KPWR playlist unreal

[Thomps2525]

Steele was hyper. Morgan was witty. Harve was cool. Riddle was warm. Vance was hip. Tuna was---and still is---clever. Each Boss Jock sounded different from all the others. On the majority of AC stations, all the hosts, except for mornings, sound similar. Well...the men sound different than the women, but you know what I mean. And I didn't say anything about being "effective." If these DJs were not effective, they wouldn't be on the air at all. But several DJs have gone back and forth between KLIT, KOST, KBIG, KSCA, KIBB, KYSR, KTWV and other stations. That, to me, says they're interchangeable.

 

[TheBigA]

Each Boss Jock sounded different from all the others.

But they did it efficiently. That was the point I was making.

Look, you obviously are a big fan of these jocks. No one will ever take their place.

But obviously for listeners of KPWR, Big Boy was as important to his audience as any of your favorites were to you.

 

[Thomps2525]

Blddblldbblubbllubblubbl---Ya better believe it, baby! But look at the DJ lineups of KFWB, KHJ, KRLA, KMPC, KBLA, KDAY and KGFJ in the 1960s. Then look at the DJ lineups of KOST, KBIG, KYSR and KCBS-FM. Well, okay, maybe you shouldn't count KCBS-FM. But none of the DJs outside of mornings really stand out. I know the "big three" broadcasting companies control 75% of the country's radio stations but they do care about personality, don't they?

Don't they?

 

[TheBigA]

I know the "big three" broadcasting companies control 75% of the country's radio stations but they do care about personality, don't they?

The number is closer to 15%. Of course they care. Especially in LA.

 

[davideduardo]

David, please clarify your statement: You don't agree that DJs are interchangeable or you don't agree that I'm wrong, uninformed and ridiculous?

.

I mean that the reason the jocks on certain stations sound "very similar" is that the formats are highly regimented and it is hard for individuality to come out. But the fault is not the jock... they likely have as much talent and personality and flair as any jocks in any era did. But today, in most dayparts we look for stationality above personality and there is an effort to not allow any individual to sound out of place.

 

[TheBigA]

But today, in most dayparts we look for stationality above personality and there is an effort to not allow any individual to sound out of place.

The era of the format began in the 70s. That's when "stationality" began to replace personality.

 

[michael hagerty]

I'm going to ask a question---something I'm very good at---and one which you or David might be able to answer. Morning shows usually have a better rating than programs in other dayparts...but which morning host at which station has (or has had) the lowest-rated show in comparison with the other hosts on that station? Are there a lot of stations with an afternoon show that gets double or triple the numbers of the morning show? How did Gary Owens' ratings compare with Dick Whittinghill's at KMPC?

A morning jock that underperforms the rest of the station won't be the morning jock for long.

Steele usually had a higher rating than Morgan, but both were usually comparable in ranking for the timeslot (#1 or #2), and had higher ratings than the rest of the dayparts.

Gary Owens' numbers in the late 60s and throughout the 70s were usually about half of Whittinghill's. Dick was almost always top 5 in mornings, Gary was usually 8th or 9th in afternoons and in a couple of books, fell to 16th (1978) and 22nd (1973). But at KMPC, what mattered was whether they could keep the commercial log full and not have to cut the spot rate. They sold the sizzle.

 

[K.M. Richards]

The KOST DJ e-mailed, "Sad to see you post the names of some of the passionate and hard-working talents you think are 'interchangeable.' This opinion is so wrong, so uninformed and so ridiculous I won't bother to respond." I never said they were not passionate and hard-working. I said they were "interchangeable." Does anyone else want to debate this? Someone besides K.M. Richards, who also thinks I'm wrong, uninformed and ridiculous?

I don't agree. However, I think you are close to the truth.

While the jocks are not, themselves, interchangable the formats they work are often so reglamented that it makes them seem so.

In a world with looser formatics, each definitely have a different feel and sound.

I am reminded of the early days of KOST as an A/C, when I on numerous occasions did custom demo tapes for Jhani Kaye when he had weekend/utility positions available. My problem always was that while my voice always seemed right to Jhani for the format (and so he kept giving me the opportunity to be in contention) I could never quite get the specific presentation he wanted for KOST. Nuances like inflection and pacing always did me in.

A format where those factors are important to a PD is going to end up having a more homogenized sound to it than one which is more personality driven. KRTH, for example, has very distinct personalities in Gary Bryan, Jim Carson, Shotgun Tom Kelly, Christina Kelley, and Charlie Tuna. At KOST and KTWV, the distinction between specific air talents is much harder to discern because of the format's restrictions.

I wouldn't call KOST's talents "interchangeable" per se but they are very similar in how they sound on-air, because of the format's requirements.

Wrong? Probably no more often than any of us, Steve. Uninformed? Only when a piece of information eludes you in research or when you express an opinion that had been previously disproved. Ridiculous? You have a ways to go before you get that moniker.

 

[davideduardo]

The era of the format began in the 70s. That's when "stationality" began to replace personality.

Not coincidentally, the early 70's was when Arbitron began offering a synchronized survey period in all markets rather than random surveys on different dates... At the same time the end drew near for Pulse and Hooper.

So stations programmed to the diary and not recall via phone or visit. Thus remembering the station was the key to winning.

 

[TheBigA]

I wouldn't call KOST's talents "interchangeable" per se but they are very similar in how they sound on-air, because of the format's requirements.

As early as 1976, WABC's legendary PD, Rick Sklar hired Bob Cruz because he sounded like Dan Ingram. Dan (who did afternoons at WABC) had defined the sound Sklar wanted for the station. So from that moment on, the DJs he hired sounded like Ingram. In doing that, Sklar began the era when the sound of the station was more important than individual personalities.

 

[michael hagerty]

Go back earlier...to 1974...could the casual listener tell Geoff Edwards, Clark Race and Sonny Melendrez apart on KMPC until they said their names?

 

[ChannelFlipper]

I mean that the reason the jocks on certain stations sound "very similar" is that the formats are highly regimented and it is hard for individuality to come out. But the fault is not the jock... they likely have as much talent and personality and flair as any jocks in any era did. But today, in most dayparts we look for stationality above personality and there is an effort to not allow any individual to sound out of place.

And KOST 103 took this to an elevated art form, particularly in the Jhani era. Every jock not named Mark and Kim* sounded alike and if they all switched dayparts without announcing the change, I for one would never have noticed. I am not surprised that KMR couldn't get a job there because he didn't have the right 'nuance'. It was quite clear to this listener that in order to be a jock there, not only did you have to read the cards well, you had to have just the right inflection on each and every syllable, just the right amount of pause between the words "along.....the KOST". I actually felt sorry for the jocks because I felt that the forced high level of "stationality" sucked all of the individualism right out of them.

I always wondered why the jocks would let themselves be marginalized like that, and then I remember there really aren't that many jobs around, so you make the deal: I get to jock on one of the top music stations in market #2, but every word I say will be micromanaged to the last syllable. Sounds like a deal with the devil to me, but I can understand why they chose it (and how many others would have gladly taken the same deal if offered to them).

*Actually, Mark and Kim had the same sound too, it is just they got to talk more due to them being the morning drive banterers.

 

[TheBigA]

I actually felt sorry for the jocks because I felt that the forced high level of "stationality" sucked all of the individualism right out of them.

But that's the job of a professional voice talent. You get hired to do commercials for Firestone, and you're hired for a specific sound, to deliver specific words, in a very specific way. Voice talent get directed through the script, and they're expected to read it as written. That's what they get paid to do. They're not getting paid because of their knowledge of the music. That's what the music director does. Music directors were added in the 60s. So once again, the MD was choosing music for the station, not specific shows.

Yes, all of this was a change from how radio was done in the 40s and 50s. Then, you had music specialists. But they also were often hosting brokered shows in fringe time. That's how Alan Freed got started. He got a local record store to sponsor a late night R&B show. Some of 60s radio was still a holdover from how radio had been done in the 50s, but it was changing. Personality was still valued, but not necessarily for music selection. As time moved on, individual shows with "welcomes" and "goodbyes" were done away with. Public radio was a holdout for this kind of block programming, but by the late 70s, the focus was on consistency of sound regardless of daypart. And it worked. That's why stations stayed with it. Meanwhile, another new format was emerging: Talk radio. That's where people were hired for their personality. Those who pine for radio as they remember it from the 60s and 70s are really pining for radio from the 50s. But only a few examples remained by the 80s. Today's radio listeners, who have no memories of what radio was like 50 years ago, don't even talk about personalities. Their interest is the music.

 

[JeffM]

Wrong? Probably no more often than any of us, Steve. Uninformed? Only when a piece of information eludes you in research or when you express an opinion that had been previously disproved. Ridiculous? You have a ways to go before you get that moniker.

You want wrong, uninformed, and ridiculous, look up any post labeled "Scooter Lesley."

 

[ChannelFlipper]

You want wrong, uninformed, and ridiculous, look up any post labeled "Scooter Lesley."

He only posts on the South Carolina board. We have enough of these posts right here.

 

[LKellerIII]

The era of the format began in the 70s. That's when "stationality" began to replace personality.

The Bay Area's equivalent to KOST - KOIT - has had live jocks who demonstrate no personality - just "stationality" for about the last 2 decades. Why they don't just voice-track the station is beyond me. I've noticed that any individuality is limited to what words they emphasize when reading the slogan. It can be "LIGHT rock, less talk," or "Light Rock, LESS talk..." etc.

Bobby Ocean was a fill-in jock on KOIT for a couple of years, and oddly enough, they let him talk on for a couple of minutes a couple of times an hour, so he had more freedom than he was ever allowed to show on KFRC, etc.

 

[TheBigA]

KOIT - has had live jocks who demonstrate no personality - just "stationality" for about the last 2 decades.

And KOIT is consistently one of the highest rated stations in the area. The listeners have spoken.

Why don't they voice-track? Maybe they do for a couple shifts. The point is to have the local voices available for sales & promotions.

 

[Thomps2525]

So someone named Scooter Lesley posts on the South Carolina board. With the name "Scooter," he just had to be from Kentucky, Tennessee or the Carolinas.

We're getting way off topic here---which ain't nothin' new---but who remembers the adult contemporary format that aired on KMET in the late 1960s and early '70s? All the announcers were female and they were known as the "KMET FeMs." Wasn't that cute? I'd love to find a KMET aircheck from that era.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

And KOIT is consistently one of the highest rated stations in the area. The listeners have spoken.

Why don't they voice-track? Maybe they do for a couple shifts. The point is to have the local voices available for sales & promotions.

One of my favorite stations was KNX-FM, which was completely voice tracked. The genius of the station was that the people who ran it actually cared about the presentation and would work very hard to ensure that it didn't sound VT because the jocks were allowed to be themselves and not everything was written for them on cards. So particular were they about the overall sound presentation they always made sure each song was either in the same or compatible key as the one that preceded it. Wow!

I hear what your saying about voices for sales and promotions, but KNX-FM didn't need them. Of course you could say they weren't around that long (either time) too. Most great stations, unfortunately, are not.

Now who wants to take a trip to the Odyssey File?

 

[Thomps2525]

I, too, liked KNX-FM. The playlist included Paul Simon, Jim Croce, Gordon Lightfoot, Bonnie Raitt, Richie Havens, Joni Mitchell, James Taylor, Carole King, Kenny Rankin, Poco, Firefall, Fleetwood Mac and the Eagles. XM Satellite Radio has a channel called The Bridge. It initially played 1960s-70s "mellow rock" and the slogan was even "Mellow Rock," same as KNX-FM. The channel has since added a lot of 1980s-90s music. (Sound familiar?)

I just saw K.M.'s post on the previous page: "You have a ways to go before you get that moniker ['Ridiculous']." In Duck Soup, Groucho yells to Chico, "Hey! You wanna be a public nuisance?" Chico asked, "How much does the job pay?" I can see now that being Ridiculous may require me putting in almost as much effort as being a Public Nuisance.