-
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
Rock 100.5 - "Quality Rock"
- Thread starter shadoobee
- Start date
I guess the problem is that they programmed the station for folks OTP - with a signal that barely reaches into the regions where hair metal still reigns supreme.
Q100 was successful with that signal b/c pop appeals to everyone ITP AND OTP. Now "quality rock" feels like an attempt to be everything to everyone - which is exactly what killed 99X. Project has had a decent bit of success because it hyper-serves it's P1s - although to me personally it sounds like doo doo.
Q100 was successful with that signal b/c pop appeals to everyone ITP AND OTP. Now "quality rock" feels like an attempt to be everything to everyone - which is exactly what killed 99X. Project has had a decent bit of success because it hyper-serves it's P1s - although to me personally it sounds like doo doo.
M
Mr_Winston-Salem
Guest
There's only one talker (750 WSB) with any good numbers in this market. It's been that way for years. The other talkers are below Rock 100.5. Adding an FM for WGST also didn't work. As Star 94 experimented with more talk, they fell. It seems FM talk works in a few markets, but not in most. Sometimes it spikes and falls. In this market, it falls. It's too expensive to invest in with the failure rate.
97.9 in Riverdale was a 6-watt religious translator with a very small listening area. This is the best way to do this. 100.9 in Woodstock is waiting for someone. Before the frequency shifts a year or two ago, I could listen to this in Gwinnett County. I can confirm 97.9 reaches past the Hall County line on I-985 on a car radio. It's a better signal than you think. In Gwinnett, 97.9's translator isn't much weaker than 100.5 WNNX's signal. I'm guessing it reaches Paulding and Douglas County too?
97.9 in Riverdale was a 6-watt religious translator with a very small listening area. This is the best way to do this. 100.9 in Woodstock is waiting for someone. Before the frequency shifts a year or two ago, I could listen to this in Gwinnett County. I can confirm 97.9 reaches past the Hall County line on I-985 on a car radio. It's a better signal than you think. In Gwinnett, 97.9's translator isn't much weaker than 100.5 WNNX's signal. I'm guessing it reaches Paulding and Douglas County too?
MarkW said:
What Mark said ^ . And Coldplay!? Are you kidding me!? Coldplay!?
So let me see if I have this straight: Rock 100.5 is now mornings with Larry "Wingnut" Wachs and Eric Von Teabagger, then it's Atlanta's favorite music mix for midtown hipsters who read the Sunday New York Times before picking up brunch at Whole Foods.
I wonder how many people signed off on this decision. And if they've ever worked in radio before.
scottsvb5 said:
What we need is a classic rock or classic hits station (or, rather, heritage rock or "heritage hits") that picks up where River leaves off, both in intensity and newness. That is, a classic station that focuses on 80s AOR, with some late 70s and early 90s to draw in other listeners, and not forgoing harder tunes.
Only problem, that's what Rock 100.5 started out with, and while it had some loyal listeners (myself included), they felt the need to change.
Generation X isn't called the "baby bust" for nothing. It also doesn't help that that demographic listens to a lot of satellite and MP3s. If you look at the array of satellite channels, and their ratings, late 1970s to early 1990s CHR and AOR is superserved and gets high ratings (compared to other satellite channels). The challenge is how to move those listeners back to terrestrial radio.
Here are the channels that superserve that market:
Classic Rewind (70s/80s AOR)
First Wave (70s/80s alternative; "classic MTV" stuff, includes some AOR)
70s on 7 (period CHR, includes some AOR)
80s on 8 (period CHR, includes some AOR)
Boneyard (70s/80s "serious" metal)
Hair Nation (80s hair bands/"lite" metal)
Liquid Metal (80s/90s very heavy metal)
Here are some other channels that also serve that demo:
Spectrum (typical AAA)
The Blend (AC, focuses on 80s AC)
How would you program against all that?
I think this is when HD Radio should be pushed even harder because I'm seeing so many stations that make great use of their HD counterparts and some that go about it all wrong.
Good use of HD radio: WLUP's HD2 channel is called "Loop Loud"
Bad use of HD radio: The River's HD2 channel is......News/Talk from WSB-AM.
I am curious about what the limitations are on the number of HD channels any station can have? If P961 can rebroadcast on it's HD channel and then push only alternative and new rock on it's HD2 signal, then it can specialize...focus advertising...etc. But, how to push the HD radio format more into the mainstream is the question. Maybe the gov can push the switch to HD radio like it did with HDTV.
Good use of HD radio: WLUP's HD2 channel is called "Loop Loud"
Bad use of HD radio: The River's HD2 channel is......News/Talk from WSB-AM.
I am curious about what the limitations are on the number of HD channels any station can have? If P961 can rebroadcast on it's HD channel and then push only alternative and new rock on it's HD2 signal, then it can specialize...focus advertising...etc. But, how to push the HD radio format more into the mainstream is the question. Maybe the gov can push the switch to HD radio like it did with HDTV.
I don't agree that WSB-AM is a poor use of The River's HD2 channel. It gets WSB onto the FM band.
I don't know the maximum number of HD channels that a station can have, but I was told by an engineer that the more channels, the less audio quality.
The FCC is not going to push everyone over to HD as it did with HDTV. What it probably could do, however, is pursuade manufacturers to include HD on more FM radios. In the 60's when the FCC told stations that they couldn't simulcast AM and FM more than 50% of the time, manufacturers started putting FM on virtually all AM radios because people now had a programming reason to listen to FM. The problem is, I doubt most of what's now on HD channels is of much appeal to a mass audience.
By the way, my radio blog--this week about the 102.9 mystery--is at www.atlairwaves.blogspot.com.
I don't know the maximum number of HD channels that a station can have, but I was told by an engineer that the more channels, the less audio quality.
The FCC is not going to push everyone over to HD as it did with HDTV. What it probably could do, however, is pursuade manufacturers to include HD on more FM radios. In the 60's when the FCC told stations that they couldn't simulcast AM and FM more than 50% of the time, manufacturers started putting FM on virtually all AM radios because people now had a programming reason to listen to FM. The problem is, I doubt most of what's now on HD channels is of much appeal to a mass audience.
By the way, my radio blog--this week about the 102.9 mystery--is at www.atlairwaves.blogspot.com.
From what I hear Roddy, the biggest obstacle of HD radio is the technology, especially when it comes to portability. The tuning processor has to be at a minimum 533Mhz and the battery technology is not sophisticated enough to last long enough to support such a power hog of a processor. I tried using a new digital tv tuner in the car and I could not get a signal for the life of me while the car was moving in midtown close to the majority of the tv towers(not like the 80s when I carried my analog Sony Watchman in the car and could get a shaky but decent signal in the moving car). I assume they have gotten car HD radios around this but I can't imagine how you can keep a digital signal stable enough in a moving car.
RoddyFreeman said:
Correct. There's a fixed amount of HD bandwidth, and you can slice it into CD-quality, FM-quality (with both 25 and 50-kbit/s options), AM-quality, and talk-quality pieces as long as they fit in the bandwidth. You could have one super-fi, CD-quality station and a bunch of low-fi talk stations, if you wanted. The only nontechnical restriction seems to be at least one HD signal must be at least FM quality, per the FCC.
If you devoted half of your bandwidth to HD (leaving the rest to analog FM; you can devote as little as a third to as much as a half of your bandwidth to HD), you could have one FM-quality HD signal and eight AM-quality HD signals. Or, you could have three high-FM-quality HD signals. Or, you could double that to six low-FM-quality signals. Et cetera.
Observations:
1. I've heard "Do You Feel Like We Do" EVERY DAY for a week between The River and Rock 100. Quality, as a brand statement, is obviously very subjective.
2. TRG with a bit about wearing condoms or not .... and Quality Rock. Laughable. I can see the billboard...."Sophomoric BS in the Morning, Quality Rock All Day!"
3. Quality Rock calls for a visceral connection with the music, personalities, digital offerings and listeners to build credibility needed to "sell" someone a reason to listen through an unfamiliar song - and to keep coming back for more.
As to the subjectivity of making Quality a brand claim. Self generated playlist set the bar much higher on defining quality that when other stations were the only point of
comparison.
Imagine a terrestrial station/format with the balls to feature a cut from the new Jeff Beck "Live at Ronnie's" and NOT wimp out by following
it with a tested, burned out classic hit just to satisfy a 40-year-old format rule of surrounding unfamiliar songs.
OMG! Unfamiliar songs driving a format??? All the bean counters and consultants can now respond with why it won't work.
Is a terrestrial format with the feel of Pandora possible?
1. I've heard "Do You Feel Like We Do" EVERY DAY for a week between The River and Rock 100. Quality, as a brand statement, is obviously very subjective.
2. TRG with a bit about wearing condoms or not .... and Quality Rock. Laughable. I can see the billboard...."Sophomoric BS in the Morning, Quality Rock All Day!"
3. Quality Rock calls for a visceral connection with the music, personalities, digital offerings and listeners to build credibility needed to "sell" someone a reason to listen through an unfamiliar song - and to keep coming back for more.
As to the subjectivity of making Quality a brand claim. Self generated playlist set the bar much higher on defining quality that when other stations were the only point of
comparison.
Imagine a terrestrial station/format with the balls to feature a cut from the new Jeff Beck "Live at Ronnie's" and NOT wimp out by following
it with a tested, burned out classic hit just to satisfy a 40-year-old format rule of surrounding unfamiliar songs.
OMG! Unfamiliar songs driving a format??? All the bean counters and consultants can now respond with why it won't work.
Is a terrestrial format with the feel of Pandora possible?
As long as radio management clings to its "one size fits all" mentality and continuously fine tunes its play list to zero in on whatever they think their "core audience" is, they'll continue to have the same success as the French department of defense before WW2. I've never understood the logic of trying to grow your audience by making it smaller. And if the programming geniuses cling to the same tired formulae, the only direction is down.
- Status