Non-Hits you couldn't live without

[TheBigA]

"and there's no shortage of them to play."

for the 4,000,000,000,000 time.

There's a famous quote attributed to James Taylor, but I'm sure he wasn't the first person to say it. He was asked how he was able to sing the same songs over and over again in his shows for over 40 years. He said "They may be the same songs, but the people sitting in the audience change, and it's their faces and reactions that make the songs different."

With radio, the audience changes too. They go through different stages of life. New people come into a format that might not be familiar with the war horses. To others, those songs are the fabric of their lives. People tune in to the radio station at all times of the day, and may only stay for a short time, so you need to hit them with your best shot. If you go to a James Taylor concert, and he doesn't do "How Sweet It Is" or "Fire & Rain," people will be disappointed, regardless of how often he's performed it. He may work in something obscure or something new, but that's often when people head to the bathroom or for a beer. You can't do that on the radio.

I may have added this before your comment, but there are ways to freshen up a classic format, and it comes with how you manage those songs. How you group them, rotate them, and present them are all part of the process. No problem doing a specialty show where you throw in something they won't expect, but it should go to a daypart where it won't hurt you. Then promote it so they know where to find it.

 

[TheBigA]

listen to rich brothers radio they blend the big hits with the lower 40 beautifully............then everybodys happy.

If you're refering to RichBroRadio.com, it may be an artistic success, but the audience is too small to be counted using web traffic trackers. That may be OK on the internet, but it costs a lot of money to run transmitters and towers.

 

[oldies76]

they blend the big hits with the lower 40 beautifully............then everybodys happy.

It's how radio should be, period. I listen to a local AM oldies station now, with big variety and selection. FM classics hits (locally) is just getting way too stale and very limited in song selection, these days. The only FM that makes the cut, would be CBS-FM online.

 

[Tom Wells]

I'll add my vote for getting the obscure stuff out there while still satisfying the people who only recognize songs that spent a week o 2 at number 1. But that's just like favoring "balancing the budget" and "satisfying all desires".
Not enough time in this case. If you have to satisfy the listener who is only 20, let's say, but wishes to hear Satisfaction by the Rolling Stones once every other day, you are going to annoy your older but more engaged listener, who would even gladly listen to some sidelight info about the obscure MC5 track you are about to play.
So you really do have to decide if you're just gonna take the beaten path to advertisers, cume and money,
or have faith in your ideas and decisions, and let time and the market ( and your available audience) prove whether there's
any real value there.

I'm just tired of so much "least-common-denominator radio that I WECLOME hearing songs I don't know.


It reminds me of french fries...everyone "knows" you can't have real, fresh cut, twice fried proper french fries
at fast food places....It costs too much in the long run. Just use frozen.

But it's not the same at all. In places where they DO make fresh real french fries, the customers won't go
anywhere else. There's a place near here that does fresh cut french fries in DUCK fat one or two days a week,
and the line outside the place is unbeleivable. That does not mean it is a model that can be repeated endlessly,
but that properly located, there are enough customers for any model.

 

[Talk_Dude]

People who listen to your station that's playing vintage music, especially classic rock, listen because they like the way classic rock sounds. They aren't just listening for familiar hits like fans of teenybopper stuff on the pop-based oldies stations.

I don't know if you can make that generalization. I was at a classic jazz station at one time and if we didn't stick to the hits, the listeners screamed. Duke, Count, and the Prez. Stick to the basics. I did some time at a classical radio station. Whenever we diverged from what we called the war-horses, we got killed by the listeners. We tried modern 20th century stuff, but they wanted Beethovan and Mozart. And nothing too obscure. I was also an oldies DJ and tried to mix in songs that weren't solid hits for the "oh wow" factor, and it became more of a tune out factor.

You totally missed my point. I was talking about songs, and you respond by talking about artists. I'm not talking about picking obscure artists, I'm talking about lesser known cuts. On your jazz station, there had to be more cuts that Duke Ellington or Count Basie recorded on albums than the few you played.

And, I specifically said that what I was talking about wouldn't work on an oldies station, so you tell me that what I suggested wouldn't work on an oldies station. Well, duh!

 

[Talk_Dude]

I just went through the exercise of tallying up all the time I spend listening to radio and to radio alternatives, like my MP3 Player. Except for certain, specific programs on NPR, I find that there isn't a station on the air that I will spend more than 10 or 15 minutes listening to, and most of them I change the station as soon as I hear what song they're playing when I turn them on. Sometimes, I turn them off because it's a song I never liked, but usually my comment to myself when I turn a station off is, "Oh no! Not that again!".

Based on what I hear being played in other cars near me when I hit a red light, I suspect that a lot of people have been totally chased away from radio by ultra-tight playlists. I know I have. I suspect that's the reason why so few people seem to be listening to the radio in their cars.

 

[Tom Wells]

I just went through the exercise of tallying up all the time I spend listening to radio and to radio alternatives, like my MP3 Player. Except for certain, specific programs on NPR, I find that there isn't a station on the air that I will spend more than 10 or 15 minutes listening to, and most of them I change the station as soon as I hear what song they're playing when I turn them on. Sometimes, I turn them off because it's a song I never liked, but usually my comment to myself when I turn a station off is, "Oh no! Not that again!".

Based on what I hear being played in other cars near me when I hit a red light, I suspect that a lot of people have been totally chased away from radio by ultra-tight playlists. I know I have. I suspect that's the reason why so few people seem to be listening to the radio in their cars.

I could have written this. Minor difference in that NPR doesn't captivate me enough to check anymore.

 

[TheBigA]

I was talking about songs, and you respond by talking about artists. I'm not talking about picking obscure artists, I'm talking about lesser known cuts.

And I think if you re-read my post, you'll see I addressed that in the next paragraph. We didn't play obscure Ellington or Basie except in a specialty show. We didn't play obscure Mozart (and there's lots of it), we didn't play obscure George Jones or Merle Haggard. We played Okie From Muskogee and Mama Tried. Back in the 90s, Merle tried to do a tour where he dropped all the war horses from his show, and it killed his touring career. He went from playing arenas to small clubs overnight.

NPR does the "cooler than the room" thing with its music in news shows. But they don't play the full track, just a verse and chorus. If you want the complete song, you need to go to their web site. I'd encourage commercial stations to do the same thing. Obscure music serves a very small segment of the audience, and they often own all the music already, so playing that music doesn't attract new P1s.

Based on what I hear being played in other cars near me when I hit a red light, I suspect that a lot of people have been totally chased away from radio by ultra-tight playlists.

You & I must live in a different neighborhood. If we're going to draw on anecdotal experience, I've checked iPod lists, and tracked publishing data from BMI and ASCAP and it's clear that the public loves the war horses. I've interviewed artists about the audience response, and they applaude louder for war horses than the obscure stuff. But I'll also add that the tightness of the playlist is directly proportional to the format and the demos of the audience. Playlists aren't ultra tight in all formats. But one consistent thing I see is that the minute you diverge from the hits, the audience goes away. You can see it very clearly in PPM.

People want to hear what they want to hear WHEN they want to hear it. They don't want to pay for it, and they hate interruptions in the music. Those are the basic rules of music programming. If you're not playing the listener's favorite song the moment they tune in, you lost them. That's what's hurting radio, not the size of the playlists.

 

[Talk_Dude]

NPR does the "cooler than the room" thing with its music in news shows. But they don't play the full track, just a verse and chorus.

I don't listen to NPR for music. I listen to shows like Fresh Air and Car Talk because I enjoy them. I do listen to Prairie Home Companion for the music, but that's a totally different thing.

 

[TheBigA]

Go to www.nprmusic.org

 

[Talk_Dude]

Go to www.nprmusic.org

Been there, done that. Wasn't impressed.

 

[hornet61]

listen to rich brothers radio they blend the big hits with the lower 40 beautifully............then everybodys happy.

If you're refering to RichBroRadio.com, it may be an artistic success, but the audience is too small to be counted using web traffic trackers. That may be OK on the internet, but it costs a lot of money to run transmitters and towers.

talking programming only...net and radio apples and oranges cost wise

 

[TheBigA]

talking programming only...net and radio apples and oranges cost wise

Programming is directly proportional to costs. Radio with low cost can afford to take more programming risks.

 

[hornet61]

talking programming only...net and radio apples and oranges cost wise

Programming is directly proportional to costs. Radio with low cost can afford to take more programming risks.

Commercial Radio Programming IMO is directly proportional to the PD and Consultant. It has become cookie-cutter programming whether it K-Earth(most boring station in America) in LA or KKKK in market 133. Commercial Radio they take no risks, on the net they take no prisoners. Hey commercial radio is driven by sales so they can't take many risks, thats why again I say, I'll stick to the better stations on the net.

 

[TheBigA]

Commercial Radio Programming IMO is directly proportional to the PD and Consultant.

That may be your opinion, but it's all about the money. If they could make more money with it, FM stations would have unlimited playlists playing 13 Floor Elevators and Spooky Tooth. At some point, the stations on the net will become just like FM. It's inevitable.

 

[Talk_Dude]

At some point, the stations on the net will become just like FM. It's inevitable.

That'll never happen. For one thing, the barriers to entry are so small on the net that there will always be the potential for someone starting a new station. For another, any station one can only listen to on a computer will never catch on the way a station one can listen to in one's car will. When I'm in my car, my only choices for entertainment while driving is terrestrial radio, satellite radio, or my own collection of songs. I bought an FM adapter that plugs into my cigarette lighter and lets me connect either my MP3 player or a simple thumb drive full of MP3's and plays them on an empty FM frequency. It cost me less than $6 from a vendor on eBay.

When I'm at home, my options open up to include television, the internet, my own CD player, and even reading a book! I've attempted to listen to various internet radio stations, but usually I end up turning them off and just loading my own choice of songs into the media player. With that kind of competition, internet stations are, I believe, doomed to be nothing but "vanity" operations done by radio wannabes.

 

[TheBigA]

That'll never happen. For one thing, the barriers to entry are so small on the net that there will always be the potential for someone starting a new station.

How about the royalties? THat's become a huge barrier and already lots of hobby internet stations have shut down because of them. SoundExchange is telling internet owners to improve monetization so they can collect their royalty.

But the fact of the matter is there are small terrestrial radio stations that play wide ranges of music now. Just no one listens because they sound amateurish and they have no money to publicize what they do. That's a bigger problem with the internet. While you can scan a radio dial to find music you like, surfing the net with an infinite dial is next to impossible.

Listening to one's personal collection has always been an option since cassettes and 8-tracks.

 

[Talk_Dude]

But the fact of the matter is there are small terrestrial radio stations that play wide ranges of music now. Just no one listens because they sound amateurish and they have no money to publicize what they do. That's a bigger problem with the internet. While you can scan a radio dial to find music you like, surfing the net with an infinite dial is next to impossible.

Listening to one's personal collection has always been an option since cassettes and 8-tracks.

As long as the songs were recorded in decent recording studios and the instruments were in tune, how can music sound "amateurish", unless it's something like punk rock that deliberately attempts to sound amateurish?

And getting songs to play on one's own system has never been easier or cheaper than it is today.

 

[TheBigA]

As long as the songs were recorded in decent recording studios and the instruments were in tune, how can music sound "amateurish",

I'm talking about the radio stations, not the music they play. Regardless of the reason, my point is there are stations with large and diverse playlists, and they don't get a lot of listenership.

 

[Talk_Dude]

As long as the songs were recorded in decent recording studios and the instruments were in tune, how can music sound "amateurish",

I'm talking about the radio stations, not the music they play. Regardless of the reason, my point is there are stations with large and diverse playlists, and they don't get a lot of listenership.

I'm not surprised. I wouldn't listen to a station with a "diverse" playlist. There's nothing so annoying as stations that mix different musical genres together into a hodge-podge. It ends up sounding like just noise.

I've been referring to stations that have a deep playlist within a given genre, not the "variety" stations that sound like a train wreck. I remember when the best classic rock station in Pittsburgh switched to "Bob". I was listening to them and they segued from a classic rock song to "Tell Me Something Good" by Rufus, with Chaka Khan. It was the musical equivalent of pickles and ice cream. I never listened to that station again, except when the other classic rock station in town came to its daily airing of "LaGrange" by ZZ Top and everyone in the office agreed it was time to change the station.