More reasons why radio sucks

[Oldbones]

We went to a 40th high school reunion this summer. The DJ's were about 1/2 our age. The songs they picked were mostly crap, they could have done some quick research and compiled a playlist of the songs that were popular in 1964-66. (sophomore, junior, senior years). So even with an audience that fit into a very small age span, the DJ's STLLL couldn't get it right.

Heh heh. A couple years ago I went with a date to her 35th reunion (1968). Same scenario...20something dj, and the whole time we were there he played exactly ONE song from 1968 (Born To Be Wild). Partial credit for Mony Mony, though he used Billy Idol's version. Lots of 60s/70s songs, but only ONE from the year this class graduated! I mentioned this to my date & she remarked that only I would have noticed that. Sigh.

 

[radiofriend1]

u have to wonder if those in charge of booking the dj specified what music they wanted or just assumed some 24 yr old kid would or should just automatically know what to play

it's up to the person running the show and paying the dj to make sure they get it right.

don't blame the 20-something dj at a 1968 reunion and try to spin that into WHAT'S WRONG WITH RADIO TODAY

 

[vibe]

Far from it; yes radio was built up from the hits; if I remember WABC used to play the #1 song every hour and we loved it! I'm not saying radio sucks, what I'm saying is that some people are tired of hearing the same old songs and crave that mix. And other options exist to supplement radio. I for one listen exclusively to music choice on cable at home but traditional oldies/rock/classic rock/ classic country stations etc in the car. But maybe there aren't enough of listeners who want a real varied mix. But maybe there are...
Marketing IS throwing darts and if a station has 24 hours a day to reach/entertain their audience, then why can't they mix it up for an hour or two each day and see what the response will be? But I'm a just a listener, with no clue as to why certain songs are played or more importantly not (other than ratings).

 

[gr8oldies]

You'd never get a consensus as to what "wider variety" to play, and it's so darn easy for folks to turn off a song they don't like. Your "oh wow" is my "what the hell is that?".

 

[surfdude]

You got that right gr8oldies!!!

90% of the general public is just fine with terestrial radio.

The other 10% don't listen to any radio, have satellite, or
spend all their free time bitching on this board!

I'm programming to the 90%.

 

[radiofriend1]

You got that right gr8oldies!!!

90% of the general public is just fine with terestrial radio.

The other 10% don't listen to any radio, have satellite, or
spend all their free time bitching on this board!

I'm programming to the 90%.

amen 2 U

 

[Tom Wells]

"What the hell is that?" is what I listen to radio FOR. AND it's my "wow". I'm with vibe. I have lotsa records, can play any obscure song at home that I HAVE, but still look for the radio to dig out more gems I've never heard. This is is what radio can do best, introduce us to a new (to us) song we will love. The #1 hits are in my brain-pod, and I enjoy hearing them on the radio sometimes, but if a station is only going to play "safe", tested hits, then I don't need to listen. I am tired of consultants deciding I am narrow minded, musically.
I am a ready for a "ZACK" format, where Benny Goodman is followed by the Ramones, and then by Luciano Pavarotti, then by Flatt and Scruggs, then the Grateful Dead, then by Killdozer, then Mantovani, then a Jerry Clower comedy piece, then Sun Ra, then a movie soundtrack piece, next Cab Calloway. After AP news, I'd like to hear Link Wray, followed by Nancy Sinatra and Lee Greenwood, then
Henry Mancini, then Blue Cheer, next Alvin Cash and the Registers, followed by Bob and Ray, and Karl Orff.

College stations sometimes come close to this.

If radio had grown in this direction, I WOULD have been in the business.
As radio decided to be more business than art, I am glad to have stayed out.

You can't see where you're going when you're looking down at your feet (quarterly results).
This results in walking into walls and/or bumping your head.

Programming to the lowest common denominator makes book, but makes boring radio for active listeners.
I guess the people who are only half-listening are the real audience.
It's so much easier to ignore "Love Child" than "Greasy Chicken".

 

[gr8oldies]

If you want to hemmorhage money, than tghat's the programming you should do. Essentially, you have your own personal jukebox which pleases only you.

 

[Tom Wells]

When I have millions to play with, I will do exactly that. (If I can get my patents into production.)
I again will offer up WEVL Memphis, TN as an example of a station which has such diversity (though not all in one show).
It is entirely volunteer staffed, well maybe they have some paying positions, but the DJs are all volunteer.
Instead of ONE person's jukebox, it is the responsibility of several dozen people.
I am happy that it stands as an example for what radio can be.
In most markets, only a college station could do this.
I sure wish they were in Chicago instead of Memphis.
I see radio as an art, and think the bottom-line mentality is the kiss of death for ANY art, not just radio.

 

[amfmsw]

Tom's made a great point. It's the mindset that playing it safe and "when in doubt, leave it out" makes radio boring.

Also, I think you meant Calvin Cash and The Crawlers: Twine Time

 

[Tom Wells]

Strangely, yes I meant Twine Time, but my album is clearly "Alvin Cash and the Registers".
Seems they used both names....I think the A.C. and the Crawlers was the earlier name they used.


It's Twine.. Time...

Oooooh, Ahhhhhh, Ooooh Ahhhh Ooooh Ahhhh!

Les twine, babeh.

 

[CTListener]

You got that right gr8oldies!!!

90% of the general public is just fine with terestrial radio.

The other 10% don't listen to any radio, have satellite, or
spend all their free time bitching on this board!

I'm programming to the 90%.

Don't any of the oldies geeks here know any people who aren't oldies geeks? How about your dentist? Chances are, he or she has the local "lite" FM playing; mine does, and it seems like I hear Billy Joel's "The Longest Time" or the Righteous Brothers' "Unchained Melody" every time I'm in the chair. I mentioned that once to the hygienist, who was humming along to the Joel song, and she said, "I never thought of that! I guess they do play those songs a lot, now that you mention it." The point is, she LIKES those songs, the ones WRCH has been playing every day for at least the past decade, and doesn't want the station changed. If WRCH were to go to a 1,500-song playlist, chances are she'd go weeks without hearing "The Longest Time" while having to put up with song after song that she's either never heard or heard years ago and didn't care much for then.

I'm an oldies geek too, but I can see why tight playlists work. I'm glad WDRC-FM goes 800 or 900 songs deep and plays "The Family of Man" and "Up the Ladder to the Roof" occasionally instead of "Joy to the World" and "Baby Love" all the time, but I realize that these "deep" oldies evidently work in this market and I'm not going to be hearing everything Three Dog Night or the Supremes ever put out. That's what I have XM for ... and even XM's decades channels generally limit what they play to songs that made the Billboard top 30. Why anyone would still think a huge-playlist approach to a format like oldies -- which depends on existing listener familiarity with 30- to 50-year-old songs -- would get ratings or ad dollars baffles me. DRC-FM uses the slogan "We're the music you grew up with -- and now your kids can, too!" but somehow I don't see the station doing big teen numbers.

 

[gr8oldies]

I've done oldies request shows, and night after night it was "Unchained Melody", "American Pie", "Oh Pretty Woman" and a handful of others. Very rarely, if ever, did we get obscure songs or anyone saying "'m sick of Unchained Melody. Play "Ebb Tide". You really can only play one song at a time, and if I'm playing "Baby I Need Your Lovin" and you're playing "Dominique", I win.

As for the poster that wants to spend millions on a stationtoplay his personal iPod, best of luck.But know you'll have next to no listeners and zero revenue.

 

[Anyacat]

I've done oldies request shows, and night after night it was "Unchained Melody", "American Pie", "Oh Pretty Woman" and a handful of others. Very rarely, if ever, did we get obscure songs or anyone saying "'m sick of Unchained Melody. Play "Ebb Tide". You really can only play one song at a time, and if I'm playing "Baby I Need Your Lovin" and you're playing "Dominique", I win.

As for the poster that wants to spend millions on a stationtoplay his personal iPod, best of luck.But know you'll have next to no listeners and zero revenue.

I'm sorry that your oldies experience and audience is so limited. It is rare to find someone on radio with the interest to play some of the more obscure titles, or even well-known titles little heard these days. And by the way, some of the dentists I know are into anything BUT light crap music--same goes for my physician and my accountant has one of the most extensive country collections I have ever seen. I'm not sure who actually wants to listen to that rhythmic AC garbage, but there must be a lot of people out there because there are plenty of stations playing the same trash. Apparently they buy more beer than I do, so they get to hear whatever they like on terrestrial radio.

