• 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

Syndicated Vs. Local

My feeling is that since AM & PM drive times are the most important parts of the day, it's best to fill that with live, local talent. It's easier to cut to the all-important traffic reports, news (if so moved to have such a service) and it will serve the public well. I also feel that the mid-day deserves a live body at the mic rather than someone on tape...syndicated or not.

Actually, voice-tracking did start on the nighttime and weekend dayparts, Eric. It wasn't until after 1996 when you had all of these stations controlled by one company that it caught on for the other dayparts. That's when someone said 'hey, we can save lotsa money by VT'ing the other dayparts! The listener won't know the difference! Rrrrrright!!!


What would I do if an owner insisted on voice-tracking my live-and-local radio station? Walk, probably.

That all depends on what you perceive to be live and local. I don't see a station that voicetracks talent different from any other if the proper elements are there. I'm using small market radio as an example. Your jocks may be off site, but you still air local news, information and weather. That's local. As for live, if you use satellite, then you are live. You have to be of some value to your community. I've heard plenty of local stations that are an absolute chore to listen to. If you want to win by being local, then you better be interesting. Voice-tracking makes it interesting if you do it right.
 
And I find it hard to believe that Tony Renda isn't making enough money with his group of stations, particularly that dominant cluster in Indiana - heck, it's the ONLY cluster in Indiana - to hire live personalities.

He paid a king's ransom for that new building and all the equipment in it. It may be awhile before that station's paid for.

By the way, Uniontown - if you're speaking of WMBS - is live and local most of the time.

Outside of the morning show and a couple of talk shows, it's pretty much on the satellite. You can't tell me with conviction that they don't do a good job of it. They're one of the last bastions of locally-owned radio, and they're also a standalone AM. For them to remain profitable these days is an absolute miracle, but they're doing very well at it. Not every jock comes out of the studio, but who cares? As long as listeners can get local news, weather, sports, lost dogs, and such from their local radio station, they're happy. No one is embracing the jocks like they once did.
 
Clarke, I'm not trying to argue. Did you say "live and local radio station"? 620 is a Long way from those days. Take Dr. Winer and the rest off, and sell radio commericals first. "If a station can't be profitable, and have live DJ's" I guess its time for Mr. Calib to be let go then.

All I'm saying is that the technology is here to accomplish both 100%. Voice track, and sound completely local. Lost dog reports, breaking news, everything. Its done every day, and absolutely can't tell the difference. If its a way to save AM's and make them sound good, I'm all for it.

KB should not have been blown up. As I keep preaching, Entercom, Clear Channel are not broadcasters. They don't know what they are doing.

I've taken everything we ever talked about in being local, and applied it to my small market station. I just don't have 6 live jocks sitting in my studio chair. But I still have six live and local jocks. This is not a satt. station.

Go to www.wrnonline.com and see what I'm taking about. Gentlemen, this is not misleading the audience.
 
All I'm saying is that the technology is here to accomplish both 100%. Voice track, and sound completely local. Lost dog reports, breaking news, everything. Its done every day, and absolutely can't tell the difference. If its a way to save AM's and make them sound good, I'm all for it.

That's exactly my point Chris. I checked that website. VERY COOL. Is this what you're using on your station in TN?
 
Ken,

Indeed! They voice track in real time, even doing lost dog reports, local birthdays, breaking local news etc. Anything and everything I feed to them via a website, hourly. The music is in our studio in the hard drive. I program the music, and they jock it.

Hitting every post on every intro as well. For the cost of one part time announcer, I'm local around the clock.

Not that's good business! I'm telling you, we sound as solid as 650 WSM in the smallest of markets, south of Nashville.
 
They voice track in real time, even doing lost dog reports, local birthdays, breaking local news etc. Anything and everything I feed to them via a website, hourly.

Listen to this man, people! This is a great idea! I had one similar to it a long time ago...like cutting a deal with Metro Networks to do the same thing, using their talent. They'd do it just for the barter. When you sit down and think about it, there's a lot of stations that could have been saved from going dark had we had the technology then that we do now.
 
What gets me is that when I say things like "Playing songs with a DJ talking in between them" is really the only format in radio, everyone jumps all over me. Yet when it comes to discussing truly live versus voice tracked, the objections to voice tracking are mostly over petty issues like "sounding local" or talking up records.

If there are a large number if different formats, if there are a wide variety of ways to make a "songs with DJ's talking between them" work, then it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to come up with a way to turn the problems of voice-tracking into program assets. There should never be a condemnation of voice-tracking based on something as petty as minor program elements that don't work as well as live.

BTW, I've known live & local DJ's who would never pick up an incoming phone call from a listeners.
 
What gets me is that when I say things like "Playing songs with a DJ talking in between them" is really the only format in radio, everyone jumps all over me. Yet when it comes to discussing truly live versus voice tracked, the objections to voice tracking are mostly over petty issues like "sounding local" or talking up records.

If there are a large number if different formats, if there are a wide variety of ways to make a "songs with DJ's talking between them" work, then it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to come up with a way to turn the problems of voice-tracking into program assets. There should never be a condemnation of voice-tracking based on something as petty as minor program elements that don't work as well as live.

BTW, I've known live & local DJ's who would never pick up an incoming phone call from a listeners.


Good point, realist. Voice-tracking can be an asset if it's done properly, and what Chris has described is the vision that I had of it all along. As far as the request lines go, yes, there's more than plenty who hit the lock button on the Telos so that all listeners get is a busy signal when they call in to the station.
 
Listen to this man, people! This is a great idea! I had one similar to it a long time ago...like cutting a deal with Metro Networks to do the same thing, using their talent. They'd do it just for the barter. When you sit down and think about it, there's a lot of stations that could have been saved from going dark had we had the technology then that we do now.
[/quote]

I can agree with the concept, I would just hope you could do better than Metro, which at least here, often sends their first feed on Pittsburgh news with little Pittsburgh news actually in it, instead using stories from Wheeling and Stuebenville as filler, or just out and out getting the actual stories wrong, such as being a full three days behind the curve on the recent minimum wage hike in Harrisburg.
 
I can agree with the concept, I would just hope you could do better than Metro, which at least here, often sends their first feed on Pittsburgh news with little Pittsburgh news actually in it, instead using stories from Wheeling and Stuebenville as filler, or just out and out getting the actual stories wrong, such as being a full three days behind the curve on the recent minimum wage hike in Harrisburg.

If you use their audio feed, I can understand that. How I would rectify it, is, if I were a smaller station using their service, I'd write the news on-site, then send it down there for their anchor to record and send back up. There has to be a little bit of interaction for their material to be of any value to their affiliate stations. Maybe that's what needs to be done...a little more interaction.

Now I've never used their audio news service before. Do they do one generic newscast that feeds all the same stations?
 
From what I can tell, they don't do a generic newcast, rather they do one for each station, but I could be mistaken. My problem lies in the fact that, at least as far as Pittsburgh goes, they often get the news wrong, or miss stories altogether, and have a habit (at least some of their personnel) of mispronouncing names on a regular basis. They may do better in other markets, since they are a national outfit, we may just be stuck with the worst of it, but the local branch is sad to say the least. And don't get me started on the stories they send down on their browser, yikes indeed! I distinctly remember as part of their "Pittsburgh feed" a few weeks ago, they send as part of their copy the great tattoo debate in some Ohio town most of our listeners never heard of.
 
They may do better in other markets, since they are a national outfit, we may just be stuck with the worst of it, but the local branch is sad to say the least. And don't get me started on the stories they send down on their browser, yikes indeed! I distinctly remember as part of their "Pittsburgh feed" a few weeks ago, they send as part of their copy the great tattoo debate in some Ohio town most of our listeners never heard of.

I would think that they rely on some interaction from their affiliates, as to what's newsworthy and what isn't. Like maybe have someone at the local station ghostwrite some news, then send it down for their anchor to record and send back up. I think if you depend on them entirely for local news, there's going to be some ball-dropping going on.
 
I am going to agree and disagree with the last comment. Certainly there should be some interaction between the affilliate and Metro in what the station would like as far as news, not so much regarding what passes for a national story, but certainly along the lines of what passes for a local one. That being said, I am a little more skepitcal to the idea of ghostwriting the news, for what is supposed to be a news service. If I am relegated to using my own resources to write stories for someone else, then why not just do the news myself to begin with.

And thanks to Metro for further proving my point this morning as we have run newscasts referring to the Steelers running back Nay - Jay (phonetically spelled, as it was pronounced on the air) Davenport and the Aim - ish (again the pronounciation they used) school shooting. This stuff is just brutal with a capital B.
 
If I am relegated to using my own resources to write stories for someone else, then why not just do the news myself to begin with.

You're half right. If I was a small-market station that was using Metro for regional news, I'd rely on them for the stuff that routinely comes in by fax. But their people can't get out and cover meetings. If you're capable of that, then write the script, chop the sound, and then send it to them so they can voice it. It has to be a cooperative effort in order to work well.
 
"send it to them so they can voice it."

Does the remote station that voices the newscast have someone whose pipes are so incredible, so compelling that no local station could possibly have anyone on their staff who would sound as good reading the words locally?
 
Radio_Realist said:
Does the remote station that voices the newscast have someone whose pipes are so incredible, so compelling that no local station could possibly have anyone on their staff who would sound as good reading the words locally?
Click to expand...

I mentioned Metro doing it in order to maintain that 'one voice' uniformity on a station with a tight budget, Realist.
 
"Metro doing it in order to maintain that 'one voice' uniformity"

And that "one voice uniformity" is such a desireable thing that it overshadows mispronounced local place name? I'll never understand the thinking behind some of these decisions. To my "out of the industry for a long time" mind, having local place names pronounced correctly trumps having the same voice mispronouncing them.
 
Radio_Realist said:
And that "one voice uniformity" is such a desireable thing that it overshadows mispronounced local place name? I'll never understand the thinking behind some of these decisions. To my "out of the industry for a long time" mind, having local place names pronounced correctly trumps having the same voice mispronouncing them.
Click to expand...

I hear on-site local announcers making those same mistakes, Realist. Is that all you're basing your argument on?
 
"Is that all you're basing your argument on?"

No, I was trying to avoid writing a major essay enumerating in extreme details all the different variables involved in this issue. Considering how much has been said already in this thread about not only syndicated versus local but also custom-delivered-from-out-of-town versus local and voice-tracked versus live-and-local, I didn't really want to re-hash everything. I just wanted to throw one or two new points onto the fire, not solve the entire issue with one massive post.
 
Radio_Realist said:
I was trying to avoid writing a major essay enumerating in extreme details all the different variables involved in this issue. Considering how much has been said already in this thread about not only syndicated versus local but also custom-delivered-from-out-of-town versus local and voice-tracked versus live-and-local, I didn't really want to re-hash everything. I just wanted to throw one or two new points onto the fire, not solve the entire issue with one massive post.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's like beating a dead horse, I know. But I stand by my earlier post.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom