• 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

Radio & Records v. Billboard

J

J-Street

Guest
Ok everyone, in the spirit of good clean radio conversation, I will attempt to start a conversation about radio. What does everyone thinking about the new Radio & Records since it was taken over by Billboard a couple months ago? Quite honestly, I think it SUCKS! If I can get some conversation going, I'll check back in and tell you WHY I think it sucks.

Stay out of this one geek!
 
billboard rules j. streak! charts today wouldn't be the same without the good folks at billboard. the new r&r website shows more songs than ever before. so don't tell me to stay out of your conversations. i own your a**
 
Both are about the same. I used R and R most. Once you get into the top 20 and especially the top 10 that good ole radio game kicks in. A number 5 tune that is worthy of maybe a number 12 can be number one in a couple of weeks with the right promotion. I don't care about that ******bag Spitzer, those kinds of things are still going on. Smart programmers use thier own research and a lot of gut to dial thier market in, but unfortunatly, most stations are either corporatly programmed cookie cutters or programmed by "numbers guys" who use research to guide them. Very little gut anymore. I liked the days of dropping stuff on the air on a whim and seeing what kind of reaction the audience had. Kinda like throwing sh!t against the wall to see what stuck!! You can figure out fairly quickly what genres your audience responds to and the ones the don't. The use that as a template whem making music decisions. I guess my point is, A hit in one market might not be a hit in any other, So the charts can only take you so far. It's too bad most radio is so watered down that nobody goes out on a limb for tunes they believe in anymore. And artist loyalty? That used to be a catch phrase in the biz that you only hear around the halls of KROQ anymore. Radio just doesn't build superstars anymore. We should start a new catch phrase "two hit wonders". Or "one album wonders." And It's partly the record companies blame, too.
 
This merging of the two main industry magazines is right in line with the watered- down - added value - "anything for a dollar" attitude that has strangled our profession for over a decade. Thumb through one when you get a chance - it's a slicked-up glossy bore; absolutely no substance. Not unlike our industry today. When I saw the first copy after the merger I thought "It's a shiny, plastic cherry that fits perfectly onto the top of this s**t sundae that we call radio in the 21st century. It's just another way the corporate swine in radio management have attempted to justify the rape of our industry.
 
can I get in on this? I agree with warlock or anyone else, it doesn't look any different than it did before. I'm not sure, but does R&R put out the paper issues it always has since everybody and their little brother has discovered the Weird Wide Web? Sometimes it was worth the 190 or so bucks/yr to have the paper copy. It seems a little too compressed on the web version. You have to click here, no click there, no click on this page to find anything. Ow! I have a headache now. Oh well, what do I know. It's time for my Kibbles & Bits....
 
Well after a long absense, I promised I would give my input on this after others put in theirs. I must say, I was referring more to the online version of R&R than the print version. I'm also referring to their charts more than anything else. As far as the online version, it's crap. The good thing about the new R&R is that they list more "new and actives." They also list the top 60 country songs rather than top 50 as before. Although, they list the country chart by AUDIENCE and not pure PLAYS. What does this mean? This means that POP COUNTRY gets played more in bigger markets, so the new country chart is more friendly to POP COUNTRY. As for all the other charts, they list them by PLAYS (yay) but they only list top 40 in Alternative, Active Rock, etc, wheras before there was a top 50! They also changed ROCK to HERITAGE ROCK. What the hell is HERITAGE ROCK? Sure, the Rock and Active Rock formats were sort of the same and needed a change, but not the way R&R has done it. And the worst part about it all, they STILL don't have the kinks worked out in their website. If you want to pull up the, let's say, Triple A chart, you can't! Well, you can, but more times than not you have to take a back door way to get to it or it will say "page not displayed" or something similar. Also, all the chart extras, like New & Active, Going For Adds, Most Added, etc, etc, are all on different pages instead of the same. It's a pain in my rear. Oh how I miss the old R&R!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom