T
trackertalent
Guest
The birth of the tape cartridge in the late 1950s brought about a major change in radio, first by providing a convenient way of storing, handling and playing commercials, promos and other programming elements. As the formats (especially Top 40) evolved and air talent became more creative, the use of carts increased and, subsequently, the number of cart machines in many studios also rose, to as many as six or more.
When the number of radio stations (competition) began to grow, programmers realized the importance of maintaining continuity... keeping things moving. On-air patter would be occasionally peppered with a 'drop-in' or other brief entertaining snippet from cart. Air talent mastered the art of 'talk-ups;' being able to feel the intro of a song and get some final thoughts across before the song's vocal began. Segues between programming elements had to be tight but not sloppy. The goal was keeping listeners glued to the radio and, preferably, to your station. From this wise thinking, 'd e a d a i r' became a dreaded, mortal sin. Having no sound for more than a couple of seconds - if that - struck terror into the hearts of programmers, who feared - and rightly so - that the listener would spin a dial (in those days) or press a button, and *poof*... instantly become someone else's listener instead.
And so it came to pass that the radio rule was tight on-air production and absolutely no dead air. Even allowing a song to begin fading without talking over it or firing off another element was unacceptable to programmers... and to listeners who came to expect a steady stream of entertainment.
As a side note, the more creative air talent on the progressive rock FM stations knew their music so intimately, that they would create 'sets' (usually three or more songs) that allowed them to artfully cross-fade songs; usually of the same key and tempo, but not necessarily so, creating a very ear-pleasing blend. Club DJs 'discovered' this much later.
And, boy, radio sure was great for a while.
So... what happened? Why are we today hearing songs completely fade out before the next element begins playing? Even some produced sweepers, in which background sound effects are used, are allowed to die a slow, painful death before the next song fires off. The only radio formats I can remember that allowed songs to completely fade before the next element began was Classical, and a now-deceased format known as 'Beautiful Music.' Loose programming worked for these two formats.
This snore-fest of bad on-air production is the result of laziness. Pure and simple. And I'm not talking about a jock who makes an honest mistake here and there, a console button that refuses to cooperate, or even an occasional automation anomaly. Today's automation systems are pretty reliable. The laziness comes into play when elements (songs, commercials, promos, sweepers, etc.) are loaded into the system and not properly adjusted for airplay. 'Ripping' songs from CD is the quickest way to get music into the library, but the beginnings need to be trimmed properly and the ends of songs and sweepers, etc. need to have an 'EOM' marker or 'sec tone' appropriately placed so that the next element fires at the right time and before the current element fades to oblivion. Some automation systems have an 'auto-trim' feature where these things are allegedly addressed. But auto-trim is based on an audio level threshold, which isn't always accurate. So don't trust it unless you would also trust someone with no radio experience to be a reliable board-op. A quality product requires commitment and, at the very least, that commitment is TIME. So, couldn't a few seconds of the time saved by ripping (rather than recording songs at real-time) be used to make sure the song (or sweeper, etc.) is adjusted properly?
It's bogus that a programmer can claim to want their station to perform to the best of its potential, yet their on-air sound is no more polished than a damp, mildewy dishrag. Fact is, a station sounds only as good as it does when it's automated. And that includes voice-tracked shifts. When your last live air talent each day switches to automation then turns off the lights and leaves, the station should not sound like someone turned off the lights and left. Do you not care what happens between 7 or 8 PM and 6 AM the next day? Has it ever crossed your mind that perhaps the reason your sales department can't sell those hours is because you haven't given anyone a reason to want to buy airtime during those hours? TV and newspapers have been experiencing audience erosion for years already. Are you helping fuel the exodus of radio listeners who realize they can make better programming choices with the digital technology available to them?
If this is your station, are you really proud of the way it sounds? Really? Do you feel that listeners and sponsors owe you their loyalty?
If you answered 'yes' to those questions, then your problem is far greater than laziness. You're not nearly as great as you think/say you are.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
When the number of radio stations (competition) began to grow, programmers realized the importance of maintaining continuity... keeping things moving. On-air patter would be occasionally peppered with a 'drop-in' or other brief entertaining snippet from cart. Air talent mastered the art of 'talk-ups;' being able to feel the intro of a song and get some final thoughts across before the song's vocal began. Segues between programming elements had to be tight but not sloppy. The goal was keeping listeners glued to the radio and, preferably, to your station. From this wise thinking, 'd e a d a i r' became a dreaded, mortal sin. Having no sound for more than a couple of seconds - if that - struck terror into the hearts of programmers, who feared - and rightly so - that the listener would spin a dial (in those days) or press a button, and *poof*... instantly become someone else's listener instead.
And so it came to pass that the radio rule was tight on-air production and absolutely no dead air. Even allowing a song to begin fading without talking over it or firing off another element was unacceptable to programmers... and to listeners who came to expect a steady stream of entertainment.
As a side note, the more creative air talent on the progressive rock FM stations knew their music so intimately, that they would create 'sets' (usually three or more songs) that allowed them to artfully cross-fade songs; usually of the same key and tempo, but not necessarily so, creating a very ear-pleasing blend. Club DJs 'discovered' this much later.
And, boy, radio sure was great for a while.
So... what happened? Why are we today hearing songs completely fade out before the next element begins playing? Even some produced sweepers, in which background sound effects are used, are allowed to die a slow, painful death before the next song fires off. The only radio formats I can remember that allowed songs to completely fade before the next element began was Classical, and a now-deceased format known as 'Beautiful Music.' Loose programming worked for these two formats.
This snore-fest of bad on-air production is the result of laziness. Pure and simple. And I'm not talking about a jock who makes an honest mistake here and there, a console button that refuses to cooperate, or even an occasional automation anomaly. Today's automation systems are pretty reliable. The laziness comes into play when elements (songs, commercials, promos, sweepers, etc.) are loaded into the system and not properly adjusted for airplay. 'Ripping' songs from CD is the quickest way to get music into the library, but the beginnings need to be trimmed properly and the ends of songs and sweepers, etc. need to have an 'EOM' marker or 'sec tone' appropriately placed so that the next element fires at the right time and before the current element fades to oblivion. Some automation systems have an 'auto-trim' feature where these things are allegedly addressed. But auto-trim is based on an audio level threshold, which isn't always accurate. So don't trust it unless you would also trust someone with no radio experience to be a reliable board-op. A quality product requires commitment and, at the very least, that commitment is TIME. So, couldn't a few seconds of the time saved by ripping (rather than recording songs at real-time) be used to make sure the song (or sweeper, etc.) is adjusted properly?
It's bogus that a programmer can claim to want their station to perform to the best of its potential, yet their on-air sound is no more polished than a damp, mildewy dishrag. Fact is, a station sounds only as good as it does when it's automated. And that includes voice-tracked shifts. When your last live air talent each day switches to automation then turns off the lights and leaves, the station should not sound like someone turned off the lights and left. Do you not care what happens between 7 or 8 PM and 6 AM the next day? Has it ever crossed your mind that perhaps the reason your sales department can't sell those hours is because you haven't given anyone a reason to want to buy airtime during those hours? TV and newspapers have been experiencing audience erosion for years already. Are you helping fuel the exodus of radio listeners who realize they can make better programming choices with the digital technology available to them?
If this is your station, are you really proud of the way it sounds? Really? Do you feel that listeners and sponsors owe you their loyalty?
If you answered 'yes' to those questions, then your problem is far greater than laziness. You're not nearly as great as you think/say you are.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...