Where have all you naysayers gone since we've modernized the playlist, cleaned up the audio processing (which you ALL hated), added jingles and now have lots of advertisers and listeners who love the station? Check our our home page(if you dare) http://www.classichitsq1045.com/
-
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
KMCQ - new and improved
- Thread starter AlaskaChuck
- Start date
It would still be cool if KMCQ can bring back some of the rare hits that were originally played when the station began.
I know it probably is not my place, but I have a recommendation...
"Classic Hits" is just one of those formats which I cannot seem to listen to very long. I used to listen to KJR-FM at times, and all of the music they were played got so repetitive and mind numbing after the first day. I was born in 95', so fortunately I was not around to hear many of those old top 40 songs beaten to death day after day back when they were new.
I dont mean to offend anyone.. However, if I was the owner of KMCQ I would change up the format. I would play a bigger variety of 50's and 60's oldies, along with other songs from the 70's that were not chart toppers.
"Classic Hits" is just one of those formats which I cannot seem to listen to very long. I used to listen to KJR-FM at times, and all of the music they were played got so repetitive and mind numbing after the first day. I was born in 95', so fortunately I was not around to hear many of those old top 40 songs beaten to death day after day back when they were new.
I dont mean to offend anyone.. However, if I was the owner of KMCQ I would change up the format. I would play a bigger variety of 50's and 60's oldies, along with other songs from the 70's that were not chart toppers.
Processing is a subjective call that you won't get 5 people to agree about at the same time.
It used to sound like it had no preemphasis, and now it does... an improvement in itself, I suppose.
It used to sound like it had no preemphasis, and now it does... an improvement in itself, I suppose.
M
Mike Brewer
Guest
Processing is better (admittedly, ANYTHING was better than what was there before), playlist is predictably tight, production value OK but could be better.
In other words - most on this board will HATE it. (cue "Kokomo")
In other words - most on this board will HATE it. (cue "Kokomo")
I think the processing has greatly improved the sound of the station, and so have the jingles.
To KMCQ's credit, there are at least some pre-70s items in the mix.
However, on the down side, most of the music on KMCQ is played to death on other stations in the market, and we already have a KJR-FM.
KMCQ was more enjoyable when it was more of an "oldies" than a "classic hits" station.
So, yes, you've made some improvements.
But how do I say this gently?
If the processing and jingles are better, but the music isn't as interesting, what are we left with?
A station with better audio that isn't as fun to listen to.
Too bad we can't have the new processing and jingles with more of the old sound.
Granted, that old sound was a bit disorganized, but I'd take it any day over the predictability of today's KMCQ.
You've done some things right. And torn some things down.
Incidentally, I hear KMCQ much less when traveling around than I did a year or two ago.
That's certainly not scientific evidence, but tells me that it isn't just me.
No substitute for a people meter, I'm sure, but it's what I've noticed.
To KMCQ's credit, there are at least some pre-70s items in the mix.
However, on the down side, most of the music on KMCQ is played to death on other stations in the market, and we already have a KJR-FM.
KMCQ was more enjoyable when it was more of an "oldies" than a "classic hits" station.
So, yes, you've made some improvements.
But how do I say this gently?
If the processing and jingles are better, but the music isn't as interesting, what are we left with?
A station with better audio that isn't as fun to listen to.
Too bad we can't have the new processing and jingles with more of the old sound.
Granted, that old sound was a bit disorganized, but I'd take it any day over the predictability of today's KMCQ.
You've done some things right. And torn some things down.
Incidentally, I hear KMCQ much less when traveling around than I did a year or two ago.
That's certainly not scientific evidence, but tells me that it isn't just me.
No substitute for a people meter, I'm sure, but it's what I've noticed.
I have been listening to KMCQ throughout most of the changes they have made in the past years.
When they went to the latest format nearly a year ago, there was almost no 50's, 60's music at all. Then little by little they started adding more and more "flashback" and it is very welcome. There is so much overlap between stations playing 70's and 80's music. (Enough Phil Collins already!) I think if they want to distinguish themselves to their closest competition, they should play more of the 50's and 60's.
Sorry to compare- the 60's on 6 was the 5th most listened to station on Siriusxm as of '08. I would imagine that there is the demand for this music around here?
I did not grow up listening to this music, I listened to oldies as a kid in the 80's and beyond. I miss KBSG greatly and have been wating for a station like that since it left.
