What Will K-Earth's Playlist Look Like in 2040?

[Kelly A]

Despite radio's best efforts to warn people and keep them safe!

But the EMP pulse would likely knock out all radio and TV broadcasts and reception.

 

[TomásEstefan]

But the EMP pulse would likely knock out all radio and TV broadcasts and reception.

Of course it will wipe out almost ALL electronics...

 

[davideduardo]

There's the key phrase in the entire post.

Ask yourself this: If in 2006, you had posted a list of 13 songs you thought KRTH would be playing in 2023, how well would that list have held up?

Here is where I post my personal and anecdotal experien:

Back decades ago, i commissioned with a well known radio research company my first music test. It was for a station in market 14 which at the time had about a 14 share, double the #2 station.

I decided to score the first 100 songs on the random list of about 700 that we were testing. I gave it a lot of thought, since I was in charge of programming the station and I wanted to know how well my "instincts" were as a nearly 2-decade market veteran.

A third of the songs I gave passing scores to were stiffs and unplayable. about 20 of the songs I thought would never pass actually did pass, and several were in the top 10% of all the songs. Many of my favorites passed, but not at the top.

My conclusion was that insiders whose job depends on songs don't know the street. We know the artists all personally, some of them were friends with whom we exchanged dinner invitations at home. Others were always there for an appearance or as guests on the morning show. I'd been in the studio when some of the songs were recorded. A few were not nice people, and that affected my perspective, too. A couple had tried to bribe me for airplay; I was not fond of them, either.

My point: no individual alone can program a station perfectly, and having listener guidance done with correct research technology makes a big difference.

Did our ratings go up after doing the test? No. Why not? We were already good enough. We just made the station better and far less vulnerable to competition. Was it worth over $20,000 to do? We thought so and continued to do tests regularly after that. Was I depressed at not getting the scores right? No, I realized that getting listener input on other things, like currents and morning show content and formatics would make us better. We were #1 for the entire 22 years I was with the station.

 

[davideduardo]

I still think kearth should add more 90's. KOLA is at an all time high with their blend of 80's and 90's playing 2 90's per hour I'm sure would not hurt kearth

And I'm sure K-earth researched the songs and their listeners and found that what they are doing is much better for the LA and OC county survey area than what KOLA is doing.

Don't you think that K-earth researches a lot of "what if" songs and blends? Music tests often also test alternative blends using the hooks of 6 to 8 songs in a montage to see how every age group and gender and ethnicity reacts. A common method there is to take a "real hour" of songs and test it to get the reference point, then take several other real hours but with changes in 2 to 4 songs to put in newer, older, more r&b or more pop variations.

For a station billing about $800,000 a week, don't you think that spending on a couple of very deep music tests is affordable and of very great value?

And, by the way, a deep test may mean lots more songs, or questions about pods with different blends or even pods of a competitor. "Deep" does not mean "more people in the test". Plenty of tests of how many people are needed for a music test of an existing station show the same thing: 80 to 120 people.