Songs You Remember And Like But Never Get Played

[Oldiesaholic]

Three things: Satellite, Internet, or personal playlist. Try YouTube for that "must listen" lost song.
P.S. tried to explain these suggestions, but after typing for 7 or 8 mins (wasted) it timed out and sent my post to the oblivion file!
Oh well!

 

[Tibbs4]

All the last few points bring up a potential for a great discussion. David is correct on his post. What I am not in total agreement with is stations pulling tired songs. By that I mean, apathetic stations just past the auto pilot stage not taking the plunge and actively changing the rotation/playlist enough. Not disagreeing with David, I mean.

i think the smart move is dwindling the number of plays of certain songs for a period of time, but the music has to come back into rotation at some point or you will have 50 songs on the playlist. With this format, you obviously ain't exactly getting more chart topping new additions. And how many times can you hear the same fifteen songs from the Eagles, Kansas, Styx or Fleetwood Mac? I think the smart approach is normal rotation for three weeks, back off two or three, give it a rest. Same with "novelty songs." They are nice to hear 10-12 times a year, so you can program them once a week or fill them in when you pull the heavy rotation core songs back for a few weeks. The biggest issue is that unheard of singles that may have been on AT40 for a few weeks don't always qualify as playable in 2014. The same is true for unreleased album cuts. A small percentage of the listeners know the songs and they tune out. There is a core group of probably a 1,000 Top 20-25 songs that were not totally run into the ground that can stay in rotation and not cause fatigue, but actually engage the listeners. It's tough to be accurate on any of this, on here, but mainly, you need to TRY to keep if ebbing and flowing, with a few curveballs and wow songs to hook the audience. That being said, no ones tastes are the same, so the treasure/trash theory is pretty dang true. If you are live and local, playing to advertisers and listeners (vs. All or large percentage of agency buys) you would be surprised how may GOLD songs there really are. And just as many exact opposite opinions of the same song. Here's an oldie that rolled up for debate this weekend after hearing it at a pub - "Last Train To London" by ELO. Chartered in the 30s. Play or not? Anybody even remember it without looking it up?

 

[TheBigA]

Here's an oldie that rolled up for debate this weekend after hearing it at a pub - "Last Train To London" by ELO. Chartered in the 30s. Play or not? Anybody even remember it without looking it up?

Here's my rule of thumb. Name an artist. Think of the Top 5 songs by that artist. If this song isn't among them, don't play it. Because there are so many other, better songs to choose from, both by that artist and others.

On the other hand, if you're doing a Sunday night specialty show (as some have talked about), and you're doing ELO From A To Z, then you'll probably play it that one time. But you're explaining why you're playing it, and you're doing it at a time that won't hurt you. The key thing here is CONTEXT. An unfamiliar song out of the blue with no context is not a good idea. Then again, that may be why you don't hear those kinds of shows much, except with major artists like The Beatles, Elvis, or Motown.

 

[Avid Listener]

Avid, the repetition effect is tied to any song, whether it's a deeper cut being played or a tested hit song being played.
Listeners can claim repetition on "Go Your Own Way" as much as "Tie a Yellow Ribbon....".

You are correct that theoretically, a station could burn out a "deep cut", but to do that they'd have to actually play deep cuts. Since almost no stations play deep cuts, the number of deep cuts getting burned out from overplaying is probably low enough to count on the fingers of one hand.

 

[Avid Listener]

Here's my rule of thumb. Name an artist. Think of the Top 5 songs by that artist. If this song isn't among them, don't play it. Because there are so many other, better songs to choose from, both by that artist and others.

That's one of the least intelligent comments I've ever read. Some artists or acts don't even have 5 "hits". And for others, they've been so prolific over their careers that their top 25 songs should be played. Perhaps it might be better to come up with rules that aren't so simple they can be written on a thumb.

 

[davideduardo]

You are correct that theoretically, a station could burn out a "deep cut", but to do that they'd have to actually play deep cuts. Since almost no stations play deep cuts, the number of deep cuts getting burned out from overplaying is probably low enough to count on the fingers of one hand.

Deep cuts are generally "burned out" before you play them. No passion, limited recall and recognition and considerable tune out.

People do not come to the radio to discover "new" deep cuts that were on albums issued 40 years ago and which had essentially no impact back then.

Playing those songs is a bit like throwing bricks at your transmitter: one will not knock you off the air, but if you keep doing it, eventually it will break.

 

[TheBigA]

That's one of the least intelligent comments I've ever read. Some artists or acts don't even have 5 "hits".

As I said: CONTEXT. You're focusing on a number. My point was to focus on the songs the artist is most known for. In the case of ELO, which was the example we were discussing, "Last Train To London" is not a song they're best known for.

 

[Tibbs4]

That's funny. I totally appreciate BigA's comments and it makes perfect SUCCESSFUL RADIO sense. AND I NEVER AGREE WITH YA, DO I, BigA? Certainly you will play more than only five Eagles songs. Hippie plays 50 Beatles songs. BigA is just making a generalization there, Avid. Add in the one or two hit wonders, so yeah, there is not a concrete rule, obviously. What is being said is, unless you are a well-funded underground-style, independent radio station (we have one of those in Nashville) you have to play things that listeners are comfortable with hearing and IF you play an occasional more obscure track you totally frame it into the context. Like the song "New Orleans Lady" by LeRoux. It works during Mardi Gras week here in the South on an Oldies format, but you HAVE to explain the band, the song, the reason you are playing it and why it was significant when it was originally on the radio and tie it in. Many people would then appreciate the song and not tune out or take a nice trip down memory lane. The song probably wouldn't be played again until next Mardi Gras. I still think you can be cutting edge with an oldies format, if you specifically narrow the years and focus, but you can't play Russian roulette or throw bricks.

 

[oldies76]

You are correct that theoretically, a station could burn out a "deep cut", but to do that they'd have to actually play deep cuts. Since almost no stations play deep cuts, the number of deep cuts getting burned out from overplaying is probably low enough to count on the fingers of one hand.

Exactly right! And yet the others here, insist on saying that if even one "lost hit or deep cut" is played ONCE, listeners will think of it as repeated frequently or a tune out. That is not true, at all.

Playing a well tested song, like "Hotel California" 4 times a day, everyday....is what repetition is all about, even if the listener hears it once every week or two. It's a long term effect, not one day. Common sense.

 

[oldies76]

Here's my rule of thumb. Name an artist. Think of the Top 5 songs by that artist.

Melanie:

1) Lay Down
2) Brand New Key
3) Peace Will Come
4) Nickel Song
5) Ring the Living Bell

 

[TheBigA]

What a legacy.

 

[davideduardo]

Melanie:

1) Lay Down
2) Brand New Key
3) Peace Will Come
4) Nickel Song
5) Ring the Living Bell

I'm getting ill.

 

[oldies76]

I'm getting ill.

Take some Advil....Here's something that will make you feel better. Take a listen.

http://wcbsfm.cbslocal.com/

 

[johnbasalla]

Of the Melanie tunes, "Lay Down..." and "Brand New Key" were really big hits. My favorite of that lot is the esoteric "Peace Will Come (According To Plan)". It was a good example of a single that got as high as it did only because it was the follow-up to a huge top 10 hit. It is very interesting. It's not a conventional "Top 40" song musically and the lyrics are "out-there" so much that you can't really understand exactly what she's trying to say.

 

[johnbasalla]

Yes, context is just about everything. I had the tough assignment of filling in on a weekly Sunday night "Oldies" Specialty show that aired live during the time that CBS was showing their 50th anniversary of The Beatles Ed Sullivan Show appearance. So, to connect and still be different, I decided to play, along with The Beatles, other songs that were in the Top 40 at the time, or would soon be. I played that up in promotion before the show and mentioned the concept every time I cracked the mike. To my surprise, I got some good calls during the first hour and a half, which directly coincided with the Beatles CBS show. The listeners were engaged, asking if this-song, or that-song was popular at the time.

 

[unitron]

Yes, context is just about everything. I had the tough assignment of filling in on a weekly Sunday night "Oldies" Specialty show that aired live during the time that CBS was showing their 50th anniversary of The Beatles Ed Sullivan Show appearance. So, to connect and still be different, I decided to play, along with The Beatles, other songs that were in the Top 40 at the time, or would soon be. I played that up in promotion before the show and mentioned the concept every time I cracked the mike. To my surprise, I got some good calls during the first hour and a half, which directly coincided with the Beatles CBS show. The listeners were engaged, asking if this-song, or that-song was popular at the time.

So you had listeners who dared to like what they liked instead of just what the ratings services say they're supposed to like?

The nerve of some people.

 

[davideduardo]

So you had listeners who dared to like what they liked instead of just what the ratings services say they're supposed to like?

The nerve of some people.

The "ratings services(sic)" don't say anything about what songs should be played. The ratings only measure how much listening goes to each radio station in a market and who is responsible for it.

Nothing more.

However, stations spend considerable sums of money to ask their listeners and potential listeners what music (and other content) they want to hear. In this case, nobody is determining what people are "supposed to like". They are finding out what listeners want, and trying to give it to them.

 

[firepoint525]

I grew up in a rural area in which, if radio had TRULY played what listeners wanted to hear, I suspect that I would have heard a lot more LOCAL bands on my local radio station, and a lot LESS of the top 40 which was forced on them (and in turn, US) by the national record companies. I also suspect that that is true everywhere else, as well. But I am guessing that none of these local bands could get played because they evidently did not have record deals, national distribution, etc. It would not do me any good to name any of these bands, because none of them ever "went national," but I still remember the kids at school wearing their t-shirts, talking about them, etc., so some of them at least generated some local buzz.

 

[Avid Listener]

I read that generally, a radio station gets better ratings for carrying play-by-play of a local sports team than they get for carrying out-of-town teams, even if the local team isn't as good as the two out-of-town teams. Music format stations brag about having their DJ's do local appearances introducing bands at concerts, even if the band's music isn't played on their station. News directors all agree that, for the most part, local news stories get better ratings than national news stories.

It seems to me that one of the problems is that when stations spend gazillions of dollars on research, they still only test the songs that they've pre-determined should be tested based on their pre-conceived ideas of what's going to succeed. I learned a long time ago, the most important thing in finding the right information is learning to ask the right questions. I'd like to see some evidence that when these consultants test for what music to play on any station that plays "vintage" music, they include in the testing "deep cuts" from albums from the target era, and new songs from recent releases of their core artists.

I was on a radio station's test list for a while. They'd send me links to long lists of songs that I was supposed to give quick impressions of. But they never included deep cuts or new releases by core artists. The "experts" keep claiming everything is tested, but I have never seen any evidence of that sort of testing. I've never had anyone in my circle of acquaintances who ever was a test subject in one of those auditorium tests who said those kinds of songs were ever included.

 

[TheBigA]

It seems to me that one of the problems is that when stations spend gazillions of dollars on research, they still only test the songs that they've pre-determined should be tested based on their pre-conceived ideas of what's going to succeed.

I don't know anyone who does research with pre-conceived ideas. The reason you spend money on research is to learn new things. Learn things that maybe you didn't think about before. I spend a lot of my year attending conferences and seminars on radio, and every one of them is predicated on telling me things I didn't know before. And I've been doing this a while. We're constantly seeing research that challenges those "pre-conceived ideas." Yet quite often, we discover that people are people, and a lot of times, they still behave the way they always have. And there's not much any of us can do about that.

Plus a lot of us work with various partners: Record labels, advertisers, and other business relationships. They don't all share the same views. They come in with their own research and their own "pre-conceived ideas." So it's more than just radio. Perhaps that challenges some of YOUR pre-conceived ideas of how radio operates.