However, as someone who likes first generation rock, I have been driven away from radio because there are no oldies stations here in Chicago (Untrue Oldies is a pathetic joke and no substitute for a far better station that met its demise in August). I have the Internet to fall back on and XM. IPods are for people like me who never hear the music they love on terrestrial radio.

 

[davideduardo]

I'm sorry that your oldies experience and audience is so limited. It is rare to find someone on radio with the interest to play some of the more obscure titles, or even well-known titles little heard these days. And by the way, some of the dentists I know are into anything BUT light crap music--same goes for my physician and my accountant has one of the most extensive country collections I have ever seen. I'm not sure who actually wants to listen to that rhythmic AC garbage, but there must be a lot of people out there because there are plenty of stations playing the same trash. Apparently they buy more beer than I do, so they get to hear whatever they like on terrestrial radio.

However, as someone who likes first generation rock, I have been driven away from radio because there are no oldies stations here in Chicago (Untrue Oldies is a pathetic joke and no substitute for a far better station that met its demise in August). I have the Internet to fall back on and XM. IPods are for people like me who never hear the music they love on terrestrial radio.

Salmon and oldies listeners like to swim against the current.

"Obscure" in radio talk is "unfamiliar" to most people. One of those songs you can't quite place, have no memories associated with, or which embarass you to hear today. Whatever the quality, these are songs that generate tune-out.

Oldies listeners do not just listen to oldies. They listen to at least several other stations. So if a song is not a big, fasmiliar favorite, they switch to another station. AC, Country, classic rock, talk, Spanish AC, whatever... but they switch. And that is why "obscure" songs don't get played... they are immensely damaging.

It takes every new programmer a while to grasp a simple fact: variety is not achieved by playing lots of songs. It is achieved by playing only good songs, even if that means playing them over and over and over. I even ahd a case of a battle between two hip hop stations. One played about 90 songs, the other about 180. The one with 90 songs was perceived by nearly 100% of the listeners to that kind of format as being the one with the best variety. The songs were better, not more numberous.

Beyond the playlist issue, oldies has a big problem which is the age of the listeners. In larger markets, most advertising is bought by the numbers, and if a station has mostly over-55 listeners, they are not going to get on the buys.

 

[Anyacat]

I'm sorry that your oldies experience and audience is so limited. It is rare to find someone on radio with the interest to play some of the more obscure titles, or even well-known titles little heard these days. And by the way, some of the dentists I know are into anything BUT light crap music--same goes for my physician and my accountant has one of the most extensive country collections I have ever seen. I'm not sure who actually wants to listen to that rhythmic AC garbage, but there must be a lot of people out there because there are plenty of stations playing the same trash. Apparently they buy more beer than I do, so they get to hear whatever they like on terrestrial radio.

However, as someone who likes first generation rock, I have been driven away from radio because there are no oldies stations here in Chicago (Untrue Oldies is a pathetic joke and no substitute for a far better station that met its demise in August). I have the Internet to fall back on and XM. IPods are for people like me who never hear the music they love on terrestrial radio.

Salmon and oldies listeners like to swim against the current.

"Obscure" in radio talk is "unfamiliar" to most people. One of those songs you can't quite place, have no memories associated with, or which embarass you to hear today. Whatever the quality, these are songs that generate tune-out.

Oldies listeners do not just listen to oldies. They listen to at least several other stations. So if a song is not a big, fasmiliar favorite, they switch to another station. AC, Country, classic rock, talk, Spanish AC, whatever... but they switch. And that is why "obscure" songs don't get played... they are immensely damaging.

It takes every new programmer a while to grasp a simple fact: variety is not achieved by playing lots of songs. It is achieved by playing only good songs, even if that means playing them over and over and over. I even ahd a case of a battle between two hip hop stations. One played about 90 songs, the other about 180. The one with 90 songs was perceived by nearly 100% of the listeners to that kind of format as being the one with the best variety. The songs were better, not more numberous.

Beyond the playlist issue, oldies has a big problem which is the age of the listeners. In larger markets, most advertising is bought by the numbers, and if a station has mostly over-55 listeners, they are not going to get on the buys.

You have nothing but contempt for people who like the music, as well as those listeners who are older than age 55. We understand that. We know that. I wonder why you feel it necessary to spoil all discussions with your mind-numbing and by now familiar response about the genre and your inability to get rich from the format. Just because you don't remember the music does not mean that it does not hold a memory for someone else or that it is not worth listening to. Probably your idea of music begins and ends with disco.

 

[davideduardo]

You have nothing but contempt for people who like the music

You are taking this to a personal level, while I have been trying to explain to you how the business of radio works

I have a respect for every music taste, whether I personally like the tunes myself.

the word "broad" in broadcasting refers, and always has, to reaching large groups of listeners. Advertisers, who make American radio possible, want to reach large groups of potential customers. And advertisers sepcify which groups of people they want to reach, and which they do not care to reach.

As a person, I respect very specialized taste. As a broadcaster, I know that only formats that reach a large group can survive, and those that do not will change. The kind of format you like, whether it be oldies, obscure cuts, or wide playlists, have been proven not to work either in getting listeners or getting the kind of listener advertisers desire. In other words, they are unviable radio formats no matter how good the music may be to some ears.

, as well as those listeners who are older than age 55.

I'd love it if advertisers would pay attention to 55+. But they don't, and they have very good and strong reasons. Were that to change, it would open up countless new format options and expand the listenership to radio as a whole. Everyone would win.

We understand that. We know that.

No, you don't or you would not be damning radio for not playing long lists, obscure oldies and oldies formats in general.

I wonder why you feel it necessary to spoil all discussions with your mind-numbing and by now familiar response about the genre and your inability to get rich from the format.

I do not make money from formats. I make my income from radio broadcasting. And the station owners, together with programmers, determine what formats and mechanics work to have a successful business. If reality disgusts you, please do not blame the messenger.

Just because you don't remember the music does not mean that it does not hold a memory for someone else or that it is not worth listening to. Probably your idea of music begins and ends with disco.

My idea of music begins with the George Szell and the Cleveland Symphony, Gogi Grant, Perry Como, Little Richard and my collection of Buddy Holly and the Crickets records. It includes Cal Tjader, Dave Brubeck, Thelonious Monk and The Sylkie. And it embarks Lucho Bermúdez, Tito Puente, Enrique Guzmán and Los Panchos. I remember listening to Specs Howard, Bill randall, Pete "Mad Daddy" Myers, and, of course, Alan Freed. I can still sing "On top of a Pizz" as well as Biondi ever did, and door chimes remind me of Dan Ingram and WABC. Scott Shannon was our morning guy in Nashville, and Jan Jeffries was a guy I hired out of Mobile to do AC in Birmingham, playing "The Morning After"

And yeah, I liked Patrick Hernandez and Lipps Inc just as well...

Get the idea?

 

[radiofriend1]

You have nothing but contempt for people who like the music

You are taking this to a personal level, while I have been trying to explain to you how the business of radio works

I have a respect for every music taste, whether I personally like the tunes myself.

they don't care how radio works. they are just pissed they can intro the shoop shoop song anymore

not to mention the fact they are scared radio is passing them by.................a legit fear IF all U do is tend to hold on to radio *back in the day*

 

[lash]

Back in the day was the only time radio was done truly right. Fat cats and lazy salespeople who sit and wait for the phone to ring from the agencies, truly aren't trained to sell in radio.

I remember meeting a sales staff that I was taking over for the first time in a large market. I asked the simple question of how many in person sales calls they made each day. The answer was 3! Three? I asked?

They immediately were required to make 10 per day. Some lied, and didn't survive. Others are running stations today. Screw the ad agencies! Sell some radio, and make some money. When agencies call us, due to our ratings. They pay double to get their larger clients on the air.

If you own an AM, do the right format in your market. Fill the format hole. If its talk, do talk. If its oldies, do oldies. Listeners will come if you offer something they can't get elsewhere. Gotta market it, but they will come.

Mr. Gringo needs to remember his days with Scott Shannon in Nashville. When radio was done right. It was innovative and creative.

Now its as boring as watching paint dry! I work everyday to bring the FUN back to radio.

 

[radiofriend1]

lash

good for U for doing your part to make radio fun


but fat cats & lazy sales people have been in radio for 40+ years

and every generation whimsically wishes for *the way radio used to be*

last i checked U can't change time------better we put our energies into looking FWD vs. wishing for the way things WERE