More reasons why radio sucks

[OldiesCat]

Oldies library size

The big hits obvoiusly have an audience, and want to be heard. My comment/question/suggestion is, just cut back a bit and throw in some other "lesser" hits a bit more often. I am not suggesting playing Yellow River by Christie once a week, but those "other" hits can be mixed in a bit more than they are now. Of course we are going to hear "Oh Pretty Woman" still and alot, but does it have to be everyday? If we cut back just a bit, it leaves room for a few other songs to be thrown into the mix. They dont have to be duds or bombs, and I truly do not believe every song that tested well is getting airplay. There are more than 300 good quality time tested hits from the golden age of oldies rock (55-75). There must be some value/assesment system to give to the various songs so the higher ones can get more airplay and the lesser ones not as often. Not as often doesn't mean NEVER! This way the huge burnout factor won't be quite so bad. There has to be a fine line between playing 300 songs to death and saying there are no other good tunes, and just throwing in obscure, lower charted hits. I am just saying what we have now doesn't seem to be working or satisfying the audience, so why not adjust it? "Brown Eyed Girl" is great, but once every 24 hrs? Is that truly what oldies audiences want? My "oh wow" songs may well be your " I hate those", but guess what? Some of those big "popular" tunes can turn into "I am starting to hate this one " too!

Basically, I have said that. There is no excuse to play just the biggest 250, 300 or even only 400 titles on an Oldies station. I also do not subscribe to the "but there are thousands of songs out there" mindset- there are indeed thousands but many of them are not songs most Oldies radio listeners are still interested in hearing. Personally, I think a 60s/70s type Oldies station should be in the 750 or so title range with another 500-700 available "oh-wow!" songs, just tucked in here & there. And not just anything, either- few in the age range give a rat's you-know-what about some lost Osmond Bros. or Partidge Family tune or some of the lousy disco that happened to make the charts but were bogus as hits in the first place. For example, if you're going to play Elton John, it's mainly about Your Song, Goodbye Yellow Brick, Bennie, Candle, Honky Cat, Crock Rock, etc., but there's nothing wrong with occasionally airing Island Girl, Elderberry Wine, Harmony, Pinball Wizard or The Bitch Is Back.

Where some folks get out of control is to propose playing "some of the more OBSCURE songs". Well, they are "obscure" for a reason- listeners don't know them, don't like them if they do and have no place on radio stations playing popular hit songs.

 

[Johnny Morgan]

The board filter took out "H0nky"--that's hilarious!

 

[board_manager]

Johnny,

As Managing Board Editor, even I have to laugh at this one. Unfortunately language filters are imperfect and "h-o-n-k-e-y" seems to be one of those words that definitely need to be reconsidered. As we've seen, filters do have their place as demonstrated by the language of a few users. However, they aren't perfect especially in regard to context. Would you throw out a spell checker just because it couldn't catch the difference between there, their and they're?

I think we can all use a giggle during the stressful holiday season. Thanks for providing one!

 

[TheFonz]

Re: Oldies library size

Is Back.

Where some folks get out of control is to propose playing "some of the more OBSCURE songs". Well, they are "obscure" for a reason- listeners don't know them, don't like them if they do and have no place on radio stations playing popular hit songs.

There's that word OBSCURE again. How do you define it??? Folks who listened to Top 40 radio in its prime would be familiar with many songs that twenty and thirty-somethings growing up with so-called Oldies radio would consider "obscure".

 

[radiofriend1]

Re: Oldies library size

Is Back.

Where some folks get out of control is to propose playing "some of the more OBSCURE songs". Well, they are "obscure" for a reason- listeners don't know them, don't like them if they do and have no place on radio stations playing popular hit songs.

There's that word OBSCURE again. How do you define it??? Folks who listened to Top 40 radio in its prime would be familiar with many songs that twenty and thirty-somethings growing up with so-called Oldies radio would consider "obscure".

that's ez. obscure are songs that hit the top 40 that djs liked but listeners could have cared less about. and care even less about today

 

[TheFonz]

Re: Oldies library size

that's ez. obscure are songs that hit the top 40 that djs liked but listeners could have cared less about. and care even less about today

I guess that you must be talking about "testers" and "consultants"....................the people who put music radio (what's left of it) where it is today.

 

[OldiesCat]

LOL here we go again

I guess that you must be talking about "testers" and "consultants"....................the people who put music radio (what's left of it) where it is today.

Oh, come on, Fonz. Music testing and consultants (who BTW are far less influential today than ever) are not what's produced stale sounding radio. It's GMs and PDs who use those tools as excuses not to have the balls to do interesting, exciting, entertaining, compelling radio.

If you're going to have any sort of library-based station, you must do some music testing, especially if you want to ditch the old-line 300 song playlist mentality. That doesn't mean cold, hard test scores determine exactly every song you play but to play 600-700 (or, in Jack's case, over 1000) titles, you're foolhardy not wanting an idea what hits they want most, which they want some and which they want less often.

Honestly, this "well, ya just look at the charts over the past 40 years and..."-- and, what? I've said this before and I'll say it again: give me $30k to do a music test of 700 songs vs. your approach of the Billboard chart criteria (playing 1000 songs) and, with similar signals, marketing and talent, my station will smoke your station every book.

The Cox approach of 250-300 songs over & over & over with everything pre-fabbed and cookie-cutter, no thank you. The radio geek theory of "play all the stuff that ever charted and do this day in rock & roll history between every other song"? Thanks, no.

But a healthy list with some relief on the powers (who needs 19 hour power rotations anymore?) and some solid lunars woven into the music flow AND personalities talking about things that are relevant and important to their listener's lives? HELL, YEAH.

Whenever I hear a big diss on "music testing" or "consultants", it is THE biggest red flag, indicating a woefully misinformed or behind-the-times radio guy because both direct blame elsewhere. That mindset usually indicates somebody who's bitter or frustrated with their own radio career (or lack thereof) and would rather point the finger of blame elsewhere than accept they've just never really "made it". It's so obvious it's not funny (but is sad).

 

[vibe]

But there certainly must be a number of songs which were huge in one area that weren't that popular in other areas. Are those songs overlooked?

 

[TheFonz]

Re: LOL here we go again

Whenever I hear a big diss on "music testing" or "consultants", it is THE biggest red flag, indicating a woefully misinformed or behind-the-times radio guy because both direct blame elsewhere. That mindset usually indicates somebody who's bitter or frustrated with their own radio career (or lack thereof) and would rather point the finger of blame elsewhere than accept they've just never really "made it". It's so obvious it's not funny (but is sad).

Nope, not a "radio guy". But after reading the Radio-Info home page day after day, I have compassion for those who are. Radio guys are a dying breed.

 

[OldiesCat]

oldies songs

But there certainly must be a number of songs which were huge in one area that weren't that popular in other areas. Are those songs overlooked?

There are a few from region to region but not as many as you might think. "Regional hits" by and large faded out with the Beatles' explosion. Mostly, those songs you're referring to were DJ faves or favours to record companies but almost never have much staying power. I'm sure I'll get several replies with examples, but the bigger question is, "are these songs people STILL care to hear, even occasionally?". My educated guess would be, "not likely" and even the handful here and there aren't enough to increase playlist size so anybody would notice.

Another thing to keep in mind is that since the sixties, Americans have moved and scattered all around the country. That's why, for instance, southern markets have not been so kind to Oldies stations. In Miami or Atlanta, a good percentage of current residents came from elsewhere, so there really are no "regional hits" you should play in those markets unless you want to turn off half your audience. And, I'm here to tell you, there is no bigger turn-off to Oldies listeners than songs they don't know or "fluke hits" (songs that got played a lot but only because they were fed by record company 'incentives' or were just PD or DJ favorites) from their era.