When they went to the latest format nearly a year ago, there was almost no 50's, 60's music at all. Then little by little they started adding more and more "flashback" and it is very welcome. There is so much overlap between stations playing 70's and 80's music. (Enough Phil Collins already!) I think if they want to distinguish themselves to their closest competition, they should play more of the 50's and 60's.
Sorry to compare- the 60's on 6 was the 5th most listened to station on Siriusxm as of '08. I would imagine that there is the demand for this music around here?
I did not grow up listening to this music, I listened to oldies as a kid in the 80's and beyond. I miss KBSG greatly and have been wating for a station like that since it left.
I'm not at all saying that everything was good about the old KMCQ. The audio was muddy. For the most part, there was no personality. (Some things haven't changed!)
Wrong versions of various songs were played, so it appeared cobbled together.
But here's the good thing: I could be surprised. Not often, because I'm hard to surprise, but it could still happen.
Look, this is radio run by banks who probably expected to sell KMCQ after a few months, and it's four or five years later.
Thus, I shouldn't expect much.
The more mainstream the station, the more attractive it'll be to a buyer. I get all that.
But musically, it could be much more interesting while mostly being mainstream.
Localwatcher, I assume you're much younger than the typical oldies demographic. Too bad you only had KBSG as a yardstick.
KBSG had entertaining personalities, but very little music variety within their format.
Then again, that's true of most Seattle stations. If I didn't know any better, I'd think the only current records are "Get Lucky", "blurred Lines", "Radioactive", and a song or two by Miley Cyrus. Oh, and Adele. How can I forget Adele?
That's why, with all its flaws, I liked the old KMCQ better than the new. Because even a random CD changer is often more interesting than an overconsulted, very predictable station.
Wrong versions of various songs were played, so it appeared cobbled together.
But here's the good thing: I could be surprised. Not often, because I'm hard to surprise, but it could still happen.
Look, this is radio run by banks who probably expected to sell KMCQ after a few months, and it's four or five years later.
Thus, I shouldn't expect much.
The more mainstream the station, the more attractive it'll be to a buyer. I get all that.
But musically, it could be much more interesting while mostly being mainstream.
Localwatcher, I assume you're much younger than the typical oldies demographic. Too bad you only had KBSG as a yardstick.
KBSG had entertaining personalities, but very little music variety within their format.
Then again, that's true of most Seattle stations. If I didn't know any better, I'd think the only current records are "Get Lucky", "blurred Lines", "Radioactive", and a song or two by Miley Cyrus. Oh, and Adele. How can I forget Adele?
That's why, with all its flaws, I liked the old KMCQ better than the new. Because even a random CD changer is often more interesting than an overconsulted, very predictable station.
A
AQH
Guest
AlaskaChuck said:
It's not in this board's DNA to issue compliments.
fordranger797 said:
Many of our listeners have never heard of the Whalers or Sonics - and don't care much for obscure surfing music. They prefer Heart, Steve Milller, Huey Lewis and the News and some time tested "malt shop oldies" from the mid to late 60's or later.
bobdavcav said:
We had to blend the channels together at the console in order to improve the audio quality - even the stream is in Mono. We also turned off the RDS as well on the transmitter. It's the best we can do with what we've got to work with.
AlaskaChuck said:
I do agree, but I don't think a "lost 45" once an hour would hurt. Or maybe even Barry Scott's "Lost 45s" on the weekends
Many of our listeners have never heard of the Whalers or Sonics - and don't care much for obscure surfing music. They prefer Heart, Steve Milller, Huey Lewis and the News and some time tested "malt shop oldies" from the mid to late 60's or later.
[/quote]
You see, this is exactly why I am frustrated with your station. KMCQ is programming to the lowest common denominator. Plus, you're targeting those in their 30's and early 40's in my opinion. Dropping Oldies for Classic Hits might have been a smart financial move, but long term you will (or currently are) having lots of Cross-Cume (shared audience) with a pile of stations in the market. The beauty of the old KMCQ prior to the takeover was that it was it's own animal and had a deep oldies playlist and it seemed the bulk of the audience was 40's and 50's. Sometimes it's not about reach but rather loyalty and exclusive cume.
Btw, it's license renewal time and you'll have to air pre-filing announcements starting on August 1st.
http://licensing.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/Auth_Files/1080711.pdf
Good luck with the station!
[/quote]
You see, this is exactly why I am frustrated with your station. KMCQ is programming to the lowest common denominator. Plus, you're targeting those in their 30's and early 40's in my opinion. Dropping Oldies for Classic Hits might have been a smart financial move, but long term you will (or currently are) having lots of Cross-Cume (shared audience) with a pile of stations in the market. The beauty of the old KMCQ prior to the takeover was that it was it's own animal and had a deep oldies playlist and it seemed the bulk of the audience was 40's and 50's. Sometimes it's not about reach but rather loyalty and exclusive cume.
Btw, it's license renewal time and you'll have to air pre-filing announcements starting on August 1st.
http://licensing.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/Auth_Files/1080711.pdf
Good luck with the station!
Chuck, with all due respect, you did seek our opinions, or maybe more accurately, our favorable opinions.
Then, when we tell you what we think, you try to tell us how invalid our opinions are.
Sorry, but your station is too predictable. And it shouldn't be in mono.
But you folks are so busy listening to yourselves that it probably doesn't matter.
This isn't personal. I don't know you. I'm sure you're doing the job you're being paid to do.
And that's precisely why people who seek even a bit of musical adventure get it from the Internet, whether from Pandora or streaming stations like mine (and many others.)
I've been in your shoes before, and I didn't find them comfortable--least of all getting valid listener complaints about the music and knowing that resolving them wouldn't fly with my boss.
I hope you have lots of success. I hardly ever listen anymore, but I'm in that black-hole over-50 demographic anyway.
Music testing notwithstanding, I've been burned out on about 80 percent of your music for more than 20 years--not because it's old, but it's the same old, same old. I tune past it and hardly ever stay. Not enough variety, no music discovery or rediscovery.
If you didn't want to hear that, maybe you shouldn't have asked.
But, even though it may seem like it, this isn't a sour-grapes post. I know what you're up against. You have people to answer to who have expectations you have to meet.
I think the prior regime could have done some compromising and satisfied both camps. It's too late for that now.
And maybe you get some of the KJR-FM crowd who want to hear music in the morning, or who get tired of hearing about iHeartRadio every 15 seconds.
Then, when we tell you what we think, you try to tell us how invalid our opinions are.
Sorry, but your station is too predictable. And it shouldn't be in mono.
But you folks are so busy listening to yourselves that it probably doesn't matter.
This isn't personal. I don't know you. I'm sure you're doing the job you're being paid to do.
And that's precisely why people who seek even a bit of musical adventure get it from the Internet, whether from Pandora or streaming stations like mine (and many others.)
I've been in your shoes before, and I didn't find them comfortable--least of all getting valid listener complaints about the music and knowing that resolving them wouldn't fly with my boss.
I hope you have lots of success. I hardly ever listen anymore, but I'm in that black-hole over-50 demographic anyway.
Music testing notwithstanding, I've been burned out on about 80 percent of your music for more than 20 years--not because it's old, but it's the same old, same old. I tune past it and hardly ever stay. Not enough variety, no music discovery or rediscovery.
If you didn't want to hear that, maybe you shouldn't have asked.
But, even though it may seem like it, this isn't a sour-grapes post. I know what you're up against. You have people to answer to who have expectations you have to meet.
I think the prior regime could have done some compromising and satisfied both camps. It's too late for that now.
And maybe you get some of the KJR-FM crowd who want to hear music in the morning, or who get tired of hearing about iHeartRadio every 15 seconds.
AlaskaChuck said:
Actually, the group's name is the "Wailers" and the old KMCQ included songs from local artists like them, the Sonics, Merilee Rush and others to augment their playlist. It wasn't a steady diet (and based on recent pictures, you haven't seen one of those in quite some time) - The old format resulted in very loyal listeners - and their ratings for the three month period before the new regime took over was 2.7 for each of the months - beating Click, The Mountain and The End. I'll bet the "new and improved" KMCQ doesn't come close to those numbers.
AlaskaChuck said:
Maybe there's a bit of a balancing act in all this. I agree that most listeners (aside from a handful of very vocal radio junkies, which almost by definition describes any of us who spend time to post on a board like this one) don't want to hear a station full of obscure songs.
But at the same time, I do wonder if they really want to hear nothing but really safe and familiar songs. It's entirely possible to build a playlist out of songs that you know and love...and to be totally bored by the results after awhile. There's a reason why everyone isn't just listening to their own music collection stored on their cellphones, and I suspect that an understanding of that might help radio stations figure out how to balance between being familiar and being interesting.
- Status