• 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

WAY TO GO KVE

Talk_Dude said:
I believe that modern audiences will embrace songs that were recorded in the past, if the songs aren't junked up by being surrounded with a bunch of retro baggage.
Click to expand...

As much as I'm against giving away the "total package" of entertainment that radio can be when good personalities are added to the mix, PPM measurement shows that very uncluttered, music driven formats are doing better than they did in the diary era.

That's mostly because the PPM measures "exposure" to stations, where the diary system required that you be sufficiently aware of what you were listening to that you would write it down at some point.

Now stations can get good ratings with at least some of their listeners having absolutely no idea what station they're hearing. That may be good in the eyes of some listeners, but given the fact that the business of radio is still funded by advertising sales, too much of it renders the medium worthless as an advertising tool and thus no longer viable as a business.

That's why radio can't survive as a wireless iPod. Your iPod just needs its battery recharged, it doesn't have to pay employees, and a public company isn't paying off $20 million in debt on your iPod. That's why radio has to differentiate itself.
 
Parttimer said:
That's why radio can't survive as a wireless iPod. Your iPod just needs its battery recharged, it doesn't have to pay employees, and a public company isn't paying off $20 million in debt on your iPod. That's why radio has to differentiate itself.
Click to expand...

No argument with you on that point. The issue isn't whether radio needs to differentiate itself from iPods and the like, the issue is how it does it. Some folks think that picking the bones of the past is the way to succeed in the future. I think that something new is needed. If I knew exactly what new thing was needed, I'd turn that knowledge into big bucks. The thing is, I don't know. I know that something new is needed, but someone else is going to have to invent that new thing.
 
T_D - TVLand probably isn't the best example to use since their idea of "retro" these days is Home Improvement. Oh, and if it has old TV stars in it it's "retro." Just another network in the MTV stable fallen far from its original purpose and turned to generic junk.

On the other hand, RTN is awesome. :)
 
I still say we gotta' get reverb back into the audio chains. And how about some PAMS jingles? Is the company still in business?
 
fryman said:
I still say we gotta' get reverb back into the audio chains. And how about some PAMS jingles? Is the company still in business?
Click to expand...

Forget reverb. Get more tremolo. Or fuzz or wah-wah. Maybe phasing or phlanging.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom