Obscure hits within a soft AC format

[Music Lover]

Here we go again. It's gonna get locked.

Reason why it's probably going to get locked again is because of Avid and David fighting.

 

[passtheword]

If everyone would stay on TOPIC, then it wouldn't have to be locked. I and some of the other members have tried to re-steer the conversation back to the original subject of the thread, but people keep taking it off-topic. What's worse is those who know they are causing discontent on this board/thread jump back into the foray...knowing it will further aggravate the situation. It's obvious we're not going to agree, so let's just "agree to disagree" and move on BACK to the original content of the thread. I'm tired of going through posts reading these unrelated items, such as why Pandora isn't profitable.

 

[Music Lover]

If everyone would stay on TOPIC, then it wouldn't have to be locked. I and some of the other members have tried to re-steer the conversation back to the original subject of the thread, but people keep taking it off-topic. What's worse is those who know they are causing discontent on this board/thread jump back into the foray...knowing it will further aggravate the situation. It's obvious we're not going to agree, so let's just "agree to disagree" and move on BACK to the original content of the thread. I'm tired of going through posts reading these unrelated items, such as why Pandora isn't profitable.

I'm tired of hearing such things too. If I were a radio industry person, that would be of interest but as a listener it is not of interest. If they want to talk about testing, sales, ratings, etc. then they need to do so in a separate thread.

 

[K.M. Richards]

My thought is if a song is obscure it means it doesn't appeal to the mainstream or has limited appeal. If I were to hear something obscure I most likely switch to another station. That doesn't mean obscure artists can't enjoy appeal online.

That's pretty much what us "suits" have been saying all along. On all three counts.

 

[Avid Listener]

Now I will digress to the anecdotal experiences that you so love to disparage. When I first tested songs in an AMT in the late 70's, I was programming a "Hot AC" in a top 15 market, I decided beforehand to give our own ears a test. After all, that was what we were using to program the music. The three of us on the music committee went song by song for the first couple of 50-song pods of music hooks and gave our own scores and averaged them. Then, with the test over, we compared. We were off by 20% or over on more than half of the songs. About 15% of what we were playing were very negative total stiffs.

Are you saying that you test the appeal of entire songs just by listening to the hooks????? Not to the entire song, but just the hooks?? You reduce songs to ony catchy little riff, the hook, and that's what you test on? And you wonder why I claim that your testing is bullsh!t!

If everyone would stay on TOPIC, then it wouldn't have to be locked.

What could be more "on topic" than posting a listing of songs appropriate to the topic? I posted a baker's dozen of such songs, with links to hear the entire songs, not just the hooks, and there hasn't been a single comment on any of them. Not even by anyone who claims to be a music lover. People say they want to talk about the music, but even when there's a post with a lot of music to talk about, no one replies to it. There's just the usual bull from the suits as replies.

 

[Music Lover]

If I were to hear something obscure I most likely switch to another station.

I give the song a chance before I switch to another station. It all depends on whether or not I like the style of the song.

 

[Music Lover]

Speaking of obscure song, a few years ago, I heard "Can't Cry Hard Enough" by the Williams Brothers for the first time. It was not too long after a close relative of mine had passed away. Had me boo hoo-ing.

 

[passtheword]

We have "Can't Cry Hard Enough" in rotation.

 

[Music Lover]

What could be more "on topic" than posting a listing of songs appropriate to the topic? I posted a baker's dozen of such songs, with links to hear the entire songs, not just the hooks, and there hasn't been a single comment on any of them. Not even by anyone who claims to be a music lover. People say they want to talk about the music, but even when there's a post with a lot of music to talk about, no one replies to it. There's just the usual bull from the suits as replies.

Of your list, I've heard Sailing by Christopher Cross.

 

[passtheword]

I give the song a chance before I switch to another station. It all depends on whether or not I like the style of the song.

Let's face it. People tune out of stations for a variety of reasons. You can't please 100% of the listeners 100% of the time. Sometimes it's not a question of whether the song is obscure or a hit...it's just personal taste. Case in point: "I would Walk 500 Miles" by the Proclaimers. That was a fairly big hit, but I absolutely loathe that song, so even when listening to a station I enjoy, I would bail on that particular song. However, I would return to listen to the station after enough time had elapsed and it was finished playing. There are many other songs I don't care for...even ones that I choose to air on my station...just because those particular tracks are played by other soft AC stations and those songs musically "fit" the format. For example, "American Pie" by Don McLean. I don't really like the song (it tends to wear on my nerves after a while, lol), but I do realize that many people enjoy that song. Since other similarly-formatted stations, broadcast or otherwise, are airing the song and musically it wouldn't stand out within a soft AC format, I incorporate it into the playlist.

 

[Music Lover]

Limahl - Never Ending Story

Tiffany - All This Time
Tiffany - Hold An Old Friend's Hand

Debbie Gibson - No More Rhyme

New Kids on the Block:
Please Don't Go Girl
I'll Be Loving You Forever
Didn't I Blow Your Mind
This One's For The Children
Let's Try It Again
If You Go Away

Taking me back to my childhood.

 

[Music Lover]

Let's face it. People tune out of stations for a variety of reasons. You can't please 100% of the listeners 100% of the time. Sometimes it's not a question of whether the song is obscure or a hit...it's just personal taste. Case in point: "I would Walk 500 Miles" by the Proclaimers. That was a fairly big hit, but I absolutely loathe that song, so even when listening to a station I enjoy, I would bail on that particular song. However, I would return to listen to the station after enough time had elapsed and it was finished playing.

Sometimes I turn the volume all the way down until enough time has elapsed.

Sometimes I pop in a CD.

 

[davideduardo]

Are you saying that you test the appeal of entire songs just by listening to the hooks????? Not to the entire song, but just the hooks?? You reduce songs to ony catchy little riff, the hook, and that's what you test on? And you wonder why I claim that your testing is bullsh!t!

Here is proof that you are wrong.

We (meaning the radio industry) now use online methods as well as individually administered systems at a research site to test songs. People are given a large piece of a song... larger than what Amazon uses as a song sampler clip. The average time a test participant spends on the song is 6 seconds. Many songs get final responses in 3, 4 and 5 seconds and few exceed 8 seconds.

People know that they are only listening to enough of a song to be able to tell us if they would "like to hear it on the radio today". If you play the whole song, they get fidgety after the first 5 or 10 songs, as they get extremely bored. If they like the song, they already know that. And if they do not, they would be put through excruciating grief having to hear the whole thing.

We also see via MScores that when listeners don't like a song, they are gone almost instantly... 5 to 10 seconds.

In any case, we do not use music tests, call out or other methods to test new songs (or any kind of previously not exposed songs). A song has to be played somewhere from 100 to 125 times on the air for the average regular listener to decide whether they like it or not. Those songs are tested only after they have adequate exposure, generally by callout (which can, in fact, be Internet based and not involve the phone for the test). The basis for the number of plays prior to testing is rooted in average time listening and extensive studies in the behavioural sciences regarding how songs move from the curiosity stage to the emotional stage.

We use hooks for the participant's convenience in evaluating songs they already know / have heard.

What could be more "on topic" than posting a listing of songs appropriate to the topic? I posted a baker's dozen of such songs, with links to hear the entire songs, not just the hooks, and there hasn't been a single comment on any of them. Not even by anyone who claims to be a music lover. People say they want to talk about the music, but even when there's a post with a lot of music to talk about, no one replies to it. There's just the usual bull from the suits as replies.

From my perspective, the songs are unknown. As such, they would only go on stations that play current music and would have to be vetted in whatever each station's process is for making new playlist adds.

 

[Avid Listener]

Of your list, I've heard Sailing by Christopher Cross.

But did you ever hear the cover version sung by Simon Zimmer? Besides, this wasn't about compiling a list of songs people have heard of. It's about songs that you like, or at least that you can hear that it fits the Adult Contemporary genre of music? Did you listen to them? Did you, as someone who is a self-professed fan of Soft AC music, like what you heard, even if you were hearing it for the first time?

Sometimes I turn the volume all the way down until enough time has elapsed.

Sometimes I pop in a CD.

Which is basically what I've been saying for a long time. People only switch to an alternative music source, be it another radio station, or an alternative source of music like a CD, if they have such an alternative available to them. Otherwise, they turn the radio off, or down, or suffer through it. If there is only one Soft SC radio station available within range of the radio you're listening to, and you want to hear Soft AC music, then changing the station isn't an option.

 

[Avid Listener]

Here is proof that you are wrong.

We (meaning the radio industry) now use online methods as well as individually administered systems at a research site to test songs. People are given a large piece of a song... larger than what Amazon uses as a song sampler clip. The average time a test participant spends on the song is 6 seconds. Many songs get final responses in 3, 4 and 5 seconds and few exceed 8 seconds.

People know that they are only listening to enough of a song to be able to tell us if they would "like to hear it on the radio today". If you play the whole song, they get fidgety after the first 5 or 10 songs, as they get extremely bored. If they like the song, they already know that. And if they do not, they would be put through excruciating grief having to hear the whole thing.

We also see via MScores that when listeners don't like a song, they are gone almost instantly... 5 to 10 seconds.

In any case, we do not use music tests, call out or other methods to test new songs (or any kind of previously not exposed songs). A song has to be played somewhere from 100 to 125 times on the air for the average regular listener to decide whether they like it or not. Those songs are tested only after they have adequate exposure, generally by callout (which can, in fact, be Internet based and not involve the phone for the test). The basis for the number of plays prior to testing is rooted in average time listening and extensive studies in the behavioural sciences regarding how songs move from the curiosity stage to the emotional stage.

We use hooks for the participant's convenience in evaluating songs they already know / have heard.

From my perspective, the songs are unknown. As such, they would only go on stations that play current music and would have to be vetted in whatever each station's process is for making new playlist adds.

That actually proves my point, that your testing methods are bogus, and designed to simply maintain the status quo and make you suits look good.

 

[K.M. Richards]

And here we have the proof that, because the explanation does not conform with Avid's personal view of "the way things should be", said explanation is rejected, despite the fact that David's explanation contains the qualifying facts that validate the process.

I will boldface said facts and let all of you decide.

Here is proof that you are wrong.

We (meaning the radio industry) now use online methods as well as individually administered systems at a research site to test songs. People are given a large piece of a song... larger than what Amazon uses as a song sampler clip. The average time a test participant spends on the song is 6 seconds. Many songs get final responses in 3, 4 and 5 seconds and few exceed 8 seconds.

People know that they are only listening to enough of a song to be able to tell us if they would "like to hear it on the radio today". If you play the whole song, they get fidgety after the first 5 or 10 songs, as they get extremely bored. If they like the song, they already know that. And if they do not, they would be put through excruciating grief having to hear the whole thing.

We also see via MScores that when listeners don't like a song, they are gone almost instantly... 5 to 10 seconds.

In any case, we do not use music tests, call out or other methods to test new songs (or any kind of previously not exposed songs). A song has to be played somewhere from 100 to 125 times on the air for the average regular listener to decide whether they like it or not. Those songs are tested only after they have adequate exposure, generally by callout (which can, in fact, be Internet based and not involve the phone for the test). The basis for the number of plays prior to testing is rooted in average time listening and extensive studies in the behavioural sciences regarding how songs move from the curiosity stage to the emotional stage.

We use hooks for the participant's convenience in evaluating songs they already know / have heard.



From my perspective, the songs are unknown. As such, they would only go on stations that play current music and would have to be vetted in whatever each station's process is for making new playlist adds.

That actually proves my point, that your testing methods are bogus, and designed to simply maintain the status quo and make you suits look good.

 

[Avid Listener]

And here we have the proof that, because the explanation does not conform with Avid's personal view of "the way things should be", said explanation is rejected, despite the fact that David's explanation contains the qualifying facts that validate the process.

I will boldface said facts and let all of you decide.

My point is that you only test the same old songs over and over. You're so damn committed to never expanding the playlists of stations that play musical genres other than "today's hits" that you never, ever even bother testing deep cuts or songs that the record labels' promo suits never pushed to see if there is good music out there to use to expand playlists and to attract listeners who aren't just nostalgia freaks. You claim that stations that use deep cut playlists always fail, but you suits never, ever test deep cuts to see if they'll work. It also proves you only recruit test subjects with microscopic attention spans, which give a real broad spectrum range of responses.

 

[davideduardo]

My point is that you only test the same old songs over and over.

That's not so. Every music test includes a big selection of "what if" songs that might possibly fit and pass. I just approved a list of 1,338 songs for a classic hits station that has a playlist of about 750. That's almost 600 songs the station is not playing. Any that pass among all segments of the station core will be put immediately on the air.

But I have told you how this works over and over. You don't listen.

You're so damn committed to never expanding the playlists of stations that play musical genres other than "today's hits" that you never, ever even bother testing deep cuts or songs that the record labels' promo suits never pushed to see if there is good music out there to use to expand playlists and to attract listeners who aren't just nostalgia freaks.

Gold based stations test past hits to see if they are still hits. Gold based stations don't play unfamiliar music or deep cuts that don't test because, going all the way back to the 70's we saw that this is a kiss of absolute certain death. We just do not commit radio suicide because we are smarter than you think we are.

Current based stations test adequately exposed currents and recurrents and recent throwbacks. We have enough songs that are getting adequate promotion in all other forms of media to pick our new adds from (whether we are country, pop, CHR, Hot AC, Urban, Hurban, Regional Mexican or any other current based format) to not "go it alone" on songs that will have no other exposure and which may get us a C&D from the label.

You claim that stations that use deep cut playlists always fail, but you suits never, ever test deep cuts to see if they'll work.

We test lots of cuts that have had some degree of exposure. But, going back to Lee Abrams and Superstars in the 70's, we find that such songs are unknown and not liked by any listeners other than the supèr-fans of the specific artist. That's how Abrams killed the progressive rockers... he killed all the unfamiliar deep cuts and off the wall stuff.

It also proves you only recruit test subjects with microscopic attention spans, which give a real broad spectrum range of responses.

We recruit test subjects who listen to our kind of station for music. We do not test non-listeners, people out of our demo, very light listeners, etc. We are not stocking a record store... we are programming radio stations to a consensus appeal. Oh, and the people are wll rewarded for participating in tests and those that meet the recruit specs are very anxious to participate.

 

[semoochie]

You're not wrong, but there needs to be some differentiation here. Adult contemporary artists, who Semoochie says do not sell because they don't show up on the Hot 100, in fact do sell, and plenty. But they do not, as a rule, sell singles. Their sales are in albums, which oddly pairs them with the metal bands and hardcore rappers who may also not get a great deal of radio play or singles sales.

This is nothing new; in the 60's, performers like Herb Alpert or Julie London sold millions of LPS without making much of a dent in the singles charts. And years later you had the phenomenon of Slim Whitman, Zamfir, etc. selling carloads of albums by direct mail order without even going through the conventional sales system.

I did not say that Adult Contemporary artists do not sell because they don't show up on the Hot 100. I was referring to a specific song and responding to a specific statement that "People once bought the record.", which I read to say that it was a hit, at the time. Regarding one poster's comment that when you buy an album, you buy all the songs on the album, all I can say is that The Beatles released a very popular album, but I would wager that absolutely no one bought it because it contained "Her Majesty"!

 

[K.M. Richards]

My point is that you only test the same old songs over and over.

And before that ... the post I responded to ... your point was that only using the hooks was the problem.

As soon as we answer one of your stock complaints, you switch to another. And then switch back again because the answer we gave won't fit both.

You flip-flop faster than a politician trying to raise campaign funds from supporters on both sides of an issue.