• 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

GOODBYE OLDIES

A

abcdj

Guest
In view of Infinity dumping Oldies in New York and Chicago and rumblings about KLUV here in Dallas, the question is WHY?

Why is it that a format that was performing very well in adults only very recently is suddenly on the outs?!

Researchers and consultants will try to say that focus groups are saying they're tired of the same old oldies over and over. One interpretation of that is that listeners are sick of oldies overall. Another interpretation is that listeners are sick of the same 400 oldies overall. There's a pretty good argument for the latter in light of the surging ratings for the Jacks out there with their expanded playlists.

Perhaps Oldies formats aren't the problem...perhaps limtied playlists are. I would never argue that you should not program "powers" on an oldies station, but I would argue about ONLY playing powers.

The other thing that I find interesting about Oldies stations is that they always talk about the "fun" factor. "..your fun oldies station.." etc.
In reality, there's not a lot of "fun" on the statin at all! If the "fun" IS only the music, well, again, what the hell's so fun about 400 tunes?! I think an oldies station SHOULD be fun...but the music alone can't be the ONLY fun thing about it! How about entertaining elements to MAKE it fun. Whether that be promotions, or entertaining DJ's or whatever.

The biggest thing missing from music radio this market, and will be even more so with the retirement of Mr. Chapman, is entertainment.

Think about it.
 
A lot of companies are just saying that the demo is becoming unappealing to advertisers. The listeners seem to be loyal, it's even selling well. I guess they're just "looking out for the future."
 
This seems to be an ongoing topic in the Oldies board, a more appropriate board to discuss this in.

<a target="_blank" href=http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=457874&Board=oldies>http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=457874&Board=oldies</a>

R
 
> A lot of companies are just saying that the demo is becoming
> unappealing to advertisers. The listeners seem to be loyal,
> it's even selling well. I guess they're just "looking out
> for the future."
>
First off,this is an appropriate board to address this issue considering what is going on at KLUV.
ABCDJ makes several good points. The limited playlist has been it's downfall,as well as several other formats. For Example you will hear Roy Orbison's "Pretty Woman" multi times, even though he had several hits like "Crying","Dreams",etc. The same goes for the Animals with "House of the rising sun",when they also had "When I was young"among other hits. The so called "research" is to blame."Reasearch(the way it is conducted)is Over kill. Certain questions or presentations are often skewed to get a predictable response,plus the age factor,not many in a true "oldies demographic" take the time to be involved in research.This will lead to another factor,geographic location of the respondents. For example "The Sir Douglas Quintet","The 5 Americans" would score higher in research here as opposed to New York,where "Doo Wop"groups would score higher. The true "demo" buys more than the younger demo.Their income is higher, they are most liklely to buy a house for instance,while the younger demo rents an apt. In that house they must furnish it,have two cars, raise kids, thus more money is being spent. Yes times change and the age shifts,BUT there are many in their 50's and 60's who still spend more than just buying an ipod with the other group.

The presonality issue has been jostled about many times.Personality is what makes radio!Russ Martin, Ron Chapman,Terry Dorsey, Bo and Jim are a few known examples.Yop don't hear about the other so called "talent", becasue frankly they are not. They just read lines,and are limited in being a presonality. The other argument that has been kicked about ,is that its about the music. The music is"a part of it" the personality is what makes it successful. When you limit a good Talent, say Bo and Jim for example,take away their "schtick"that made them a personality, increase your music, and your spot load, do you really expect an increase in ratings? Only a consultant would think so,not a true program director.

Infinity is bowing to Viacom to go after the younger demo, along with CBS TV. Why? The management itself is close to that younger demo themselves, but claim they want to appease the advertisers. Common sense dictates you appeal to the listener,become successful with them, then the advertiser would be happy. The talent of today have been brought up with running a board, reading a liner,turn to sex and pushing the envelope on it to be controversial and have people talk about it. The problem is,that has been run into the dirt (literally). The FCC is being more vigilant and the government is becoming more conservative everyday so this entertainment style is on it's death bed. Creativity and originality is missing, and the sad thing is todays talent haven't been taught to be that way, only copy other's success. Again go back to "the basics" of entertaining radio, and both listeners and advertisers will be pleased.
 
> > A lot of companies are just saying that the demo is
> becoming
> > unappealing to advertisers. The listeners seem to be
> loyal,
> > it's even selling well. I guess they're just "looking out
>
> > for the future."
> >
> First off,this is an appropriate board to address this issue
> considering what is going on at KLUV.
> ABCDJ makes several good points. The limited playlist has
> been it's downfall,as well as several other formats. For
> Example you will hear Roy Orbison's "Pretty Woman" multi
> times, even though he had several hits like
> "Crying","Dreams",etc. The same goes for the Animals with
> "House of the rising sun",when they also had "When I was
> young"among other hits. The so called "research" is to
> blame."Reasearch(the way it is conducted)is Over kill.
> Certain questions or presentations are often skewed to get a
> predictable response,plus the age factor,not many in a true
> "oldies demographic" take the time to be involved in
> research.This will lead to another factor,geographic
> location of the respondents. For example "The Sir Douglas
> Quintet","The 5 Americans" would score higher in research
> here as opposed to New York,where "Doo Wop"groups would
> score higher. The true "demo" buys more than the younger
> demo.Their income is higher, they are most liklely to buy a
> house for instance,while the younger demo rents an apt. In
> that house they must furnish it,have two cars, raise kids,
> thus more money is being spent. Yes times change and the age
> shifts,BUT there are many in their 50's and 60's who still
> spend more than just buying an ipod with the other group.
>
> The presonality issue has been jostled about many
> times.Personality is what makes radio!Russ Martin, Ron
> Chapman,Terry Dorsey, Bo and Jim are a few known
> examples.Yop don't hear about the other so called "talent",
> becasue frankly they are not. They just read lines,and are
> limited in being a presonality. The other argument that has
> been kicked about ,is that its about the music. The music
> is"a part of it" the personality is what makes it
> successful. When you limit a good Talent, say Bo and Jim for
> example,take away their "schtick"that made them a
> personality, increase your music, and your spot load, do you
> really expect an increase in ratings? Only a consultant
> would think so,not a true program director.
>
> Infinity is bowing to Viacom to go after the younger demo,
> along with CBS TV. Why? The management itself is close to
> that younger demo themselves, but claim they want to appease
> the advertisers. Common sense dictates you appeal to the
> listener,become successful with them, then the advertiser
> would be happy. The talent of today have been brought up
> with running a board, reading a liner,turn to sex and
> pushing the envelope on it to be controversial and have
> people talk about it. The problem is,that has been run into
> the dirt (literally). The FCC is being more vigilant and the
> government is becoming more conservative everyday so this
> entertainment style is on it's death bed. Creativity and
> originality is missing, and the sad thing is todays talent
> haven't been taught to be that way, only copy other's
> success. Again go back to "the basics" of entertaining
> radio, and both listeners and advertisers will be pleased.
>
Ed is right. Absent creativity and originality, radio is driven by people who have appreciation neither for the oldies format itself nor an understanding of the people who listen to it. Also correct is the observation that many management level corporate types never heard today's oldies when they were riding the top 40 all those years ago. Many of the neophytes who manage and still others who conduct "research" seem to think the Animals, Four Seasons, Lou Christie, and a host of other artists recorded only one song each, with the result, in part, programming tunnel vision that dictates a 400-song playlist.

So research-driven programming decisions, narrow play lists, and all the other factors fueling the move to dump oldies are, as with other bad moves in the business, top down in their nature. And management people who should make their own decisions don't do it, because they are too lazy or too uninformed to do so, so they fall back on expensive research, and justify playing one Animals song out of many because that's the only one that research subjects were given. Perhaps those who think the only oldies worth hearing are lomited to 400 would do well to see a proctologist and find their brains, then reconsider some of the decisions they are making.
 
The problem is how much variety is too much. Over in New Orleans there are two 100kw oldies stations. One has the 400 song playlist (WTKL), while the other has a 2000+ song playlist(WTIX). WTIX is down to a half point while WTKL enjoys being in the cities top 10.
 
> The problem is how much variety is too much. Over in New
> Orleans there are two 100kw oldies stations. One has the 400
> song playlist (WTKL), while the other has a 2000+ song
> playlist(WTIX). WTIX is down to a half point while WTKL
> enjoys being in the cities top 10.
>
There has to be other factors to the difference.. not the music. The Jock's, promotions, dial position all play a part.
 
