now, so automation isn't running much anyway.
Personally, I was against letting the library get so big, and I didn't want to upgrade our 20GB Vault. My thinking was that if you let it grow so large that the music only plays once or twice a year, you aren't really pruning the crap from the gems. It's also a pain to keep everything backed up. But variety won out, especially since we need to keep a large library for each particular format, like classical music or jazz.
You, sir, (Ssnake)are a culturally well rounded person and WREK a cultural beacon in the stormy radio night.
And your birdcalls are notably in Wide-Glide FM stereo.
I only hear the light color feathered birds on 1690. I'm sure WREK's birds are multi-colored.
There is an ugly rumour that Joe Webber will not play any of the dark feathered birds. First he kills Air America......and now this.
The man disgusts me!
And your birdcalls are notably in Wide-Glide FM stereo.
I only hear the light color feathered birds on 1690. I'm sure WREK's birds are multi-colored.
There is an ugly rumour that Joe Webber will not play any of the dark feathered birds. First he kills Air America......and now this.
The man disgusts me!
Do not know the man, never in the biz, but I have heard a variety of birds on the wmlb web stream yesterday and today.taylorengineer said:
O
OldiesCat
Guest
playlist size
Thought I agree in principle that tight playlists are (or should be) a thing of the past, please let us know how you expect to be successful by "I don't care what Arbitron says". Last most of us knew, our Arbitron performance had much to do with our ability to generate revenue.
smashedcd said:
Thought I agree in principle that tight playlists are (or should be) a thing of the past, please let us know how you expect to be successful by "I don't care what Arbitron says". Last most of us knew, our Arbitron performance had much to do with our ability to generate revenue.
Re: playlist size
i know it makes money. and its your livelyhood. i dont think that should be taken from you. but i do think each cluster should have at least one station with an expanded playlist for those of us who still like radio. if there was an fm equivelant to deep tracks xm 40 or sirius 16 the vault i would listen. but i cant listen to the same songs over and over again. thats why i have xm, sirius and live 365...right behind me is my collection of nearly 1000 vinyl albums and my nearly 300 cd's...so i definitly dont need a tight playlist to listen to. ;D
Oldies Cat said:
i know it makes money. and its your livelyhood. i dont think that should be taken from you. but i do think each cluster should have at least one station with an expanded playlist for those of us who still like radio. if there was an fm equivelant to deep tracks xm 40 or sirius 16 the vault i would listen. but i cant listen to the same songs over and over again. thats why i have xm, sirius and live 365...right behind me is my collection of nearly 1000 vinyl albums and my nearly 300 cd's...so i definitly dont need a tight playlist to listen to. ;D
I
itburnswhenipee
Guest
Math Equation
They may want to teach you this very basic math equation at the Connecticut School of Broadcasting:
Broad playlist=Low Ratings=Lower Ad Revenue=Negative Profit Margin=Radio Station Goes Dark
smashedcd said:
They may want to teach you this very basic math equation at the Connecticut School of Broadcasting:
Broad playlist=Low Ratings=Lower Ad Revenue=Negative Profit Margin=Radio Station Goes Dark
smashed???
What happens if my radio station has an expanded playlist (say 800-1000 songs) but most of those
don't meet your criteria for listening or liking? Then an expanded playlist is worthless. You're not
tuning in. Lots of others aren't, either. It's sad, but true, to much diversity and unfamiliar songs
and artists make the majority of listeners tune out.
What if your station has 100 songs that I love? And very few average or bad ones? Then your
station is great...and these songs are songs lots of people love and aren't necessarily the ones
that have all been played to death on radio until this station? You win. Limited playlist, good
listenership and maybe even a few bucks in the wallet.
One of the highest rated stations I ever worked for had a Top 40 playlist of LESS than 50 songs.
The music was all great, sounded great together and the station rocked. Granted it was 1986, and
the music blended together better than the train wreck "music" of today, but I never heard one
complaint about songs being overplayed because the station had energy, excitement and was
a friggin' blast to work at and we we're a friggin' blast to listen to.
I think the real issue is there's not enough tight, consistent sounding music being produced to
make any PD or MD's job easy these days. It's all fragmented sounding and it's hard to line up.
And Classic Rock, in particular, is music that has been overplayed for 35 years and people are
sick of the same songs, for sure, but what are ya gonna give 'em new?
What happens if my radio station has an expanded playlist (say 800-1000 songs) but most of those
don't meet your criteria for listening or liking? Then an expanded playlist is worthless. You're not
tuning in. Lots of others aren't, either. It's sad, but true, to much diversity and unfamiliar songs
and artists make the majority of listeners tune out.
What if your station has 100 songs that I love? And very few average or bad ones? Then your
station is great...and these songs are songs lots of people love and aren't necessarily the ones
that have all been played to death on radio until this station? You win. Limited playlist, good
listenership and maybe even a few bucks in the wallet.
One of the highest rated stations I ever worked for had a Top 40 playlist of LESS than 50 songs.
The music was all great, sounded great together and the station rocked. Granted it was 1986, and
the music blended together better than the train wreck "music" of today, but I never heard one
complaint about songs being overplayed because the station had energy, excitement and was
a friggin' blast to work at and we we're a friggin' blast to listen to.
I think the real issue is there's not enough tight, consistent sounding music being produced to
make any PD or MD's job easy these days. It's all fragmented sounding and it's hard to line up.
And Classic Rock, in particular, is music that has been overplayed for 35 years and people are
sick of the same songs, for sure, but what are ya gonna give 'em new?
O
OldiesCat
Guest
playlist
It's never about size of the playlist but the quality. We hear a lot of the "gee whiz, there are thousands of songs that were hits-we should play them all!" and that just isn't realistic. Those who've been in the biz awhile understand just how many of those "hits" got where they did on the charts: payola, favors, record company promotions, PD and DJ favorites. There are tons of songs that got high on the charts that will never stand up today.
So, let's all understand there is no magic number for a library-based radio station playlist. Each market and each format has to decide how it should best meet listener demand and expectation. I've said this before: I'll program (for instance) my Oldies station with 500 titles and can make it sound like just as much variety as your station with 1000 titles-it's all in how they're rotated.
Preferably, an Oldies station in 2007 ('60s and '70s based) can do really well and live up to "playin' the hits" with about 700 everyday titles and another 500 or so specialty/spice titles. You can have a nice variety without playing "Brown-Eyed Girl" every 19 hours and still keep that hit factor and familiarity.
Tibbs2 said:
It's never about size of the playlist but the quality. We hear a lot of the "gee whiz, there are thousands of songs that were hits-we should play them all!" and that just isn't realistic. Those who've been in the biz awhile understand just how many of those "hits" got where they did on the charts: payola, favors, record company promotions, PD and DJ favorites. There are tons of songs that got high on the charts that will never stand up today.
So, let's all understand there is no magic number for a library-based radio station playlist. Each market and each format has to decide how it should best meet listener demand and expectation. I've said this before: I'll program (for instance) my Oldies station with 500 titles and can make it sound like just as much variety as your station with 1000 titles-it's all in how they're rotated.
Preferably, an Oldies station in 2007 ('60s and '70s based) can do really well and live up to "playin' the hits" with about 700 everyday titles and another 500 or so specialty/spice titles. You can have a nice variety without playing "Brown-Eyed Girl" every 19 hours and still keep that hit factor and familiarity.
Tibbs2 said:
BINGO!! its not about the size its the fact that there is a a heavy rotation of songs that are 25+ years old. i am refering to classic rock radio btw. the same eagles, stones and foreigner songs every few hours. we have a citadel startion here that played freebird twice the other day. just a few hours apart.
O
OldiesCat
Guest
repetition
Well, "Free Bird" twice in one day is crazy (though many programmers do recycle daytime programming into overnights, in an attempt to "stretch" their library- of course, you have to be one of those 300 title stations to NEED TO do that).
I don't think it has anything to do with how old the songs are-this whole discussion is more of a function of 20+ years of those 300 title stations banging the crap out of the same thing, day after day, month after month, year after year. The key with Oldies (60s/70s) and Classic Rock, Eighties, etc., is depth in the core acts. You're quite right, for instance, about Classic Rock playing the same Eagles songs; the hits are great, but there's also nothing wrong in getting a little spice and playing "James Dean" or "The Last Resort" and other similar cuts occasionally. Not a ton, because it really is all about "Life In The Fast Lane", "Hotel California" and so on-but the Eagles had a bunch of great songs that weren't "hits" but everybody knows them because those albums of theirs were multi-platinum. Fleetwood Mac is another example; there are few people that don't know just about every cut on "Rumours", even though the standards are "Don't Stop", "Dreams", "Go Your Own Way"- stuff like "Second Hand News", "Gold Dust Woman" and even "Never Going Back Again" hold up well, sound great and give you that "WOW!" spice.
smashedcd said:
Well, "Free Bird" twice in one day is crazy (though many programmers do recycle daytime programming into overnights, in an attempt to "stretch" their library- of course, you have to be one of those 300 title stations to NEED TO do that).
I don't think it has anything to do with how old the songs are-this whole discussion is more of a function of 20+ years of those 300 title stations banging the crap out of the same thing, day after day, month after month, year after year. The key with Oldies (60s/70s) and Classic Rock, Eighties, etc., is depth in the core acts. You're quite right, for instance, about Classic Rock playing the same Eagles songs; the hits are great, but there's also nothing wrong in getting a little spice and playing "James Dean" or "The Last Resort" and other similar cuts occasionally. Not a ton, because it really is all about "Life In The Fast Lane", "Hotel California" and so on-but the Eagles had a bunch of great songs that weren't "hits" but everybody knows them because those albums of theirs were multi-platinum. Fleetwood Mac is another example; there are few people that don't know just about every cut on "Rumours", even though the standards are "Don't Stop", "Dreams", "Go Your Own Way"- stuff like "Second Hand News", "Gold Dust Woman" and even "Never Going Back Again" hold up well, sound great and give you that "WOW!" spice.
- Status