R
-
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
I've seen the future, and the only way it's going to fly it to put real ninche channels on HD2 that people would be willing to pay for, but could get for free (ie: steal channels from satellite radio).
Heck, it they put the old Bonneville beautiful music format on HD2 they could even run commericals and charge for them as that is a format with a long TSL and older listeners listen to radio more than the kids anyhow. They're really missing the boat on the generic HD2 (with some exceptions, like Detroits live RIFF2 channel).
It's the progarmming, stupid, as I hear spots every single day on the air for HD radio, so if people are listening to the radio now, they are aware of it; people who DON'T listen to the radio everyday, don't have a clue.
I'm talking that FM-HD has a chance, while AM-HD, in it's current form, is throwing gasoline on the fire to AM reception woes.
Same goes for AM-ANALOG - innovative programming can still save the day.
Heck, it they put the old Bonneville beautiful music format on HD2 they could even run commericals and charge for them as that is a format with a long TSL and older listeners listen to radio more than the kids anyhow. They're really missing the boat on the generic HD2 (with some exceptions, like Detroits live RIFF2 channel).
It's the progarmming, stupid, as I hear spots every single day on the air for HD radio, so if people are listening to the radio now, they are aware of it; people who DON'T listen to the radio everyday, don't have a clue.
I'm talking that FM-HD has a chance, while AM-HD, in it's current form, is throwing gasoline on the fire to AM reception woes.
Same goes for AM-ANALOG - innovative programming can still save the day.
M
Mike Walker
Guest
DAMN STRAIGHT, Johnny! The problem with format negotions between "Alliance" members is that they're (the stations) mostly programmed by people too damn young to even remember WHAT'S MISSING! Like traditional country, and BEAUTIFUL MUSIC! You know, formats people would actually listen to!
Haw! Gorman's blog is a big ole belly-laugh!
Ditto on the kiddie-city radio programming fraternity. Not only do most programmers these days not "get" what are rightfully mainstream formats, most of them don't "get" the original concept of radio.
To them, anything between the music - really, what radio has historically had to offer as a "reason to listen" other than consuming CDs, sat-radio, cassettes, 8-tracks or Chrysler HiWay Hi-Fi - the foreign concept known as "CONTENT" - constitutes the ENEMY.
Just string together a bunch of music, add in a big, aggressive, angry-sounding "liner guy" - and ZAP!! There's your jockless, bland, content-free, no-connection-with-the-listener "radio station!"
Every radio station sounds the same when the song's playing. What creates identity and listener loyalty is what happens between tunes.
Ditto on the kiddie-city radio programming fraternity. Not only do most programmers these days not "get" what are rightfully mainstream formats, most of them don't "get" the original concept of radio.
To them, anything between the music - really, what radio has historically had to offer as a "reason to listen" other than consuming CDs, sat-radio, cassettes, 8-tracks or Chrysler HiWay Hi-Fi - the foreign concept known as "CONTENT" - constitutes the ENEMY.
Just string together a bunch of music, add in a big, aggressive, angry-sounding "liner guy" - and ZAP!! There's your jockless, bland, content-free, no-connection-with-the-listener "radio station!"
Every radio station sounds the same when the song's playing. What creates identity and listener loyalty is what happens between tunes.
It's been said that radio people (people who work or have worked in radio) listen to radio backwards, we turn down the songs and turn the radio back up when the talk and commercials come on, just to hear how it sounds, the production, seguing, etc. Non-radio people do the opposite. I think radio people do this partly to critique another station, and in some cases learn what to do and what not to do, from hearing others.
Savage said:
Like this stuff?
http://www.clearchannelmusic.com/formatlab/
Observation: Before today, the last time I stumbled across the Format Lab website was well over a year ago -- the headline then was "We Play What You Hear on HD Radio". But now, I see the Format Lab's mission has been diluted down to also cover "Internet, Wireless Phones, and In-Store", so I guess Clear Channel has hedged their bets on IBOC.
By the way, note that those cute "channel names" are trademarked, so don't even think of "borrowing" them without forking over some money.
JohnnyElectron said:
Johnny... IF a ONE-HUNDRED-AND-ONE-PERCENT AGREEMENT were a mathematical reality—I’d say you just hit it! B-U-L-L-AE’, sir! Despite a recent “drive-by” from the HD-at-any-cost cadre here, Gorman HAS EARNED his “expectation of RESPECT”—He is no “idiot”—recent personal invective here on R-I notwithstanding... I only wish MY resume included the likes of Cleveland’s “Buzzard”—“heritage” and “exceptional” are nearly-generic when grabbing for adjectives to describe that station and the fruits of his radio career. One HAS to rationalize that his abilities go WELL-BEYOND computing the optimum Led Zep, Steely Dan, and Yes turnovers at 100.7 FM!
I think we can all find common ground [SHOCKING as it may seem] in the proposition that TOTAL agreement with a contemporary in the “Broadcast Arts” is a near-impossibility. From MY perspective, there are THREE that violate that tenant... One “Oldie-But-Goodie”; another consummate “recurrent”; and a “new add”... The “oldie” is my recently-departed first boss from Notre Dame... The “recurrent” is Jerry D-C... and NEW to the “party” [and the HD and terrestrial-radio debate] is George Brusstar of that “LITTLE INTERNET radio show” fame a.k.a. “The Radio Racket”... CONSTANT reflection and a bit of required humility lead me to the conclusion that NONE violate my intellectual sensibilities!
All, ARE – or have been “pensive” in regards to HD Radio... I’ll recall my own position from a post here that is only days old...
hipporadio said:
So WHY is this man that usually-seizes upon an opportunity to purchase “the latest technology” STILL without an “HD” radio in his domicile? SIMPLE... NO BENEFIT—given the state of PROGRAMMING in the corporately-controlled swill-called-“radio”... ‘Let’s just loose the “male stiffie” ‘n be honest here—“radio” STINKS... ‘and this industy wishes-‘n-hopes thar I’ll shell-out 200-plus dollars for “HD” Radio to “enjoy” the banal “Stations between the stations”? —God rescue my “stupid” soul!!!
R
Radioman100
Guest
I've gotta wonder why these reputable, experienced, clearly beyond reproach industry blogger types spend so much time blogging about HD Radio. They claim it's going to fail all on its own, so why spend hours upon hours talking about it?
It's intellectually lazy. They have a blog, which they have to update semi-regularly or risk losing readership and prestige. When they run through a creative dry spell, they drag out HD Radio for another beating. They know they can count on the usual chorus of kooks to sing their praises, and hey, they filled their daily blogging quota with something.
If these "visionaries" were half as visionary as the anti-HD kooks think they are, they would actually be writing something worthwhile, something useful, something that might help the industry move ratings and revenue forward, not blasting HD for the umpteenth time.
I guess it all boils down to this. The anti-HD crowd has described HD Radio with many whimsical euphemisms like "stillborn" and "DOA." They say it will never get off the ground. If they truly believe that, there's about as much sport in continually picking on HD Radio as the class bully picking on a retarded kid.
It's amazing to me that these "visionaries" have such a huge blind spot when it comes to HD Radio. They're always telling us what radio as an industry should be doing to improve its fortunes, yet they have no advice to offer when it comes to HD? We're supposed to applaude and buy into their unique foresight when they can't even see what HD Radio is? It's merely a delivery mechanism for new programming options. That's it.
Surely people this smart, practically radio Gods, would see just how bad the HD Radio Alliance's marketing campaign has been and see how that might correlate to "consumer apathy" at retail. No, they never talk about that. They simply poke fun and blast away because it's easy, and their willing choir makes them feel like geniuses.
I wonder how they'll feel when the Alliance's new ad campaign, the one touting the specific benefits and formats of HD2 channels, kicks in next month and they find out the problem with HD Radio has been bad marketing all along?
If any of these "industry leaders" were actually in the know, they'd already be talking about (and probably blasting away at) that campaign. That's news, not just more of the same lazy crap.
It's intellectually lazy. They have a blog, which they have to update semi-regularly or risk losing readership and prestige. When they run through a creative dry spell, they drag out HD Radio for another beating. They know they can count on the usual chorus of kooks to sing their praises, and hey, they filled their daily blogging quota with something.
If these "visionaries" were half as visionary as the anti-HD kooks think they are, they would actually be writing something worthwhile, something useful, something that might help the industry move ratings and revenue forward, not blasting HD for the umpteenth time.
I guess it all boils down to this. The anti-HD crowd has described HD Radio with many whimsical euphemisms like "stillborn" and "DOA." They say it will never get off the ground. If they truly believe that, there's about as much sport in continually picking on HD Radio as the class bully picking on a retarded kid.
It's amazing to me that these "visionaries" have such a huge blind spot when it comes to HD Radio. They're always telling us what radio as an industry should be doing to improve its fortunes, yet they have no advice to offer when it comes to HD? We're supposed to applaude and buy into their unique foresight when they can't even see what HD Radio is? It's merely a delivery mechanism for new programming options. That's it.
Surely people this smart, practically radio Gods, would see just how bad the HD Radio Alliance's marketing campaign has been and see how that might correlate to "consumer apathy" at retail. No, they never talk about that. They simply poke fun and blast away because it's easy, and their willing choir makes them feel like geniuses.
I wonder how they'll feel when the Alliance's new ad campaign, the one touting the specific benefits and formats of HD2 channels, kicks in next month and they find out the problem with HD Radio has been bad marketing all along?
If any of these "industry leaders" were actually in the know, they'd already be talking about (and probably blasting away at) that campaign. That's news, not just more of the same lazy crap.
R
Radioman100
Guest
KB1OKL said:
Would you pay $200 just to receive something?
That's been the HD Radio Alliance's marketing campaign up to this point. Buy an expensive radio and you'll hear "stations between the stations."
Nobody in their right mind would drop that kind of money on a product that promises no specific benefits.
Would you buy a new $200 "Widget" based on this ad?
"Try the new Widget! It does something new, and it improves your widgeting experience over other widgets!"
The new ad campaign corrects this rather obvious shortcoming.
Irony, thy name is Clear Channel. I checked out the CC format lab website for the first time and the first thing I heard was the tail end of a comedy bit by Sammy Allred. Clear Channel fired Sammy from his top-rated morning show a few weeks ago. I wonder if they're paying a royalty for the stuff they stream on the site.
It's like 50 channels and nothing on. All dreck, all the time. 50 flavors of dreck. Soul-less, compressed, commerical, vapid dreck.
Now, back to our previously scheduled HD bashing....
It's like 50 channels and nothing on. All dreck, all the time. 50 flavors of dreck. Soul-less, compressed, commerical, vapid dreck.
Now, back to our previously scheduled HD bashing....
R
Radioman100
Guest
grantchester said:
Wow! 50 channels and they all suck?
I know a guy that was programming one of the Format Lab channels before he took a PD job with another company. One of the dance channels in fact. He was a night jock, and I believe he was given great latitude in what he played. If I remember correctly, he had total control over the music on the channel.
I really don't know much about Clear Channel's Format Lab operation, but I'd guess all the channels are programmed in more or less the same manner, by jocks, production people and such across the country. My friend said it didn't pay much, so it was largely a labor of love, but it was his and he was proud of it.
And you have the nerve to come here and insult his work after briefly listening to a comedy channel?
Typical of the anti-HD crowd. You don't have to know what you're talking about. You just bash away, making stuff up if you have to. Never mind the feelings that may be hurt. It's Clear Channel after all. There's no humans working there, right? The music decisions are all commercial, all handed down by corporate, right? All of these Format Lab channels are programmed by a suit in San Antonio, right? Wrong...
M
Mike Walker
Guest
Did you check the BOTTOM END OF THE FM DIAL, or just the commercial stations? I don't know about you, but most of my radio "inspiration" comes from public radio, and North Carolina has some WONDERFULLY eclectic offerings. Check out WNCW's website http://www.wncw.org and listen for yourself! Or WFDD http://www.wfdd.org or WDAV http://www.wdav.org or WFAE Charlotte, where "Thistle and Shamrock" originates (not exactly "commercial dreck"!) http://www.wfae.org
Your mileage may vary, but I suspect there is just as much imagination and "inspiration" within earshot on YOUR FM DIAL, plus more too via multicasting, all at the BOTTOM OF THE DIAL!
Your mileage may vary, but I suspect there is just as much imagination and "inspiration" within earshot on YOUR FM DIAL, plus more too via multicasting, all at the BOTTOM OF THE DIAL!
R
rbrucecarter5
Guest
A lot of good comments here -
The "stations between the stations" ad campaign was really ill conceived, because all it encourages people to do is tune between locals and probably find some rimshot stations.
An ad campaign touting the advantages of HD-2 formats is entirely dependent on whether those formats are differentiated enough from what is on the air now. Satellite has the advantage of being able to coordinate formats and cover niches. If all the stations could get together in a given metro area and coordinate formats - agreeing to slice up the pie to effectively compete against satellite, there might be a chance. But that's never going to happen. So you have a station with a given format that comes up with some minor variation of it. And oldies station here programs even older oldies. Jack has an ALL request HD-2. Somebody else does "pride radio", which is pointless because gays don't necessarily have different tastes, etc. These formats are NOT going to inspire people to go out and buy HD!
As for Clear Channel's format lab - its success depends on who is in the focus group. If their research panel is a bunch of tired old retired jocks and jock wannabes with their own list of 100 songs they have on their iPod - the "new" formats they come up are doomed before they ever hit the airwaves. A good example is their failure to make a CCM format that is successful. A few of the conglomerates have tried it, and usually pull it within a year or two because the ratings are poor. There have been rumors to the effect CC is going to try it in Dallas, because Dallas has a successful CCM station and they want a share of the audience. Nobody bothers to ask the target audience a single question about what they don't like about the existing station. They get in "professionals", give listeners more of the stuff they DON'T like on the existing station, and the format will fail. I've often suggested - go out to churches, ask young professionals and kids - the ones with spending money - what is wrong with the existing station, and you'll get some real information not filtered through "experts".
I could make the same comment about any other format you care to mention. A good example is country - ratings falling on the big corporate stations here, and a little outfit running rim shots gains an enormous following for their "Ranch" format. Classic rock sucks on the corporate stations, that play all the BAD songs from the 70's and 80's, and a brokered format on a rimshot is a local favorite. On and on - corporate radio doesn't know how to respond to listeners, because they hire radio insiders to program their formats. People who haven't actually listened to anybody but themselves in decades.
You want to kill HD radio? Forget the interference issues - poor programming decisions will do the job much more effectively than a bunch of DX'ers will.
The "stations between the stations" ad campaign was really ill conceived, because all it encourages people to do is tune between locals and probably find some rimshot stations.
An ad campaign touting the advantages of HD-2 formats is entirely dependent on whether those formats are differentiated enough from what is on the air now. Satellite has the advantage of being able to coordinate formats and cover niches. If all the stations could get together in a given metro area and coordinate formats - agreeing to slice up the pie to effectively compete against satellite, there might be a chance. But that's never going to happen. So you have a station with a given format that comes up with some minor variation of it. And oldies station here programs even older oldies. Jack has an ALL request HD-2. Somebody else does "pride radio", which is pointless because gays don't necessarily have different tastes, etc. These formats are NOT going to inspire people to go out and buy HD!
As for Clear Channel's format lab - its success depends on who is in the focus group. If their research panel is a bunch of tired old retired jocks and jock wannabes with their own list of 100 songs they have on their iPod - the "new" formats they come up are doomed before they ever hit the airwaves. A good example is their failure to make a CCM format that is successful. A few of the conglomerates have tried it, and usually pull it within a year or two because the ratings are poor. There have been rumors to the effect CC is going to try it in Dallas, because Dallas has a successful CCM station and they want a share of the audience. Nobody bothers to ask the target audience a single question about what they don't like about the existing station. They get in "professionals", give listeners more of the stuff they DON'T like on the existing station, and the format will fail. I've often suggested - go out to churches, ask young professionals and kids - the ones with spending money - what is wrong with the existing station, and you'll get some real information not filtered through "experts".
I could make the same comment about any other format you care to mention. A good example is country - ratings falling on the big corporate stations here, and a little outfit running rim shots gains an enormous following for their "Ranch" format. Classic rock sucks on the corporate stations, that play all the BAD songs from the 70's and 80's, and a brokered format on a rimshot is a local favorite. On and on - corporate radio doesn't know how to respond to listeners, because they hire radio insiders to program their formats. People who haven't actually listened to anybody but themselves in decades.
You want to kill HD radio? Forget the interference issues - poor programming decisions will do the job much more effectively than a bunch of DX'ers will.
Mike Walker said:
Mike, you make a very good point. I enjoy most of the content offered by public stations, but the stuff coming out of the Clear Channel "Format Lab" just doesn't do it for me.
As for Radioman's accusation that the "anti-HD crowd" have hurt the feelings of the poor employees who aren't being paid for their "labors of love", I think the finger actually needs to be pointed at the overpaid, corporate executives who continually expect their people to do more with less, as a result of mistakes made at the top level.
M
Mike Walker
Guest
Ya' know, if Clear Channel, Infinity, Citadel, etc. supplied the bulk of my radio listening, I'D FREAKIN' SEE NO POINT TO HD EITHER! Thank God I'm not young, and into the "hippest" new music (the fact that I use a term like "hippest" no doubt proves my point), and that I prefer to know what's going on in the world around me, as well as hear unusual music, makes public radio fertile ground for MY listening.
Were I younger/hipper/flashier, no doubt I'd be pretty unimpressed!
Were I younger/hipper/flashier, no doubt I'd be pretty unimpressed!
D
dbdigital
Guest
There is a hack job piece in the Portland Business Journal on HD Radio (you can always tell it's a hack job when they refer to HD Radio as "hi-def").
But the article quoted Bridge Ratings which downgraded their 2007 forecast for HD radio sales from 2.1 million to 1.5 million. They predicted slow sales growth for HD radios through 2010.
I can believe this because none of the catalogs from the big box retailers (I'm talking Circuit City and Best Buy) show any kind of HD Radio for the Christmas season.
http://portland.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2007/12/17/story7.html?b=1197867600^1564300
db
But the article quoted Bridge Ratings which downgraded their 2007 forecast for HD radio sales from 2.1 million to 1.5 million. They predicted slow sales growth for HD radios through 2010.
I can believe this because none of the catalogs from the big box retailers (I'm talking Circuit City and Best Buy) show any kind of HD Radio for the Christmas season.
http://portland.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2007/12/17/story7.html?b=1197867600^1564300
db
hipporadio said:
Ya know... I hear this pronouncement from various people at various times and it is basically trumpeted in an intellectualy dishonest fashion as an all inclusive statement. First let me agree with the quote. Quasi-vulgarity aside, radio DOES stink. But not for the reasons stated previously.
Radio stinks because you don't like most of it. You're not supposed to. Most of radio is not for you. It's for someone else. I operate in a market of 20+ local stations. Another dozen come rolling in on AM and from the 'Burbs for a total of right arouhd 30. I program ONE. I count as cume for about 5 of these stations in a week. From a listener standpoint, 25 of these stations stink. I don't need or want them. That's because I don't CARE if "Blazin' Hip Hop from the streets" or "The Country you grew up with" are there. They Stink.
Now don't go off quite yet. I understand you aren't necessarily saying "Those Other" stations stink.You're asserting that "The stations I like" stink. As in "Gee I wish the station that I listen to did or didin't play or do ________". They stink. 2 points.
1) You're still listening
2) If not, then it might not be for you.
We all uinderstand that there is a constant correction by radio to find the "Best" audience for each station. Best doesn't necessarily mean largest, but more like "Most desirable from a sales standpoint." If "All" radio stinks for you, then perhaps you (the proverbial you) are not in one of those sales target groups. That is, if you (The proverbial you) are a 63 year old who has a "veteran, Please Help" handwritten cardboard sign and stands under an overpass, you might not be in a desirable group. Remember radio is a MASS medium.
Also there is the point of geography. As any station is "Radio", the statement "Radio Stinks" means either ALL RADIO STINKS, which for most people is incorrect, or "SOME PART OF RADIO STINKS" which is obvious. There's almost 20,000 transmitters in the US. Point conceeded. Some radio stinks. Duh.
As for Gorman, he has a great resume, no doubt. But I will say the same thing we all say to each other in our programming meetings all the time. Remember, "you're not in the demo."
As I read this thread, I started with Gorman and then Hippo and as I thought about what I really thought abour Gormans blog, I read this (Which if you read the thread, you already have) from Radioman100.
http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,87722.msg660883.html#msg660883
Thanks for writing almost exactly what I was thinking before I even thought it. ?
There was Radio that Stinks long before I was ever in the business and I can't remember sometime when there WASN'T "Radio that Stinks".
Maybe I just don't get it.
Or I might be out of the Demo.
Clouseau
Mike Walker said:
I also listen to NPR most of the time and see absolutely no reason for them to be broadcasting in iBlock and I hope they are not using any of my tax dollars to install that jammer. I am not going to subsidize any ill-fated lead balloon of a technology which is going absolutely nowhere fast.
KB1OKL said:
Frankly, I hope they don't have any opf my tax dollars at all, but that's for another thread.
Bob,
I noticed you did get an in IBlock and lead balloon, however in order to truly graduate to the next level you will need Destructive, Defective and of course to appeal to the heart of the "Anti" crowd, you might want to mix in a "Titanic 2000 of Broadcasting".
You might also want to mix in a "Belching" and perhaps create a title for yourself such as Ambassador, Doctor or El Presidente. (I wonder if "Inspector" would; work?)
But seriously, welcome to the forum.
Imperial Comentator
Clouseau
- Status