radio..ice cold

[davideduardo]

Your memory differs from mine. I distinctly remember the DJ's saying that those lists were developed from record shop sales in the market. Here is a statement from the KTKT Tribute Site: "The KTKT Top 40 Certified Sound Survey presented the top 40 songs as ranked by record sales in the Tucson area. " It does not say that Hooper and Pulse did the survey so we both might have a point here.

All radio station charts in that era were the result of some combination of the same four elements: calls to record shops (as well as on-stops if there were any locally), juke box play (if available), requests and the station program director / music director opinion.

Pulse and Hooper did not "survey" music sales, locally or nationally. They were radio ratings companies that produced market "surveys" of relative listening levels and were not involved with the music industry.

THis is not an issue of differing memories. Radio stations did their own music surveys. Hooper and Pulse and Trendex, and later Arbitron, did listening surveys.

 

[landtuna]

Maybe...a lot of things "killed the radio star," including the radio stars themselves.

I don't understand that statement. Can you elaborate?

What killed the video? Certainly MTV is not what it was 20 years ago.

But video is not dead. Virtually every new song these days has an intro on YouTube (which has largely replaced MTV in its original capacity). Without the video component people would actually have to LISTEN to the song and would, likely as not, disregard it as the junk it has become.

 

[TheBigA]

I don't understand that statement. Can you elaborate?

Who were the original MTV VJs? Former radio stars. Radio over-expanded during the 80s thanks to the FCC's Docket 80-90. More radio stars diluted the impact and the quality. Then you have the first availability of portable music devices that weren't radios. So lots of things in the 80s that hurt radio. That's why a lot of heritage radio companies, like NBC and GE, sold off their stations at the end of the 1980s.

But video is not dead. Virtually every new song these days has an intro on YouTube (which has largely replaced MTV in its original capacity). Without the video component people would actually have to LISTEN to the song and would, likely as not, disregard it as the junk it has become.

But the power of MTV as a single video outlet for music has vanished. Now video is as Omni-present as radio, so if radio's impact has been diminished, so has video. There is no concentrated single source any more, and hasn't been for a long time. The power isn't in the source, but in the music and the musician himself. If he makes his music, and doesn't attach any strings to it, it could go viral. Neither radio nor video is doing it...the FANS are in control.

 

[CTListener]

Who were the original MTV VJs? Former radio stars.

Alan Hunter was an actor. Martha Quinn had never been on the air at a commercial station. She was finishing up at NYU and interning at WNBC when she got the MTV gig. Nina Blackwood's radio experience was minimal, too. Hardly "stars."

 

[landtuna]

Who were the original MTV VJs? Former radio stars. Radio over-expanded during the 80s thanks to the FCC's Docket 80-90. More radio stars diluted the impact and the quality. Then you have the first availability of portable music devices that weren't radios. So lots of things in the 80s that hurt radio.

I remember well when MTV came to my cable company because it was the first service I blocked. Not after watching a good deal of what was on it however. I cannot remember recognizing a single "VJ" (as they called themselves then) nor did any seem to be over 25 years old. Those were definitely not the same "stars" I was thinking of when I said "video killed the radio stars". Perhaps it was because MTV liked to think of itself as being on the sharp edge of new format music and I couldn't stand that crap and would not let it into my house (except on headphones turned way down).

I do agree that video wasn't the only thing that "killed radio" but my response then would have been the same as now - if radio had kept the in-between personalities that made it work in the first place and not given way to morning zoo's and give-aways as a means of attracting an audience they may have prolonged their popularity decades longer. The kids today do not like mouthy DJ's because they are inane and not entertaining. Not the case in the old days when you could look forward to something interesting between songs other than a 7 minute string of commercials.

 

[landtuna]

But the power of MTV as a single video outlet for music has vanished.

Hmmmmm, thought that was what I said.

Now video is as Omni-present as radio, so if radio's impact has been diminished, so has video.

Really? Where is new music (Pop) introduced? YouTube. Save for the very infrequent give-away's on iTunes.

There is no concentrated single source any more, and hasn't been for a long time.

There may not be a single source but it is the next closest thing.

The power isn't in the source, but in the music and the musician himself. If he makes his music, and doesn't attach any strings to it, it could go viral. Neither radio nor video is doing it...the FANS are in control.

I disagree. Musicians have released freebie music which falls right on its face. The real test of popularity is whether people will pay for it and right now that issue is seriously in doubt. Many musicians are releasing their works free only to drive concert appearances where visual entertainment is predominant and people have to pay for the privilege. Songs are now a buck a throw over iTunes - the same exact cost as in 1957 only the dollar is worth only 12 cents of what it used to be then.

The fans, if anything, are used to paying nothing and getting even less in return. Lousy material downgraded to mp3 quality. Perhaps it is only worth 12 cents at that.

 

[TheBigA]

I cannot remember recognizing a single "VJ" (as they called themselves then) nor did any seem to be over 25 years old.

MTV was based in NYC, and Mark Goodman and some of the others were well known in NY FM radio. They weren't attempting to be Top 40, so people like Dan Ingram or Cousin Brucie would have been huge mistakes. This was FM rock on TV, and the VJs were the same age as their intended audience. By design. The generation raised on MTV didn't want the 60s-style AM DJs. They hated that kind of radio. And radio moved away from that cliché in 1975.

 

[landtuna]

This was FM rock on TV, and the VJs were the same age as their intended audience. By design. The generation raised on MTV didn't want the 60s-style AM DJs. They hated that kind of radio.

I understand that. Where are they now, all those hugely talented VJ's? I can't think of a single one, anywhere. They came and went just like their music.

And radio moved away from that cliché in 1975.

Not entirely. My long time favorite FM here in Phoenix didn't get rid of its last 60's type DJ until about five years ago when they finally made the move from Oldies to Classic Crap (or whatever they are calling the junk they now play). Some other stations (KODS, WDJO for example) still have something similar to the old style DJ. Both are Oldies stations of course.

 

[TheBigA]

I understand that. Where are they now, all those hugely talented VJ's? I can't think of a single one, anywhere. They came and went just like their music.

I never said they were "hugely talented," but the channel got away from that radio-style of presentation 20 years ago, and their talent stays the age of their target demo, which is 20s-30s. The only old guy still there is Kurt Loder, who stays mainly off air.

 

[davideduardo]

I remember well when MTV came to my cable company because it was the first service I blocked. Not after watching a good deal of what was on it however. I cannot remember recognizing a single "VJ" (as they called themselves then) nor did any seem to be over 25 years old. Those were definitely not the same "stars" I was thinking of when I said "video killed the radio stars". Perhaps it was because MTV liked to think of itself as being on the sharp edge of new format music and I couldn't stand that crap and would not let it into my house (except on headphones turned way down).

I am likely quite close in age to you, and got my first radio job in 1959 as a teen and my first management job in 1964... also as a teen.

But when MTV came on, I was fascinated. I loved Kennedy (now on Fox Business Channel) and Downtown Julie Brown and Nina Blackwood and J.J. and Martha Quinn. The first video I saw was that incredible Duran Duran one with the sailing ships. The presentations were of particular interest, as they showed me where radio presenters would be in a few years.

Other than CNN and, later, Headline News, MTV was my favorite cable channel and it definitely affected the way I thought about radio.

So here we have a difference in tastes and styles. I was always looking for a way to do things in a new way and to freshen the older things. I never wanted a station to sound like it did a year or a decade ago and I never knew how it would sound tomorrow. Change was the greatest promotion I could create on a station... the expectation of missing something if you did not listen every day.

Anything else is the radio equivalent of that unintentionally profound movie, Groundhog Day.

 

[landtuna]

I am likely quite close in age to you, and got my first radio job in 1959 as a teen and my first management job in 1964... also as a teen.

I am closing in on 70 and was 20 in 1964 and had already been in Vietnam one year. I did not have the luxury of being up close and personal to the music scene as it changed from 50's feel good music to the post-payola girl groups to the British Invasion. I returned home just as the Beatles became a national phenomena. 'Satisfaction' was last year's most popular song and I hated it but did not necessarily hate the rest of the Rolling Stones portfolio. We had virtually no exposure to the pop music of the day while in SE Asia so huge changes were already underway as I got off the plane. Huge changes continued for the next decade as pop turned to rock turned to Disco then back to various sub-genre's of rock and then.....disappeared in the muck and mire of grunge, hair bands, hip hop, rap (which I maintain is not a music form), and other equally distasteful forms. Now we have something similar to the early 60's with marginally talented "artists" performing more visually than musically and with virtually no innovation which was the hallmark of pop music a generation earlier.[/quote]

But when MTV came on, I was fascinated. I loved Kennedy (now on Fox Business Channel) and Downtown Julie Brown and Nina Blackwood and J.J. and Martha Quinn. The first video I saw was that incredible Duran Duran one with the sailing ships. The presentations were of particular interest, as they showed me where radio presenters would be in a few years.

I saw juvenile airheads talking about nothing and knowing not much as well. DJ's in old time radio were never the epitome of knowledge but they at least knew how to entertain. I didn't see that in early MTV. There were a very few videos that I liked - Dire Straits' Walk of Life remains my all time favorite - but most were simply noise and flash, designed to mask the worthlessness of the music they pretended to support.

Other than CNN and, later, Headline News, MTV was my favorite cable channel and it definitely affected the way I thought about radio.

Not sure how you can say that. Top-40 radio, for years, had done essentially what CNN HN were doing, presenting just the very tip top of news events. Something done at the top of the hour on virtually every format T-40 station in the country. I guess if your interest wandered to what was happening in the world of TMZ (of latter days) then MTV was where you went for that type of entertainment.

So here we have a difference in tastes and styles. I was always looking for a way to do things in a new way and to freshen the older things. I never wanted a station to sound like it did a year or a decade ago and I never knew how it would sound tomorrow. Change was the greatest promotion I could create on a station... the expectation of missing something if you did not listen every day.

Funny, but the biggest changes in radio, by far, were the 20-odd years between mid-50's and mid-70's. There was more change then, in music, format and presentation than at any time since the invention of the radio. For someone who professes to embrace change you seem rather comfortable with the commonality of today's music. At least that is the impression I am getting from your posts. There was a tremendous amount of invention in popular music between the early 50's and early 80's - something that is virtually absent today. It is just forgettable and perhaps that is for the best.

I cannot think that the continuing failure of radio is partly due to the lack of human involvement as we used to have as well as the pathetic music being played. That is not to say that yesterday's music was better but rather the creativity of the musicians that made it so that made a substantial difference. After all, if one doesn't like the content then nothing else matters.

 

[TheBigA]

I cannot think that the continuing failure of radio is partly due to the lack of human involvement as we used to have

Depends on what you mean by "human involvement" but that would apply to just about everything today from banking to self check at the grocery store.

 

[landtuna]

Depends on what you mean by "human involvement" but that would apply to just about everything today from banking to self check at the grocery store.

"Human involvement" in radio context means on-air talent doing something besides time, temp and ads. In short, entertaining.

The lack of human involvement in ordinary banking transactions is a plus. Not so in my experience buying groceries due to the lack of proper marking and/or mis-marking of products so they don't register correctly at the automated check-out machine. I use ATM's successfully all the time and appreciate the convenience. Not so at the grocery.

 

[TheBigA]

"Human involvement" in radio context means on-air talent doing something besides time, temp and ads. In short, entertaining.

Then the issue is a matter of subjective opinion as to what's entertaining. The ones today are entertaining to some people, just not to you.

 

[JeffM]

. Huge changes continued for the next decade as pop turned to rock turned to Disco then back to various sub-genre's of rock and then.....disappeared in the muck and mire of grunge, hair bands, hip hop, rap (which I maintain is not a music form), and other equally distasteful forms. Now we have something similar to the early 60's with marginally talented "artists" performing more visually than musically and with virtually no innovation which was the hallmark of pop music a generation earlier.

I saw juvenile airheads talking about nothing and knowing not much as well. DJ's in old time radio were never the epitome of knowledge but they at least knew how to entertain. I didn't see that in early MTV. There were a very few videos that I liked - Dire Straits' Walk of Life remains my all time favorite - but most were simply noise and flash, designed to mask the worthlessness of the music they pretended to support.

Funny, but the biggest changes in radio, by far, were the 20-odd years between mid-50's and mid-70's. There was more change then, in music, format and presentation than at any time since the invention of the radio. For someone who professes to embrace change you seem rather comfortable with the commonality of today's music. At least that is the impression I am getting from your posts. There was a tremendous amount of invention in popular music between the early 50's and early 80's - something that is virtually absent today. It is just forgettable and perhaps that is for the best.
[/QUOTE]

"Your dad" is back again...bring out the Jim Nabors and Robert Goulet records. "YOU KIDS CALL THAT $#!+ MUSIC?!! AND GET OFFEN MY LAWN!!"

 

[gr8oldies]

One huge difference that should not be overlooked. Our is the first generation that has marketed, remarketed, repackaged and resold the music of our youth to us over and over again. We bought the 45s, the LPs, the LPs again, the CDs, the improved CDs, the commemorative boxed sets, the mp3 downloads, ete, etc, etc. My parents' generation listened to radio stations that played currents, without the extremes. We have radio stations (and internet streams) playing 40-50 year old music every day.

 

[gr8oldies]

I can, but since I've been in the business and followed radio more closely, I'm an exception, though I imagine most can remember at least a few of WOWO's DJs. WMEE, not so much. On the "You know you're from...." Facebook group for my home county, the only names from CKLW that come up are Gary Burbank and Dick Purtan.(Burbank of course who went on to a long term career on WLW). I can name the late 1967 jock lineup from CKLW, doubt many others can. Maybe I'll ask

 

[landtuna]

"Your dad" is back again...bring out the Jim Nabors and Robert Goulet records. "YOU KIDS CALL THAT $#!+ MUSIC?!! AND GET OFFEN MY LAWN!!"

No idea what you tried to say.

 

[NigelWick]

No posts in a month. Is the local market that dead?

 

[Steve Green NEPA]

If you folks don't mind, I'll chime in for a spell with a few thoughts .......

Too many radio stations ; too few companies ......

There was a 'this site is dead' thread a few years ago on this site. My $.02 cents was that sites were dead EVERYWHERE ......

Arbitron stopped releasing the entire market's roster to the 12+ public. Real big of them. Much of the discussion content here and elsewhere had been drawn to that exact subject's magnet for the longest time. One less topic per board, nationwide ......

Marketing's insistence on relegating people over age 55 to live out of their golf carts.
Certainly that method of replacement made sense years ago, because younger immortals always had come up through the assembly line to replenish the older discards.
No more. Not for radio, anyway. I have no stats here, but an estimate would situate the available music-radio audience -- the sweet spot demo -- not at '25-49' but more like 30-40. And a dozen stations in every major market have advisors dividing that audience even further.......

Music company consolidation.
Thanks to these managers and scouts, many of whom have to be at least partially tone-deaf, modern pop music genres have become largely indistinguishable. As far as new and exciting or 'offbeat' fare on the radio goes, the key word is 'clueless'.
Besides, the eligible younger recruit listeners seem to be getting along, serenading themselves without the help of anyone over 30.......

Eight words : 'Spot clusters and lame commercials within those clusters'.
And if the modern pop music forms weren't indistinguishable enough, then the sound of modern music radio's 'approach' to the format hour is enough to turn the whole dial into some leftover casserole ........

The ennui among youth has been documented elsewhere (for years and so far without dispute) as having its roots begun before most, if not all, of the modern selfie-listening and entertainment devices existed. That says something about either music radio or music. Flip a coin ........

Naturally, I'm confident that most of the posters to here and other places can add more factors to this list of negligence or petrification ........

We who spend time in chat and on forums such as this are not the ones who are out of step in indicting the charges. Way to go, Sam, for starting this thread.