> > The problem is how much variety is too much. Over in New
> > Orleans there are two 100kw oldies stations. One has the
> 400
> > song playlist (WTKL), while the other has a 2000+ song
> > playlist(WTIX). WTIX is down to a half point while WTKL
> > enjoys being in the cities top 10.
> >
> There has to be other factors to the difference.. not the
> music. The Jock's, promotions, dial position all play a
> part.
>
I would not count on KLUV changing and leaving oldies. A Jack FM is arready in place. What else is Infinity going to do with it? They have their own problems with KVIL which continues to tank downward. They have to plan to do something with 105.3 when Stern leaves. Russ can't keep carrying the station forever even though he is a top notch talent. So KLUV is not a problem for them right now. They are looking down the hall!!! thoughts?
 
> The problem is how much variety is too much. Over in New
> Orleans there are two 100kw oldies stations. One has the 400
> song playlist (WTKL), while the other has a 2000+ song
> playlist(WTIX). WTIX is down to a half point while WTKL
> enjoys being in the cities top 10.
>
All other things being equal, and with very few exeptions, that scenario will always hold true.
 
> > The problem is how much variety is too much. Over in New
> > Orleans there are two 100kw oldies stations. One has the
> 400
> > song playlist (WTKL), while the other has a 2000+ song
> > playlist(WTIX). WTIX is down to a half point while WTKL
> > enjoys being in the cities top 10.
> >
> All other things being equal, and with very few exeptions,
> that scenario will always hold true.
>
I think the key would be to have your 400 tunes and surely play them a lot but have a larger category that plays sparingly to add the "oh wow" factor and keep the burn factor a little lower.

Having said that I do challenge anyone to take a Whitburn book,or whatever source,and try to find 2000 songs you'd really want to play. You MIGHT find a thousand, maybe...but you'd be hard pressed to find 2000 songs that you seriously want to hear on a continuing basis.

Ask yourself, do you really want to hear "Ode to Billy Jo", "In the year 2525", and "Sincerely" every other day? That's what would happen with a 2000 song playlist.

I still maintain that the music will always be the music, but it will be what goes into the mix in addition that will make a difference. Think about it, when's the last time anyone in the market has done a promotion on the air that seriously impacted the market? Something that transcended format, created top of mind awareness, and caused talk outside of the station in other media. It's been a long, long time (as Linda Ronstadt would say).
 
my random and incoherent thoughts... this won't be a revelation to anyone but sometimes it just feels good to get it out...

Is it true that radio not allowed to play an oldie if it hasn't been used in a national ad campaign in the last 10 years? How long before a generation thinks the Beatles were a one-hit wonder?

Personalities and promotions are about all radio has to distinguish itself from personal music devices. Local personalities and local promotions (okay, and monthly cost) are about all radio will have to distinguish itself from satellite - and satellite could theoretically challenge that. (maybe they already have - don't have one yet).

One fading advantage for radio vs. personal music devices is the occasional "surprise" song; even if I have 1,000+ songs on my player, I'll never be surprised by any single track. This small advantage is already going away as it is becoming easier to download a playlist that someone else has selected.

AM/FM isn't a product, it's a distribution channel. Entertainment and information are the products. When TVs became commonplace, television broadcasts became the better distribution channel for dramas and soaps and comedies. iPods and the like are becomning the better distribution channel for pure (jockless) music and they're really only just getting started. What happens when you can download music easily and quickly over a wireless Internet connection anywhere in the city?

What's left for AM/FM? Seriously, as satellite radio becomes increasingly commonplace in our cars and in our homes and on our wireless devices; nd with new technology such as broadband over metropolitan area networks and broadband over cellular potentially offering new distribution for music/news/talk programming in the next handful of years or so, what's left for AM/FM? Suddenly your favorite internet radio station is available on your pda/handheld/wireless/laptop/cell/whatever - and possibly fairly soon, at least in major markets.

Hey, maybe a couple of you can be back in the business *and* be on the beach at the same time. If you do, make sure to post your URL on the board.
 
huh?

No it's not true about oldies in commercials.

And the thought of anybody at any age thinking the Beatles were a one-hit
wonder makes many of us wonder where you got whatever you're smoking.
>
> Is it true that radio not allowed to play an oldie if it
> hasn't been used in a national ad campaign in the last 10
> years? How long before a generation thinks the Beatles were
> a one-hit wonder?
>
> Personalities and promotions are about all radio has to
> distinguish itself from personal music devices. Local
> personalities and local promotions (okay, and monthly cost)
> are about all radio will have to distinguish itself from
> satellite - and satellite could theoretically challenge
> that. (maybe they already have - don't have one yet).
>
> One fading advantage for radio vs. personal music devices is
> the occasional "surprise" song; even if I have 1,000+ songs
> on my player, I'll never be surprised by any single track.
> This small advantage is already going away as it is becoming
> easier to download a playlist that someone else has
> selected.
>
> AM/FM isn't a product, it's a distribution channel.
> Entertainment and information are the products. When TVs
> became commonplace, television broadcasts became the better
> distribution channel for dramas and soaps and comedies.
> iPods and the like are becomning the better distribution
> channel for pure (jockless) music and they're really only
> just getting started. What happens when you can download
> music easily and quickly over a wireless Internet connection
> anywhere in the city?
>
> What's left for AM/FM? Seriously, as satellite radio becomes
> increasingly commonplace in our cars and in our homes and on
> our wireless devices; nd with new technology such as
> broadband over metropolitan area networks and broadband over
> cellular potentially offering new distribution for
> music/news/talk programming in the next handful of years or
> so, what's left for AM/FM? Suddenly your favorite internet
> radio station is available on your
> pda/handheld/wireless/laptop/cell/whatever - and possibly
> fairly soon, at least in major markets.
>
> Hey, maybe a couple of you can be back in the business *and*
> be on the beach at the same time. If you do, make sure to
> post your URL on the board.
>
 
millions o' titles

Totally agree. I have to laugh at these "there are thousands of songs that were hits", etc. Sure- thousands charted but that doesn't make them all hits anybody would still be interested in hearing today.
>
> Having said that I do challenge anyone to take a Whitburn
> book,or whatever source,and try to find 2000 songs you'd
> really want to play. You MIGHT find a thousand, maybe...but
> you'd be hard pressed to find 2000 songs that you seriously
> want to hear on a continuing basis.
>
> Ask yourself, do you really want to hear "Ode to Billy Jo",
> "In the year 2525", and "Sincerely" every other day? That's
> what would happen with a 2000 song playlist.
>
> I still maintain that the music will always be the music,
> but it will be what goes into the mix in addition that will
> make a difference. Think about it, when's the last time
> anyone in the market has done a promotion on the air that
> seriously impacted the market? Something that transcended
> format, created top of mind awareness, and caused talk
> outside of the station in other media. It's been a long,
> long time (as Linda Ronstadt would say).
>
 
well...

...those were just exaggerated comments produced in frustration.

1) "oldies in commercials" - I had been listening (recently) to an oldies station and noticed that I could think of a commercial associated with pretty much every song I'd heard over a period of a couple of sets (or whatever you call them).

2) "Beatles" - given the expansive library of songs produced by the Beatles and the Stones and Zep and so on, it just drives me nuts that they play such a small and predictable subset. And it seems (subjectively) that the subset shrinks every couple of years. So... how long 'til they just play one Beatles song? Exaggerated, I know. But man it drives me up The Wall.



The paragraph that contained those two comments was out-of-place and pointless. I thought about deleting it before posting. But the whole post was just letting off a bit of steam, so I didn't bother.
 
Re: huh?

> And the thought of anybody at any age thinking the Beatles were a
> one-hit wonder makes many of us wonder where you got whatever you're
> smoking.


However, in the early 1970s, I remember talking to one prominent jock who admitted he thought the Beatles would be nothing more than a fad when he started playing their records (remember 45s) in 1964.

A early Beatles song was playing in a fast-food restaurant a few days ago, and the high school girl behind the counter asked me the name of the group singing. I was stunned when she said she did not know who the Beatles were.

And how many baby boomers recognize Sinatra's contribution to pop music or can even name one of his records?
 
Re: huh?

> > And the thought of anybody at any age thinking the Beatles
> were a
> > one-hit wonder makes many of us wonder where you got
> whatever you're
> > smoking.
>
>
> However, in the early 1970s, I remember talking to one
> prominent jock who admitted he thought the Beatles would be
> nothing more than a fad when he started playing their
> records (remember 45s) in 1964.
>
> A early Beatles song was playing in a fast-food restaurant a
> few days ago, and the high school girl behind the counter
> asked me the name of the group singing. I was stunned when
> she said she did not know who the Beatles were.
>
> And how many baby boomers recognize Sinatra's contribution
> to pop music or can even name one of his records?

I can name plenty of them which decade would you like to start with? The 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, or the 90's?
I'm a baby boomer and Frank Sinatra is tied with the Beatles as my favorite artist and favorite group of all time. Along with Franks talent singing the
music on all his records is some of the best written and produced music of all
time and in my mind will never be touched by anyone ever!!!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom