It's 2015! Time to get rid of the '70s.

[Avid Listener]

Why don't any of you armchair PDs who know that everything radio is doing is wrong and all the research is wrong put your money where your mouth is and either try to become a major market PD or buy a station and prove it? Just walk in and say you don't believe in research, you don't need it because you "just know". Play your 10,000 B sides, become number one in all demographics and make lots of money? You don't think if doing it your way would result in ratings and sales orders coming in the door radio stations wouldn't already be doing it?

Because I'm not an idiot. If I had the resources to buy a radio station, I'd use them to buy a bar/restaurant. If I'm going to invest my money in something, it'll be something I love doing.

 

[davideduardo]

The proof is in the pudding. Any research method that produces false data must be flawed. One need not know what the method is. All one needs is to see the results. If the results are flawed, then that proves that the research method is flawed.

So, because you don't like the songs a consensus of actual radio listeners select, the data is false?

No, they are expecting GOOD MUSIC.

But that's not the way listeners express themselves in one-on one interviews. They say things like "I like hearing my favorite songs" and "I like that I can sing along with all the songs" and so on. In other words, familiar favorites.

And that takes us back to the core of threads like this one. Little by little, terrestrial radio is chasing people away from radio completely!

So, basically because some classic rock station in Pittsburgh did not play the songs you want to hear, you think everyone in radio is incompetent and all stations suck.

 

[MarioMania]

I would like to listen to an 80's station

Is the market ready for it 80-89

 

[davideduardo]

Because I'm not an idiot. If I had the resources to buy a radio station, I'd use them to buy a bar/restaurant. If I'm going to invest my money in something, it'll be something I love doing.

Now that is humorous. You'd rather be in one of the most failure-prone businesses there is rather than one where a good operator with a decent facility can make good, sustainable cash flows.

 

[oldies76]

[No, just the people who are offensive or think they are more deserving of hearing what they want than the rest of the audience. In other words, people like you and Oldies76.

It has nothing to do with "deserving" more than the audience. It has to do with SATISFYING your audience. Radio has to come to a consensus. You can satisfy your core audience AND music fans alike if done properly. YOU will not even try. Thankfully rural stations have. And it sounds like you won't even give them a chance.

 

[oldies76]

So what we have is a complainer, who threatens to stop listening ... and six months later, he's still listening. We don't care that he complained so much as we care that he either didn't intend to follow through on his threat or he couldn't find a station he liked better.

oldies76, you are the philosophical equivalent of that guy. You insist that we program for you specifically while the rest of the audience applauds what we are already programming.

No, I just stop listening all together, since they do not appeal to listeners with an interest in classics hits. That station in L.A. is a perfect and prime example. I've already found local and other stations that are close to what I'm looking for and I am satisfied with them. If they stop playing the music I enjoy listening, then I will stop listening. I can check back later to see if they have improved or not. Simple as that. If radio cannot come to a consensus to satisfy ALL listeners, then I don't need to listen either. It's their choice to make.

I'm for LISTENER SATISFACTION. I'll play what they want, not some predetermined, researched list of 400 burned songs.

 

[oldies76]

Play your 10,000 B sides

2000-3000 A SIDES is all I need.

 

[oldies76]

You have been told that this is not the case over and over in the past. So posting this lie is obviously intentional.

Research companies do not pick the songs to be tested. The station does. And each time a classic hits or other gold-based station tests, they include lots of "what if" songs to see if some older titles that have not been played have benefited from resting and to see if some newer songs are ready to be introduced to the audience. A station may test several hundred songs that they are not currently playing. In the last gold-based test I was involved with, more than 500 songs that were not on the air were tested.

Either way, the results are still usually the same, the same core songs with slight variations here and there. And since listeners are usually not familiar with "new" classics being introduced at music tests, they will score them negatives due to saturation of the tested songs they are already used to. It's not a lie, it's a true observation just by looking at a stations playlist every week, month.......and year.

If there was distinctive variation, then most of those 500 extra non-aired songs that are introduced in a music test would score positive. They don't. That's why the playlists at many classic hits stations have varied just slightly in recent years.

Does your core listening audience approve? Sure. And that's why they get the ratings, but it's the people that want more out of a station, like music fans, are the ones disappointed and there are plenty of them too!

 

[davideduardo]

It has nothing to do with "deserving" more than the audience. It has to do with SATISFYING your audience. Radio has to come to a consensus. You can satisfy your core audience AND music fans alike if done properly. YOU will not even try. Thankfully rural stations have. And it sounds like you won't even give them a chance.

"Rural" stations have a much smaller competitive environment, and listeners have fewer alternatives. So stations don't have to program against multiple niche formats and the whole market is not highly fragmented. So they don't understand the need for tight programming and often don't have experienced programmers. And they definitely don't have much budget to pay staff and to spend on any kind of programming assistance.

In large markets, stations have to defend against both lateral and direct programming challenges, and they spend money to try make sure they do it successfully.

Stations in larger markets that have tried to win with larger playlists have always lost... either to direct competitors or to flankers.

Of course, you think that small market programmers make "big bucks" and that a station can be successful with 3000 songs in the library. Neither will ever happen.

 

[oldies76]

Of course, you think that small market programmers make "big bucks" and that a station can be successful with 3000 songs in the library. Neither will ever happen.

About 700 songs is all I need. The other 2300 are fillers, such as lost hits and weekend specialty shows. Gotta be diverse DE.

Good night.

 

[davideduardo]

Either way, the results are still usually the same, the same core songs with slight variations here and there. And since listeners are usually not familiar with "new" classics being introduced at music tests, they will score them negatives due to saturation of the tested songs they are already used to. It's not a lie, it's a true observation just by looking at a stations playlist every week, month.......and year.

You are incredibly disingenuous. The additional "what if" songs are from the same charts from the same years that the reset of the playlist comes from. If the listeners know the ones that are being played, they will know the ones that are off those charts that are not being programmed. Listeners know the songs, whether they have been played recently or not... they don't forget them simply because they have not been heard recently. But they do know, and instantly, which songs they still want to hear.

If there was distinctive variation, then most of those 500 extra non-aired songs that are introduced in a music test would score positive.

That's an ignorant statement. The songs are as different and varied as the songs from any chart from any week of any month from any year in the period that the station plays.

Does your core listening audience approve? Sure. And that's why they get the ratings, but it's the people that want more out of a station, like music fans, are the ones disappointed and there are plenty of them too!

When you add deep cuts that are not favorites of the core, the core will go away. And you will be left with a few whiny malcontents like you, who still won't be happy.

 

[TheBigA]

About 700 songs is all I need. The other 2300 are fillers, such as lost hits and weekend specialty shows.

I'm sure you own more than 3000 songs. Play them. Listen to them. Enjoy them. As I said a long time ago, radio is just a free sample. If you like what you hear, hopefully you'll buy the complete works of the artist and listen on your own time. That's how radio works. None of us program radio stations to replace your personal collection. The record labels don't loan us their music with the thought that we'll make it easy for consumers to stop buying music. This is a never ending thread where you want us to do something we'll never do. So get used to it.

 

[oldies76]

You are incredibly disingenuous.

That's an ignorant statement.

a few whiny malcontents like you

You're on a roll here.....nice.

Been watching some of those Schoolhouse Rock reruns lately?

 

[Music Lover]

If they stop playing the music I enjoy listening, then I will stop listening.

That's how I feel when a music artist I like changes music style and image completely. Charlotte Church is an excellent example of that. She changed from this sweet girl singing classical music to singing Britney Spears pop complete with a tabloid image. I no longer buy her music.

 

[oldies76]

When you add deep cuts that are not favorites of the core, the core will go away.

Who said anything about "deep cuts"?

#1's and other TOP 10 singles. Those are not "deep cuts".

 

[Avid Listener]

So, because you don't like the songs a consensus of actual radio listeners select, the data is false?

No, because the research allegedly says that listeners only want to hear a small list of songs. I don't question which songs are picked so much as I question that only a relative handful of songs get picked. Those are two totally different things.

As for your inability to discern the difference between an anecdotal illustration of a point and proof, that says more about your inability to grasp what is being said than any comment I could make.

Now that is humorous. You'd rather be in one of the most failure-prone businesses there is rather than one where a good operator with a decent facility can make good, sustainable cash flows.

Again, you miss the point. I'd rather do something I'm passionate about than be a worker drone.

Of course, you think that small market programmers make "big bucks"

He must have read your posts that painted such a glowing picture of AM radio stations in the "AM radio is dead" thread.

 

[oldies76]

That's how I feel when a music artist I like changes music style and image completely. Charlotte Church is an excellent example of that. She changed from this sweet girl singing classical music to singing Britney Spears pop complete with a tabloid image. I no longer buy her music.

I remember her from the late 90's. She was a good singer. I believe she had one single released then as well.

This is supposed to be an area for "music enthusiasts" to discuss, but that sure didn't last long....

 

[oldies76]

Again, you miss the point. I'd rather do something I'm passionate about than be a worker drone.

Or sitting in some cubicle or on a bench in an airport terminal, on a laptop all day long!

 

[oldies76]

No, because the research allegedly says that listeners only want to hear a small list of songs. I don't question which songs are picked so much as I question that only a relative handful of songs get picked. Those are two totally different things.

With a goldmine of classic hits out there (thousands of hit singles from the late 1960's through the 80's that are just in the top 20), it's really a wonder and a Sherlock Holmes mystery as to why only 400 or so are ever chosen at any given time, and it's usually the same titles (the cores, with a few extras thrown in). It's been this way for decades. The only thing that may shuffle the lists are demographic shifts over the years. I rest my case.

 

[Music Lover]

While we're on the subject of strange programming....

This station is an Internet only Sub Channel of a TV station in Texas.
http://www.yesterdayssofthits.com/
https://www.facebook.com/kaqc2

The focus of the station is soft hits from the 70's & 80's yet every now and then I've heard "Just The Way You Are" by Bruno Mars played. I guess maybe it's because he has a retro vibe?