Per R & R

[Radio_Realist]

"What I'd like to see is maybe on an AC station, you play one song an hour that's an album cut (provided it's not 7 friggin' minutes long, which would probably rule out anything Harry Chapin did), and treat it like a special feature of the hour. A liner right before it like "Today's Hits and Yesterday's Favorites...and those in between!" Then go to the song."

Sounds like a great idea, as long as it wasn't some far out "off-beat" song that doesn't fit the rest of the music you play.

 

[kenhawk1160]

Sounds like a great idea, as long as it wasn't some far out "off-beat" song that doesn't fit the rest of the music you play.

Oh, naturally! It would have to fit the format. To do something totally out of the loop would be just plain stupid. Let's just say in this case we're straddling the loop, so to speak.

 

[frothingslosh]

Why does every thread wind up with the same tired rant from Realist?

Because he cannot win on the facts, so he launches personal attacks, that's why. I offer detailed rebuttals, and he changes his arguments.

I must admit, however, that it's a great joy to watch him explode. He does it so reliably! Only John Cleese in Fawlty Towers could melt down so thoroughly on such a regular basis.

Bravo, Mr. Realist! You have brought us great entertainment once again!

 

[Radio_Realist]

"I offer detailed rebuttals"

Bullocks!

You offer rebuttals to things I never said. You rebut my arguments by re-stating them as something I never said, and then you refute your misquoting of me.

"off-beat" My arse!

 

[frothingslosh]

"I offer detailed rebuttals"

Bullocks!

You offer rebuttals to things I never said. You rebut my arguments by re-stating them as something I never said, and then you refute your misquoting of me.

"off-beat" My arse!

It's "bollocks," mate. Not sure what "bullocks" are.

You make so many arguments, Mr. Realist, and they change so frequently, that it's difficult to know to which I've responded.

For instance, you dragged "live and local" announcers into the argument in one of your two very, very lengthy rebuttals. When did I mention "live and local" announcers during this discussion? I did not.

You asked about the top-selling records. I provided that information. You could not be bothered to look at the facts.

I'll admit that maybe I reduced one of your many different arguments incorrectly, and I apologise ...

... but in the future, perhaps you'd like to make one point and stick to it? There's a good lad.

In any event, I fear "life is too short" to continue trying to discuss anything reasonably with you. Feel free to have the last word, if you like.

 

[Radio_Realist]

"When did I mention "live and local" announcers during this discussion? I did not."

This is not a two-way conversation between you and me, it is an open forum discussion with many participants. Live and local announcers have been mentioned often over the course of this open forum discussion. If you can't be bothered reading all of the posts, that's your problem, not mine.

"You asked about the top-selling records. I provided that information."

I asked as part of a discussion about stations that play vintage music, such as oldies or classic rock. You answered with non-sequiteur information about current artists from the world of CHR. Again, if you can't be bothered reading all the posts from everyone, that's your problem, not mine.

[EDIT]

[EDIT-personal attack.]

 

[cingram]

Oh, come on, mods, leave the personal attacks in. It makes things more lively.

And for Pete's sake, he's attacking somebody named Sir Reginald Frothingslosh.

THAT I want to see.

 

[cingram]

P.S.

"The vast majority of radio listeners apparently want to hear the songs they like, and only the songs they like, and not 'other cuts'."

That is absoilutely and indisputably right.

 

[Radio_Realist]

"That is absoilutely and indisputably right."

That isn't what is under dispute. What is being disputed is whether or not people only like songs that they have heard many, many times before or whether they will also like songs that they haven't heard as often that sound similar to the songs that they are familiar with.

You are contending (so it would appear) that the only thing that makes people like a song is extreme familiarity. If it doesn't tickle the nostalgia button, then no one will like a particular song. I am contending that people like songs based on how the songs sound, and even if they are hearing a song for the very first time, there is an excellent chance that they will like that song if it sounds similar to other songs that they already like.

People ask why I keep beating a dead horse after so-called "experts" tell me otherwise. Yet the rebuttals that I keep getting usually have nothing to do with what I've said. Clark, you say that it is "absoilutely and indisputably right" that radio listeners want to hear the songs that they like. I've never said that they did not "absoilutely and indisputably" want to hear the songs that they like. I'm saying that they will "absoilutely and indisputably" like other songs that sound stylistically similar to songs that they like because they are already familiar with them.

Understand, this entire discussion is about stations that play "vintage" music formats like oldies or classic rock. But if stations that play new music, like CHR stations, can succeed on introducing new songs into their playlists constantly, why can't a station that plays vintage songs also introduce "new" vintage songs the same way that CHR stations do?

Is anyone claiming that all of the people who listen to vintage music formats are so set in their ways that they can't enjoy a good-sounding song in the style of the songs that they are familiar with?

And, since I have to keep repeating this so someone won't twist it into claiming that I'm advocating playing nothing but "fresh" vintage songs, I'm only talking about maybe one such song every few hours or so. I'm not advocating fresh vintage songs wall-to-wall, so I'd appreciate it if no one attempts to befute what I'm saying by putting those words in my mouth (again).

"only the songs they like"

Do you really believe that whether or not people "like" a song is a black/white, no/no-go issue? That people either absolutely love a song or totally and completely hate it? Do you really believe that there are not degrees of how much someone likes any given song, with some songs as absolute favorites they like hearing often and other songs that they like to hear every now and then but not too often? Do you honestly believe that no one within the range of your station's transmitters can rank the order in which they like a list of songs on a ten-point scale? Are you really saying that to everyone in your audience, every song that was ever recorded would either rate as a 10 or a 1, with no songs ever being ranked at any level in between?

 

[cingram]

Darn, I really don't want to get tangled up in this argument again, but I'll tackle the last paragraph.

"Do you really believe that whether or not people "like" a song is a black/white, no/no-go issue?"

Essentially, yes. They either want to hear the song, or they don't.

"That people either absolutely love a song or totally and completely hate it?"

No. That's a different question. See below.

"Do you really believe that there are not degrees of how much someone likes any given song, with some songs as absolute favorites they like hearing often and other songs that they like to hear every now and then but not too often?"

"Do you honestly believe that no one within the range of your station's transmitters can rank the order in which they like a list of songs on a ten-point scale? Are you really saying that to everyone in your audience, every song that was ever recorded would either rate as a 10 or a 1, with no songs ever being ranked at any level in between?"

Those are good questions. Sure, there are degrees.

If you do music research, you will find that in the aggregate, the music tested will fall into one of the following categories:

1. Songs that are loved
2. Songs that are liked, but not loved
3. Songs that are neutral (don't care)
4. Songs that are disliked or hated
5. Songs that are unfamiliar

Beyond that, you have to make value judgments. If a song is a novelty (even if its score is high), you wouldn't want to play it too often; it won't hold up to the exposure. And if a song doesn't fit the format (one time I saw "Respect" by Aretha Franklin rank #3 in a CHR test) you have to make the call on that, too.

On the other point, I don't think there's such a thing as "fresh vintage songs." They may exist for an individual, and as a music consumer, I may listen to an old album and find and enjoy them. But for radio, they might as well not exist. By definition, they're vintage, and the moment has passed. No station(s) are going to try to bring them back from oblivion...and I don't think it would do them any good if they did.

 

[Parttimer]

The only place for niche music is niche formats, which now will proliferate on satellite and HD2, to the delight of tens of listeners.

 

[Boss Radio]

Going way back to when WTAE was a music station, their research method offered an array of choices for each song.

I can't recall them exactly, but it was along the lines of "don't know it," "can't stand it," "take it or leave it," "used to like it but I'm tired of it now," "like it," and "it's one my favorites."

So even 30 years ago it wasn't a black and white, yes/no, pass/fail issue.

 

[kenhawk1160]

The only place for niche music is niche formats, which now will proliferate on satellite and HD2, to the delight of tens of listeners.

In major market radio, yes. Small market radio, I would have to disagree with you. Niche programming has actually proliferated, if not thrived, outside of the city.

 

[Boss Radio]

The only place for niche music is niche formats, which now will proliferate on satellite and HD2, to the delight of tens of listeners.

In major market radio, yes. Small market radio, I would have to disagree with you. Niche programming has actually proliferated, if not thrived, outside of the city.

Also to the delight of tens of listeners.

 

[Radio_Realist]

"No. That's a different question. See below."

Actually, it's the exact same question, phrased a little differently.

If you do music research, you will find that in the aggregate, the music tested will fall into one of the following categories:

1. Songs that are loved
2. Songs that are liked, but not loved
3. Songs that are neutral (don't care)
4. Songs that are disliked or hated
5. Songs that are unfamiliar

So, what changes a song that gets a #5 on the list to one of the other four? Every song starts out as a #5 the first time its played. If new songs never got introduced, we'd all still be listening to nothing by Glenn Miller 78's.

"Beyond that, you have to make value judgments."

And that's what I've been arguing for in post after post after post, and getting mocked about as a reply.

"But for radio, they might as well not exist. By definition, they're vintage, and the moment has passed. No station(s) are going to try to bring them back from oblivion...and I don't think it would do them any good if they did."

I take it you don't listen to "The Electric Lunch" on the #1 station in Pittsburgh, do you? Or to the 4:00 Deep Cuts on the same station.

As for their moment passing, why do people who like the vintage sound of 50's style lounge singers accept lounge-style songs by people like Harry Connick, Jr., Michael Buble, and even Rod Stewart and Cindy Lauper that they are hearing for the first time? Why is it the people who like lounge-style music of the 50's can accept great sounding new recordings in the style of their favorite music, but people a little bit younger, who like songs in the styles of the 60's or 70's won't accept hearing songs in that musical style that they haven't heard before?

Why is it that those of us who liked oldies when they were new (like you've said about yourself) wouldn't like hearing new songs in that same style today? Obviously, you liked hearing new songs when they were first introduced back on Groovy QV, right? When you were listening to Groovy QV back in the day, did you change the station when they played a new Top 40 song? If you still like that kind of music, why would you change the station if you heard a song that fit right in with the ones you knew, but that you were hearing for the first time? Did you just get old and set in your ways? Didn't you like hearing new songs back in the days of Groovy QV that fit right in with the other songs they played? If you liked hearing new songs that fit in with the rest of the Top 40 back in the days of Groovy QV, why would you not like hearing new (or at least, new to your ears) songs that fit in with the rest of the oldies being played today?

And please note, I'm not trying to be obtuse about this, but I'm asking why, not to simply be told "that's just the way it is". If that is the way it is, there must be a reason why it's the way it is. Why do people who used to be excited about hearing songs for the first time back in the day now switch the station when they hear songs for the first time?

 

[kenhawk1160]

Also to the delight of tens of listeners.

Uh huh. And if there WERE indeed "tens of listeners", we would not be doing as well financially as we are. Niche programming isn't for everyone...unless you REALLY know how to sell it.

 

[kenhawk1160]

Why is it that those of us who liked oldies when they were new (like you've said about yourself) wouldn't like hearing new songs in that same style today? Obviously, you liked hearing new songs when they were first introduced back on Groovy QV, right? When you were listening to Groovy QV back in the day, did you change the station when they played a new Top 40 song? If you still like that kind of music, why would you change the station if you heard a song that fit right in with the ones you knew, but that you were hearing for the first time? Did you just get old and set in your ways? Didn't you like hearing new songs back in the days of Groovy QV that fit right in with the other songs they played? If you liked hearing new songs that fit in with the rest of the Top 40 back in the days of Groovy QV, why would you not like hearing new (or at least, new to your ears) songs that fit in with the rest of the oldies being played today?

And please note, I'm not trying to be obtuse about this, but I'm asking why, not to simply be told "that's just the way it is". If that is the way it is, there must be a reason why it's the way it is. Why do people who used to be excited about hearing songs for the first time back in the day now switch the station when they hear songs for the first time?

You make a good point, Realist. I think we're not as 'open-minded' about music today as we once were. We're in a society today of instant gratification...if we like it, we buy it. There's no compromise. I think the same philosophy applies to music. Remember that we also had fewer formats back then. If you want to listen to an AC station, you can find about six sub-brands of that. There's more choices out there than ever before, and with our car radios that have some 20 presets on the tuners, it's all that easier to hop between channels, until we find something that strikes our fancy. We want what we want when we want it...and we get it. Why? Because someone out there will figure that it's a market waiting to be capitalized on and, thus a demand is created. Supply the demand. This is how stations make money today, by supplying the next 'new' format that's going to cater to the 'fad' of today. We have had lots of stations in this town that have had 'gimmick' style formats almost all of their existence (104.7 is a great example of that) and don't really have any identity to speak of. But that's my two cents.

 

[Boss Radio]

Also to the delight of tens of listeners.

Uh huh. And if there WERE indeed "tens of listeners", we would not be doing as well financially as we are. Niche programming isn't for everyone...unless you REALLY know how to sell it.

We get it. Congratulations on being successful. Drive the Mercedes safely. But know that what you put out is utter crap.

 

[lash]

And what station to you own or program Boss Radio? Are you truly a former KHJ jock? While everyone is welcome to their opinion on the forum, it sure would be great every once in a while, to hear about everyone's radio experience that can back up the opinions.

 

[Boss Radio]

All of the above is actually none of your business, Lash.