• 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

Todays Current Music

N

no1uknow

Okay, trying to get a feeling for your thoughts on todays current product.
-Do you think its overall better
-Is it good enough and plentiful enough to change the balance of Gold to current at your station?

It seems most of the big players are anywhere 35%-65% current to gold to 40%-60%. Anybody with some good input?
 
The current product is better than it was, say 5 to 10 years ago. Part of it is because the music is better but the larger factor is that the slower charts have helped make the songs stick around longer and thus become more familiar to our listeners. We've gotten more recurrent based in the last couple of years.

If you go back and look at music research since the early 90s, you'll find there is a big hole in the mid to late 90s since there's not a lot of high testing titles from that period. It was during that time that the country charts were moving songs up and out of the charts very quickly. As soon as a song hit #1, radio and the labels were coming off of it and working in the artist's next single, so we were often playing 4 or 5 singles a year from an artist, but often times the songs weren't sticking around to become really familiar to the listeners so they weren't all that familiar when they eventually moved into recurrent and never made it to gold. Many of those titles don't get played now because they get crappy test scores and they get crappy test scores because they're largely unfamiliar to the listeners. As a result, we were relying so much on late 80s and early 90s gold to the point that we started burning out the titles, but didn't have the gold to replace them with. It was about '99 or so when the charts slowed down and we went from having over 40 #1 songs a year to around 20 or so (or less), and the titles from that era are testing well enough to start replacing the early 90s gold. Now we're allowing the hits to stick around long enough to eventually become recurrent and gold titles.

I used to tell the record labels all the time..."you'll sell more albums if you have two hits off of them than if you have five singles off them".


> Okay, trying to get a feeling for your thoughts on todays
> current product.
> -Do you think its overall better
> -Is it good enough and plentiful enough to change the
> balance of Gold to current at your station?
>
> It seems most of the big players are anywhere 35%-65%
> current to gold to 40%-60%. Anybody with some good input?
>
 
> Okay, trying to get a feeling for your thoughts on todays
> current product.
> -Do you think its overall better
> -Is it good enough and plentiful enough to change the
> balance of Gold to current at your station?
>
> It seems most of the big players are anywhere 35%-65%
> current to gold to 40%-60%. Anybody with some good input?
>

I have an internet-only station that plays a mix of current and classic country.
The mix is roughly 60% classic country to 40% current. With a playlist of just over 1350 songs it surely keeps things from repeating too soon.

The current songs seem to be getting better "track ratings" lately. Newcomers like Danielle Peck, Jessica Dean and DeLana Stevens are ranking very high
among the current songs, and the majority of the oldies are also showing good track ratings.

Since the station is not ad-driven there's plenty of freedom and the format definately works for us.<P ID="signature">______________
WJJD The Country Giant Revisited streams at
http://www.live365.com/stations/alanmccall</P>
 
> The current product is better than it was, say 5 to 10 years
> ago. Part of it is because the music is better but the
> larger factor is that the slower charts have helped make the
> songs stick around longer and thus become more familiar to
> our listeners. We've gotten more recurrent based in the
> last couple of years.
>
> If you go back and look at music research since the early
> 90s, you'll find there is a big hole in the mid to late 90s
> since there's not a lot of high testing titles from that
> period. It was during that time that the country charts
> were moving songs up and out of the charts very quickly. As
> soon as a song hit #1, radio and the labels were coming off
> of it and working in the artist's next single, so we were
> often playing 4 or 5 singles a year from an artist, but
> often times the songs weren't sticking around to become
> really familiar to the listeners so they weren't all that
> familiar when they eventually moved into recurrent and never
> made it to gold. Many of those titles don't get played now
> because they get crappy test scores and they get crappy test
> scores because they're largely unfamiliar to the listeners.
> As a result, we were relying so much on late 80s and early
> 90s gold to the point that we started burning out the
> titles, but didn't have the gold to replace them with. It
> was about '99 or so when the charts slowed down and we went
> from having over 40 #1 songs a year to around 20 or so (or
> less), and the titles from that era are testing well enough
> to start replacing the early 90s gold. Now we're allowing
> the hits to stick around long enough to eventually become
> recurrent and gold titles.
>
> I used to tell the record labels all the time..."you'll sell
> more albums if you have two hits off of them than if you
> have five singles off them".
>
>
> > Okay, trying to get a feeling for your thoughts on todays
> > current product.
> > -Do you think its overall better
> > -Is it good enough and plentiful enough to change the
> > balance of Gold to current at your station?
> >
> > It seems most of the big players are anywhere 35%-65%
> > current to gold to 40%-60%. Anybody with some good input?
> >
>

you would also sell more albums if the albums didnt suck!! :)
<P ID="signature">______________
note to the NAB..satellite radio..its worth paying for!!</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom