Why do these stations insist on playing recurrents? don't they know people are sick to death of theese songs???? radio and records is smart enough to realize this why don't the programmers of top 40 radio stations? is there any station we can listen to that plays prefurably no or at least little recurrent material?
-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
top 40 station we can listen to that doesn't play recurrents?
- Thread starter marcus250
- Start date
XM 20 On 20 plays almost no recurrents and no golds at all.
They have XM 30 The Hitlist playing almost all recurrents and golds.
That way everybody is happy.
They have XM 30 The Hitlist playing almost all recurrents and golds.
That way everybody is happy.
Head to head, no recurrent = getting killed.
You *DO* realize that R&R's charts are BASED on airplay, right? And that they are charts of CURRENTS??
Most people are passives, and haven't been exposed to the music for as long as you. The bigger stations do callout research, which tells them how much burn there really is in the tested songs.
Since the AVERAGE listener doesn't post here, you just might not qualify as a research sample. Those more typical listeners just might take longer to burn on titles.
marcus250 said:Why do these stations insist on playing recurrents? don't they know people are sick to death of theese songs???? radio and records is smart enough to realize this why don't the programmers of top 40 radio stations?
You *DO* realize that R&R's charts are BASED on airplay, right? And that they are charts of CURRENTS??
Most people are passives, and haven't been exposed to the music for as long as you. The bigger stations do callout research, which tells them how much burn there really is in the tested songs.
Since the AVERAGE listener doesn't post here, you just might not qualify as a research sample. Those more typical listeners just might take longer to burn on titles.
all i want is one station with variety and more new music!
thanks for the suggestion of XM guess i didn't make myself too clear! in place of the recurrents there is plenty of new music to play! people are exposed to songs more than you might think what with ipods etc! i deffinately appreciate what XM does now if they would just play more new music! it is posible not to repeat for 2 and 1/2 days with all the songs on the media base chart! i do realize it would be imposible for all stations to do what i am suggesting all i want is one!
thanks for the suggestion of XM guess i didn't make myself too clear! in place of the recurrents there is plenty of new music to play! people are exposed to songs more than you might think what with ipods etc! i deffinately appreciate what XM does now if they would just play more new music! it is posible not to repeat for 2 and 1/2 days with all the songs on the media base chart! i do realize it would be imposible for all stations to do what i am suggesting all i want is one!
Re: all i want is one station with variety and more new music!
And you got one. XM, as suggested.
You have to remember that most Top 40 listeners are tuning in wanting to hear the song(s) THEY want to hear. They definitely don't want to wait for 2-1/2 days!
Also, MOST people DON'T have iPods. Many do, most don't. An even higher percentage of radio users do not have iPods, compared to the general population.
Bottom line: those people use the radio differently than you (and vice versa).
marcus250 said:i do realize it would be imposible for all stations to do what i am suggesting all i want is one!
And you got one. XM, as suggested.
You have to remember that most Top 40 listeners are tuning in wanting to hear the song(s) THEY want to hear. They definitely don't want to wait for 2-1/2 days!
Also, MOST people DON'T have iPods. Many do, most don't. An even higher percentage of radio users do not have iPods, compared to the general population.
Bottom line: those people use the radio differently than you (and vice versa).
There's a CHR in eastern Europe that can be heard all over Latvia and Lithuania called European Hit Radio. Their playlist is HUGE, and they pretty much play every song that makes the Top 40 in the US, UK, Germany, and the Euro-chart Hot 100:
http://www.europeanhitradio.com/
http://www.europeanhitradio.lt/
http://www.europeanhitradio.com/
http://www.europeanhitradio.lt/
The problem as I see it is that too many stations aren't actively looking for music, they're just taking whatever the record companies send them and throw those tracks into rotation. That leads to more and more use of recurrents and golds to make up for the lack of newer tracks that would otherwise take up that time. While we should be out there looking for new acts and other tracks from big acts that we aren't playing (Irreplaceable, anyone?), we're sitting back and waiting for the next single to hit our desks. That's not the way it should be.
Trust me: callout isn't always correct. Most people, when you ask them if they're tired of hearing a recurrent track, they'll say no because they like the song, but when it's aired, they usually think "this again? It's a good song, but they play it so much!" I've seen this over and over again. It happens. People do get burned out on recurrents quicker than the industry thinks they do. It makes it difficult to rely on the audience to program our stations, I know, but sometimes stepping in and saying, "okay, we've played this enough already" is a good thing.
Trust me: callout isn't always correct. Most people, when you ask them if they're tired of hearing a recurrent track, they'll say no because they like the song, but when it's aired, they usually think "this again? It's a good song, but they play it so much!" I've seen this over and over again. It happens. People do get burned out on recurrents quicker than the industry thinks they do. It makes it difficult to rely on the audience to program our stations, I know, but sometimes stepping in and saying, "okay, we've played this enough already" is a good thing.
Why would you want to listen to a station without recurrents? Sorry, but I like it when I hear some "Don't Cha", "Ain't No Other Man", "SOS", "Gold Digger", "Pon de Replay", and "Hollaback Girl" with my hits. Golds are always refreshing to hear every once in awhile.
And FYI, how quicky a song will burn out has nothing to do with how successful a song is. Best example is probably "Move Ya Body", which lasted two and a half years as a strong recurrent, and it only went to #6. And Eminem's "Shake That", which was only a top 20 hit, but still doing fair as a recurrent after almost a year and a half.
And FYI, how quicky a song will burn out has nothing to do with how successful a song is. Best example is probably "Move Ya Body", which lasted two and a half years as a strong recurrent, and it only went to #6. And Eminem's "Shake That", which was only a top 20 hit, but still doing fair as a recurrent after almost a year and a half.
I'm not saying recurrents are a bad thing, but I've noticed stations relying on them much too heavily. In essence, use them, but don't abuse them. Too many stations today are abusing them.
In the late '70s and early '80s, programmer Mike Joseph developed a Top 40/CHR format called "Hot Hits." The stations that used this approach played only current hits - no gold, no recurrents.
WTIC-FM in Hartford, WBBM-FM in Chicago, WFBL-AM in Syracuse, NY, WNVZ in Norfolk, and KITS in SF (pre-Modern Rock) were all Hot Hits stations at one time, as were the now-defunct WCAU-FM Philly (now WOGL), WHYT Detroit (now WDVD) and WMAR-FM Baltimore (now WWMX).
The biggest plus of Hot Hits was that the playlist was true Top 40 - a mix of everything. The chief minus of these stations were that they were extremely repetitive. The top currents, from what I've read on the format, got played once every 45 minutes or so. Generally the playlist consisted of 30 to 50 hit singles as well as a sprinkling of cuts from albums that were on the station's LP chart (which would be about the only time a recurrent or current hit would be played - if it was a cut on a charting LP). So many of these stations probably had an extremely high burnout factor.
From what I've been able to gather, most stations which began as Hot Hits, despite ratings success, did eventually open up their playlists to recurrents and even golds within a year after the format began. I think many of the Hot Hits stations were simply sick of paying Mike Joseph to consult, but according to a mini-documentary about WCAU-FM that was featured on Airchexx.com, they were also concerned about the burnout factor and also wanted to improve the ratings in the adult demos.
A couple of years later, in 1986, WTRK (106.1 FM, now WISX) tried a similar all-currents format (called "Electric 106"), also consulted by Joseph, and failed miserably. They then became WEGX "Eagle 106" and began playing older songs along with the currents, and the ratings went up dramatically after years in the toilet for that frequency.
So all-currents formats have been tried before. Granted, the radio climate is very different today from what it was 25 years ago, but a station that played nothing but currents would still have extremely high burnout. You are all right - stations shouldn't overload on recurrents, but they shouldn't ignore them either. For example, if WXKB is still playing Mary J. Blige's "Be Without You" 47 times a week three years after it was a hit, that's recurrent overload.
WTIC-FM in Hartford, WBBM-FM in Chicago, WFBL-AM in Syracuse, NY, WNVZ in Norfolk, and KITS in SF (pre-Modern Rock) were all Hot Hits stations at one time, as were the now-defunct WCAU-FM Philly (now WOGL), WHYT Detroit (now WDVD) and WMAR-FM Baltimore (now WWMX).
The biggest plus of Hot Hits was that the playlist was true Top 40 - a mix of everything. The chief minus of these stations were that they were extremely repetitive. The top currents, from what I've read on the format, got played once every 45 minutes or so. Generally the playlist consisted of 30 to 50 hit singles as well as a sprinkling of cuts from albums that were on the station's LP chart (which would be about the only time a recurrent or current hit would be played - if it was a cut on a charting LP). So many of these stations probably had an extremely high burnout factor.
From what I've been able to gather, most stations which began as Hot Hits, despite ratings success, did eventually open up their playlists to recurrents and even golds within a year after the format began. I think many of the Hot Hits stations were simply sick of paying Mike Joseph to consult, but according to a mini-documentary about WCAU-FM that was featured on Airchexx.com, they were also concerned about the burnout factor and also wanted to improve the ratings in the adult demos.
A couple of years later, in 1986, WTRK (106.1 FM, now WISX) tried a similar all-currents format (called "Electric 106"), also consulted by Joseph, and failed miserably. They then became WEGX "Eagle 106" and began playing older songs along with the currents, and the ratings went up dramatically after years in the toilet for that frequency.
So all-currents formats have been tried before. Granted, the radio climate is very different today from what it was 25 years ago, but a station that played nothing but currents would still have extremely high burnout. You are all right - stations shouldn't overload on recurrents, but they shouldn't ignore them either. For example, if WXKB is still playing Mary J. Blige's "Be Without You" 47 times a week three years after it was a hit, that's recurrent overload.
How's this for interesting programming...
In 2 Canadian markets (Ottawa & Montreal), stations can only play up to 49% hits! Reason being: the markets are made up of french stations that must play no less than 65% french music- which even the french listeners can't stand! So the CRTC has leveled the playing field, by telling us that our broadcast week can't exceed 49% hits, so we won't take all the french listeners in the market. Now try programming a CHR station that can't play 51% of the hits out there!!
In our case we MUST rely on our strong recurrents. We've also got to forecast what we think will convert into a hit, and spin them ASAP to maximize our non-hit plays. And lastly, some of our playlist is made up of records that you'll never see on a CHR chart. It has it's pros and cons... While we can never fully be a true CHR, we sound different than any other CHRs in North America who's playlists are nothing but Billboard's Top 40 list..
"Hits" for us are defined as a song that has entered the Top 40 on Billboard Hot 100, and Top 40 on our Canadian national airplay chart.
Montreal and Ottawa CHRs: Hot899 Ottawa, and MIX 96 Montreal (HAC/CHR)
In 2 Canadian markets (Ottawa & Montreal), stations can only play up to 49% hits! Reason being: the markets are made up of french stations that must play no less than 65% french music- which even the french listeners can't stand! So the CRTC has leveled the playing field, by telling us that our broadcast week can't exceed 49% hits, so we won't take all the french listeners in the market. Now try programming a CHR station that can't play 51% of the hits out there!!
In our case we MUST rely on our strong recurrents. We've also got to forecast what we think will convert into a hit, and spin them ASAP to maximize our non-hit plays. And lastly, some of our playlist is made up of records that you'll never see on a CHR chart. It has it's pros and cons... While we can never fully be a true CHR, we sound different than any other CHRs in North America who's playlists are nothing but Billboard's Top 40 list..
"Hits" for us are defined as a song that has entered the Top 40 on Billboard Hot 100, and Top 40 on our Canadian national airplay chart.
Montreal and Ottawa CHRs: Hot899 Ottawa, and MIX 96 Montreal (HAC/CHR)
CanadianCHR said:How's this for interesting programming...
In 2 Canadian markets (Ottawa & Montreal), stations can only play up to 49% hits! Reason being: the markets are made up of french stations that must play no less than 65% french music- which even the french listeners can't stand! So the CRTC has leveled the playing field, by telling us that our broadcast week can't exceed 49% hits, so we won't take all the french listeners in the market. Now try programming a CHR station that can't play 51% of the hits out there!!
In our case we MUST rely on our strong recurrents. We've also got to forecast what we think will convert into a hit, and spin them ASAP to maximize our non-hit plays. And lastly, some of our playlist is made up of records that you'll never see on a CHR chart. It has it's pros and cons... While we can never fully be a true CHR, we sound different than any other CHRs in North America who's playlists are nothing but Billboard's Top 40 list..
"Hits" for us are defined as a song that has entered the Top 40 on Billboard Hot 100, and Top 40 on our Canadian national airplay chart.
Montreal and Ottawa CHRs: Hot899 Ottawa, and MIX 96 Montreal (HAC/CHR)
Same thing South of the border as well. I traveled to Mexico last summer....U & Dat...Mexican song...Crowded...Mexican song...I Write Sins, Not Tragedies...Mexican song...
Yes, but are the English stations (if they have any) handicapped too because of this? We're an all English CHR, but forced to play 51% non hits, so we don't blow the French stations out of the market.
I din't believe there's any sort of quotas at all in Mexico. CHRs like Alfa 91.3 in Mexico City play pretty much nothing but hits in English. Beat 100.9, Mexico City's Dance station, doesn't play anything in Spanish either.
Los 40 on the other hand, which can be heard all over Mexico is more evenly split between Spanish and International hits. Still, the Spanish sounding songs they play aren't traditional Mexican records but rather contemporary records sung in Spanish. These songs come from all over Latin America
I think some of Canada's CHRs have found ways around all the quota rules. I know Z-103.5 in Toronto is very Dance friendly and since most of these Dance songs never chart on the national charts in Canada or the U.S., the rest of the music the station plays (Rock, Pop, and Hip Hop) is hit-oriented. It also needs to play like 40 percent Canadian content in regular rotation, like all other CHRs. What many Canadian CHRs have done, smartly, to avoid having to do this every hour is air lots of countdowns and all-request hours. They can just call these specialty shows, ie not part of regular rotation, and can be exempt from filling the stupid quotas at those hours. You end up seeing a countdown in the morning, another one at noon, the next hour is all request, a countdown in the afternoon, a mixshow at 5, an all request hour a little later in the evening, and a top 9 at 9 countdown at night.
The countdowns are when the CHRs in Canada can easily play lots of new music without alienating their audience.
Los 40 on the other hand, which can be heard all over Mexico is more evenly split between Spanish and International hits. Still, the Spanish sounding songs they play aren't traditional Mexican records but rather contemporary records sung in Spanish. These songs come from all over Latin America
I think some of Canada's CHRs have found ways around all the quota rules. I know Z-103.5 in Toronto is very Dance friendly and since most of these Dance songs never chart on the national charts in Canada or the U.S., the rest of the music the station plays (Rock, Pop, and Hip Hop) is hit-oriented. It also needs to play like 40 percent Canadian content in regular rotation, like all other CHRs. What many Canadian CHRs have done, smartly, to avoid having to do this every hour is air lots of countdowns and all-request hours. They can just call these specialty shows, ie not part of regular rotation, and can be exempt from filling the stupid quotas at those hours. You end up seeing a countdown in the morning, another one at noon, the next hour is all request, a countdown in the afternoon, a mixshow at 5, an all request hour a little later in the evening, and a top 9 at 9 countdown at night.
The countdowns are when the CHRs in Canada can easily play lots of new music without alienating their audience.
Josh C. said:I'm not saying recurrents are a bad thing, but I've noticed stations relying on them much too heavily. In essence, use them, but don't abuse them. Too many stations today are abusing them.
Sometimes those recurrents test better than the currents with the LISTENERS...and isn't it about THEM?
marcus250 said:Why do these stations insist on playing recurrents? don't they know people are sick to death of theese songs????
Where is your "research" to back this up?
CHRles said:I din't believe there's any sort of quotas at all in Mexico. CHRs like Alfa 91.3 in Mexico City play pretty much nothing but hits in English. Beat 100.9, Mexico City's Dance station, doesn't play anything in Spanish either.
Los 40 on the other hand, which can be heard all over Mexico is more evenly split between Spanish and International hits. Still, the Spanish sounding songs they play aren't traditional Mexican records but rather contemporary records sung in Spanish. These songs come from all over Latin America
I think some of Canada's CHRs have found ways around all the quota rules. I know Z-103.5 in Toronto is very Dance friendly and since most of these Dance songs never chart on the national charts in Canada or the U.S., the rest of the music the station plays (Rock, Pop, and Hip Hop) is hit-oriented. It also needs to play like 40 percent Canadian content in regular rotation, like all other CHRs. What many Canadian CHRs have done, smartly, to avoid having to do this every hour is air lots of countdowns and all-request hours. They can just call these specialty shows, ie not part of regular rotation, and can be exempt from filling the stupid quotas at those hours. You end up seeing a countdown in the morning, another one at noon, the next hour is all request, a countdown in the afternoon, a mixshow at 5, an all request hour a little later in the evening, and a top 9 at 9 countdown at night.
The countdowns are when the CHRs in Canada can easily play lots of new music without alienating their audience.
Yes, there are ways to go around the quota rules in Canada...
Firstly, Z103.5 doesn't have the hit/non hit quota... This is only for Montreal and Ottawa...
Second, Canadian stations have to respect the 35% Canadian music quota no matter what kind of shows they run. The rule is that any music that is played between 6a-6p MUST be atleast 35% Canadian. As well, the entire broadcast week must be 35% Canadian. So of course we try and play as little CanCon between 6a-9a, and 3p-7p.
As for the Hit/Non hit quota... it's a weekly quota of 51% non hit... So we'll stuff a lot of our non-hits after 7p, where we can get away with rolling more new music... And Sunday night "specialty" programming runs our non-hit total up as well.
Certainly a different way to program a radio station...
mistermicrophone said:Josh C. said:I'm not saying recurrents are a bad thing, but I've noticed stations relying on them much too heavily. In essence, use them, but don't abuse them. Too many stations today are abusing them.
Sometimes those recurrents test better than the currents with the LISTENERS...and isn't it about THEM?
You didn't read my prior post, did you? The fact is, burnout is higher than callout (or any other form of testing) shows it to be, because when asked, most people respond positively because they like the song, but they won't say they're tired of it even if they are, because they think that if they do, the song will just drop off, and they don't want that to happen. Nostalgia can be a fun feeling to play with on the air, but the whole idea of contemporary hit radio is just that: it's contemporary, meaning what's popular now, not what was popular six months ago. Too many stations rely on recurrents to make up the majority of their playlist, and that's causing much more burnout than the industry realizes, let alone the fact that it's enough burnout to make one want to drive a Q-Tip through their eardrum the next time they hear Nickelback's "Photograph" (as a great example).
Ask your average listener what their top ten problems with radio are. I promise you that in that list will be a complaint that radio drives too many songs into the ground. That's burnout, and it happens too much.
Josh C. said:mistermicrophone said:Josh C. said:I'm not saying recurrents are a bad thing, but I've noticed stations relying on them much too heavily. In essence, use them, but don't abuse them. Too many stations today are abusing them.
Sometimes those recurrents test better than the currents with the LISTENERS...and isn't it about THEM?
You didn't read my prior post, did you? The fact is, burnout is higher than callout (or any other form of testing) shows it to be, because when asked, most people respond positively because they like the song, but they won't say they're tired of it even if they are, because they think that if they do, the song will just drop off, and they don't want that to happen. Nostalgia can be a fun feeling to play with on the air, but the whole idea of contemporary hit radio is just that: it's contemporary, meaning what's popular now, not what was popular six months ago. Too many stations rely on recurrents to make up the majority of their playlist, and that's causing much more burnout than the industry realizes, let alone the fact that it's enough burnout to make one want to drive a Q-Tip through their eardrum the next time they hear Nickelback's "Photograph" (as a great example).
Ask your average listener what their top ten problems with radio are. I promise you that in that list will be a complaint that radio drives too many songs into the ground. That's burnout, and it happens too much.
Recurrents don't cause song burn-out. What makes the average listener get really sick of a song when it's played 100 times a week. Think about it...that's what made "Photograph" annoying to average listeners in the first place. (Well...for me it was annoying from the beginning, but...)
spongebag7890 said:Josh C. said:mistermicrophone said:Josh C. said:I'm not saying recurrents are a bad thing, but I've noticed stations relying on them much too heavily. In essence, use them, but don't abuse them. Too many stations today are abusing them.
Sometimes those recurrents test better than the currents with the LISTENERS...and isn't it about THEM?
You didn't read my prior post, did you? The fact is, burnout is higher than callout (or any other form of testing) shows it to be, because when asked, most people respond positively because they like the song, but they won't say they're tired of it even if they are, because they think that if they do, the song will just drop off, and they don't want that to happen. Nostalgia can be a fun feeling to play with on the air, but the whole idea of contemporary hit radio is just that: it's contemporary, meaning what's popular now, not what was popular six months ago. Too many stations rely on recurrents to make up the majority of their playlist, and that's causing much more burnout than the industry realizes, let alone the fact that it's enough burnout to make one want to drive a Q-Tip through their eardrum the next time they hear Nickelback's "Photograph" (as a great example).
Ask your average listener what their top ten problems with radio are. I promise you that in that list will be a complaint that radio drives too many songs into the ground. That's burnout, and it happens too much.
Recurrents don't cause song burn-out. What makes the average listener get really sick of a song when it's played 100 times a week. Think about it...that's what made "Photograph" annoying to average listeners in the first place. (Well...for me it was annoying from the beginning, but...)
That's exactly my point: stations rely on recurrents much too heavily than they should, and that causes burnout.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.