• 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

Everyone talks about new formats they would like. K-EARTH 101 is the only station that I know of that has a full lineup of live and local personalities and plays good songs. BUT how can anyone handle the commercial breaks? they are out of control. I would like your opinions on that. Wouldn't XM be worth the small price for no commercials on every format? I have no affiliation with Sirius/xm I am just curious how anyone can listen to all those commercials? commercials in the 60's and 70's had nice jingles that people enjoyed. I mostly listen to unscoped reelradio.com that is all I can handle when not listening to XM. I like listening to Shotgun Tom Kelly but I can't handle the commercials. Do any of you have the same problem with radio today? Teens and young adults have no patience with that at all. I see them turn off Pandora because of one 10 second Ad.
 
XM/Sirius is a non-negotiable gotta-have for me. The limited playlists and stopsets that seem to be getting longer by the year on local radio would drive me crazy if that is all I had in the car. But once I turn on XM, there are many commercial-free formats, about 10 of which I listen to regularly and another 10-15 or so that I tune in from time to time for some added flavor. Plus they have some talk channels with hosts that are not available in the LA area. Added bonus - for the shows that do air locally that are also aired on SiriusXM, I will usually listen to the satellite channel as it has no AM static.

I, like a lot of people these days, sometimes use internet radio stations via smartphone in the car, but I don't like that very much as I have to control the radio with the phone, which is very dangerous due to lack of ease of use with the smartphone controls. If I want to do that, then I tell myself I just have to pick a station and leave it. As you may infer from my handle, I don't usually do that very well.
 
With my smartphone in the car through a bluetooth conection to the radio it's 181.FM for me and their Beatles channel, Good times 50's 60's channel, and the Super 70's channel! Miles and miles of uninterupted music. And the selection of music played is top notch!
 
Everything has a cost. For some things, you pay a monthly bill. For others, you sit through commercials.

The one thing to know is the number of radio commercials has been about the same for the past 50 years. What has changed is commercials today are grouped into a "stop-set." In the 60s, there were a couple between each song. The goal today is to minimize the interruptions, because as you noticed, the length of the break isn't as bad as the interruption. I can't sit through the 10 second pre-roll on YouTube. But that's the trade-off for free music.

Have you counted the commercials on TV? The breaks are about the same as radio.
 
Maybe because I've gotten used to XM as well, but it appears to me like local radio has way too many commercials these days. Especially CBS-owned stations seem to have the most. There are times when I've flipping through presets and I hear ads on all of them. Even with my 35 miles commute everyday, I feel like I barely hear many songs with all the ads in between.
 
TheBigA said:
Everything has a cost. For some things, you pay a monthly bill. For others, you sit through commercials.

The one thing to know is the number of radio commercials has been about the same for the past 50 years. What has changed is commercials today are grouped into a "stop-set." In the 60s, there were a couple between each song. The goal today is to minimize the interruptions, because as you noticed, the length of the break isn't as bad as the interruption. I can't sit through the 10 second pre-roll on YouTube. But that's the trade-off for free music.

Have you counted the commercials on TV? The breaks are about the same as radio.

I personally don;t mind those long stop-sets so much because they generally follow 4 to 8 songs in a row. What I don't understand is why advertisers put up with this. If I was advertising on radio, I would not be happy that my expensive commercial was the 7th ad in the middle of a 15 commercial stop set. Is anybody listening by then? For advertisers, I would think that the old 60s formats: song-commercial-song-commercial- would be superior. If most listeners are like me, they change the station during those long stop sets.
 
Lkeller said:
If I was advertising on radio, I would not be happy that my expensive commercial was the 7th ad in the middle of a 15 commercial stop set. Is anybody listening by then?

You'd be surprised how many do. Like everything in advertising, the agencies have done studies, and determined that people are more likely to sit through radio breaks than TV breaks. But still, a vast majority stay with the station through the entire break. Especially on news/talk/sports stations. Consider those who listen (voluntarily or involuntarily) at work. The radio that's left on at the car repair shop all day, or in the store. No Tivo for radio. The only radio where some people switch during commercial breaks is in the car, and that's about a third of the regular listening. And generally not during morning or afternoon drive, because so much of the content is information, rather than music.

In fact, if you're wondering why some music formats are being replaced by talk, the answer is that talk listeners are more likely to stick with the station through a break than music listeners. Music listeners are generally more demanding about the songs they hear, and less willing to pay for the service. And we find that the length of the break doesn't matter. The second a break begins, those who are likely to switch leave for another station, and return either when that station goes into a break or plays a song they don't like. But the fact is they do return.

But, just in case being first is important, some advertisers request to be first in cluster, and there's a premium price for that position.
 
Neel Mehta said:
Maybe because I've gotten used to XM as well, but it appears to me like local radio has way too many commercials these days. Especially CBS-owned stations seem to have the most.

If they do, it's not by much. But keep in mind that CBS stations are also less likely to use voicetracking or syndication, which is a more expensive way to do radio. XM is almost all voicetracked and automated.
 
TheBigA said:
XM is almost all voicetracked and automated.

And still sounds more live than most radio stations.
 
Actually most music stations have only two stopsets an hour. The difference between CBS and say, Clear Channel, is in the amount of 10's and 15's that CBS runs. They're short, but the audience still does a somewhat subconscious count in their heads and perceive the set as being longer. Clear Channel sells more 30's and 60's with a few shorter ones bookending most breaks which time wise are about as long as most stations run..
 
Something I've noticed about music stations is that they all seem to be in a stop-set at the same time. So, if I switch to another station, that station is running commercials, too. I was in my car today and noticed 4 or 5 music stations all running commercials at the same time. That's when I go to KCSN or KCRW (on weekends) and often find myself staying there for awhile.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom