-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
R
rbrucecarter5
Guest
txchipk said:
No, I am glad you gave a history of this problem. Once again, the owners of KTCU show themselves to be inept. First they hand an upgrade to KEOM on a silver platter at their own expense - now they give away their last chance to become a major player in the DFW market? They play too much country for my taste, but it is one of the creative bright spots in DFW radio. I would gladly trade KMAD for better reception of KTCU! Thankfully - Pioneer supertuner 3D's have adaptive IF technology and KTCU can be heard all over the metroplex with one - even in Mesquite.
A....
Researching Radio's Real Customers; the Listeners, is a fine idea....right up to the point where the results of that research supplanted the creativity intrinsic to its presentation.
When Radio execs decided to pursue research as a way quantify the On-Air Creative arts, they did so not to serve the Listener....they did so in an effort to cut costs.
Thus taking this industry from being a near perfect entertainment vehicle, to becoming poor competition with an I-Pod; "Radio? It's like listening to someone else's I-Pod with commercials."
BTW....Most stations in the 70's through the mid-90's, small, medium, large, and major were fully staffed. The few automated ones were staffed with licensed engineers 24/7-365 per FCC regulations.
Jon-David Wells
The Wells Report
Researching Radio's Real Customers; the Listeners, is a fine idea....right up to the point where the results of that research supplanted the creativity intrinsic to its presentation.
When Radio execs decided to pursue research as a way quantify the On-Air Creative arts, they did so not to serve the Listener....they did so in an effort to cut costs.
- Find a list of the "right" records
- Cut Air Personality contribution to as close to zero as possible; "Respect the music!" Even to the point of bragging about it on-air; "More Music, Less Talk".
- Then, since we're not doing anything anyway, fire all of us or replace us with out of town lightweights.
Thus taking this industry from being a near perfect entertainment vehicle, to becoming poor competition with an I-Pod; "Radio? It's like listening to someone else's I-Pod with commercials."
BTW....Most stations in the 70's through the mid-90's, small, medium, large, and major were fully staffed. The few automated ones were staffed with licensed engineers 24/7-365 per FCC regulations.
Jon-David Wells
The Wells Report
R
rbrucecarter5
Guest
jondavidvox said:
I am going to satellite myself - done with this total lack of creativity.
One thing is for sure - once in car streaming is widely available, the few creative outlets scattered in markets around the country will have quite a splendid audience. They will be discovered and listened to - en masse - by people all over the country. And the cost reduced, cookie cutter stuff? Withering and dying. The worst aspect of it - the owners won't have a clue what went wrong. The focus groups all said they were playing the right set of 100 songs. The advertisers created interesting sounding commercials. The on-air talent was easy on the balance sheet. Profits were good - the listeners just went away.
When little college stations like KTXT generate fanatical, loyal followings of listeners - who protest on Facebook when the station is taken down - and these stations are doing everything that focus groups, accountants and lawyers say is wrong - it ought to tell the owners something about what people really want to hear on the radio.
jondavidvox said:
That's just not so.
At no time was a higher percentage of US stations automated than in the late 60's well into the 80's.
During much of the 70's companies like IGM, Drake Chennault, SRP, Bonneville, RPM, Kala, FM 100, Peters, Churchill and others provided taped programming to several thousand stationd... at a time when total stations on the air was less than 7 to 8 thousand.
And the staff on duty often was a person with a 3rd Restricted, the qualifications for which was being able to sign one's name. Calling the holder of a 3rd an "engineer" is like calling a drunk at a karaoke bar a "singer." Only critical pattern DA's were required to have first ticket holders on duty after the early 70's, and most first ticket holders then were stronger at memorization than at engineering.
By the mid-80's, much of the taped format distribution gave way to satellite formats... also on thousands of stations.
Now, David, when I got my 3rd phone, I had to take a test. Many of my friends who took the test failed element 9. And the FCC could use license revocation as leverage to keep operators in line.
It may be true that many stations in the '60s and 70's were automated, but that was a time before FM was seen as economically viable. Many owners 'SAT' on the licenses, with no commitment to attract listeners. Never were so many stations left without a live operator on duty, as is the case now.
The agencies see that being the 4th spot in a 10 minute commercial set is not a good value. investors see the declining revenues, and are pounding the stocks while withholding financing. The bottom line is that even people who have proven their ability to deliver, people with track records of success, and being flushed. Wages are driven lower. Even profitable stations are being cut to the bone. (You can't tell me that WCCO-AM, which just cut some more, isn't turning a large profit.)
The people who understand how the station/listener/advertiser relationship works are gone. Managers are so spooked they can't risk taking a chance. Research is good, but the person implementing the research has to understand the context to effectively use that research.
The bottom line that is missing is the human-to-human connection. That is what made post-television radio so great, and that is what is lost in the voice-tracked world we live in now.
It may be true that many stations in the '60s and 70's were automated, but that was a time before FM was seen as economically viable. Many owners 'SAT' on the licenses, with no commitment to attract listeners. Never were so many stations left without a live operator on duty, as is the case now.
The agencies see that being the 4th spot in a 10 minute commercial set is not a good value. investors see the declining revenues, and are pounding the stocks while withholding financing. The bottom line is that even people who have proven their ability to deliver, people with track records of success, and being flushed. Wages are driven lower. Even profitable stations are being cut to the bone. (You can't tell me that WCCO-AM, which just cut some more, isn't turning a large profit.)
The people who understand how the station/listener/advertiser relationship works are gone. Managers are so spooked they can't risk taking a chance. Research is good, but the person implementing the research has to understand the context to effectively use that research.
The bottom line that is missing is the human-to-human connection. That is what made post-television radio so great, and that is what is lost in the voice-tracked world we live in now.
grantchester said:
What's replaced it is interactive human-to-human connection, known as the cell phone. The day the phone was made portable was the day the radio's days were numbered. I go to sports events and half the people in the stands have their cell phones out during play stoppages, and they're texting other people, either within the venue or on the outside. We don't need professional reporters any more because the entire country has become reporters, telling us what's happening, providing us with pictures, and even some video. If radio can't be a part of that conversation, it's irrelevant. Radio can't allow itself to remain defined by what it was or what it did, because the current audience has no understanding of that.
Right now, radio is filled with a lot of people who remember what radio was. It's very similar to the post-WW2 period, when people remembered radio for providing live music, comedy, and drama. When that went away it took almost ten years for radio to recover. What we need are people with a fresh view of what radio can do, and are able to see past what it did. Who can understand that radio is simply a distribution system, similar to the phone and internet but one-way, and to find a way to adapt that very simple, cheap, and efficient distribution system in a way that will attract consumers.
rbrucecarter5 said:
You may want to go to SiriusXM....but now they sound like crap. I have it now, and after our six months of free service ends, we are getting rid of it. Instead of the 15 channels of music I enjoyed, its down to 2. So to me its not worth it anymore.
R
rbrucecarter5
Guest
salemjedi54 said:
Tell me about it!!!! I just had them in a rent car and am NOT impressed at the sound quality. But - I'm used to eating static on the stations I really want to hear anyway. Even around here - it takes (or took) KOOI, KNIN, KMAD, KTCU to fill up my car radio pushbuttons. Compression artifacts are just as bad as static, but hey the music is there. And after the bankruptcy - who knows what new channels will be programmed by the new owners. I might as well get used to compression - that will be the way broadband is. But - to get thousands of stations instead of a few dozen - it will be a worthwhile trade.
DavidEduardo said:
Wow...I should feel insulted. I was one of those guys at an automated AM/FM in upper NY state. Nothing is worse that being all alone late at night by yourself with a bunch of automated cart decks in the tundra, and have the wind blow through cracks in the cinderbocks. Brrrr. Gives me chills just thinking about it.
DE is correct. A 3rd phone was all that was needed in the 70s to run the place by rourself. By the early 80s, computers had been devised to replace them, take the meter readings, raise and lower power as needed, and everything else. It was only the beginning, folks. By the mid-80s, we were able to fire our chief engineer, and hire an outside technical services company who handled our stations and five competitors. They did a great job, by the way. 24/7 service.
Like I said....Operators on duty 24/7-365. It was the law, and should be again.
J-D
FB
J-D
FB
jondavidvox said:
The rest of the story is the operator (me) turned the transmitter off at midnight. No commercials? Turn off the transmitter. No operations when there's no money. Requiring staffing would mean stations will sign off the air, perhaps as early as 9PM. At one time, that's what stations did.
TheBigA said:
No it wouldn't mean stations would sign off if it had to be staffed at all times. The only reason you'd want to sign on and off daily, is if the world was still on a 9 to 5 workweek and everyone went to bed at 9:00 PM. We're living in a 24 / 7 world nowdays, and lots of folks have jobs in the second and third shifts.
Also, signing on and off daily puts far more wear and tear on the transmitter, than it does if left on all the time. It's like shutting down your PC. When your PC is on, it generates heat until you turn it off. Keep doing that daily and the constant changes between heating and cooling causes components to undergo stress. The only difference is, computers are cheaper.
- Status