I drove thru Atlanta this weekend, for the first time in 3 years. And both Q100 and Star94 had weekend giveaways, live club broadcasts, and similar playlists. My daughters liked Q100, but I personally liked hearing the older pop tunes on Star. They told me that Britney Spears 'Toxic' isn't cool anymore, wow!! i thought i was one 'Cool Dad'..haha!! Can't believe how fast CHR is moving nowadays!! Is there that noticeable of a difference between the 2 in Atlanta? or am i just getting old and ready for "the home" ???...haha!!
-
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
Who's ontop of the CHR battle?
- Thread starter Post Master General
- Start date
I think Star has a playlist that caters slightly more toward adults. Like the bclark said...they edit out all of the rap. But I think that the biggest shortcoming Star 94 has right now is its on-air processing. Q100 has a well-rounded sound for Top 40...but listening to Star can be a very fatiguing experience. It's a very squashed sound with lots of weird midrange "honking." If they can get that fixed they would be 10 times better, IMO.
I have read tons of posts on Star's processing and I am not in the market, so what gives?
Does no one from Star read R-I? Is it an in-house decision to torment listeners or just someone
is missing tweaking the audio? Afterall, if they are going for an upscale, slightly older listener,
why make it sound so unrefined?
You know, no one has asked how this will affect Q-1OO in a long time. Certainly this processing
isn't the answer.
Does no one from Star read R-I? Is it an in-house decision to torment listeners or just someone
is missing tweaking the audio? Afterall, if they are going for an upscale, slightly older listener,
why make it sound so unrefined?
You know, no one has asked how this will affect Q-1OO in a long time. Certainly this processing
isn't the answer.
Tibbs, you make a great point. Star 94 dropped by nearly a full share in the fall 2006 ratings period...and that's when they changed their processing. Maybe the drop was just because of Christmas music...but Q100 wins hands-down in the sound department. That can only be a positive thing for them.
Also, Star's sound is only made worse by the fact that they use reverb. Star 94 right now is a perfect case of "when cranking it to 11 goes wrong." LOL
Also, Star's sound is only made worse by the fact that they use reverb. Star 94 right now is a perfect case of "when cranking it to 11 goes wrong." LOL
Whit-
I've listened on many stereos/radios and I just don't get your harping on Star's processing!
I understand the complaints about ALL radio processing....I know it doesn't sound like the CD. But radio, technically, is imperfect technology and the sound quality will never be as good as your CD. And then you have all the programmers with their theories about "flavoring" the audio.....
Star has aggressive processing....it is very "loud." This is important to some programming types who learned their chops in the AM days....."loud" was/is important to AM stations for technical reasons. Loud is not *as* inportant for an FM station.....as a matter of taste, some difference between the loudest and quiet is very musical and desirable. But if the quiet parts get too quiet they will get buried in the background noise while driving. Some of the high end car stereo equipment actually offer a compressor to "squeeze" the dynamic range(difference between loud and quiet sounds)of CD's. People complain that they can't hear the quiet parts due to road noise....they want it a "little" louder!
There are quite a few other stations who are really pushing it. But Atlanta has reasonable audio quality.....go to NYC and check that out....the stations in New York sound like s**t!
The frequency balance on Star sounds identical to most other stations in town.....what is this "midrange" comment you keep making?
There is an engineer from Star who is a regular lurker/poster. I'm sure he has seen your comments.
As I suggested before.....why don't you call Don Benson and offer to "fix" it for them? An audio guru gets around $3K/day...... and all the continuity girl he can carry home!
I've listened on many stereos/radios and I just don't get your harping on Star's processing!
I understand the complaints about ALL radio processing....I know it doesn't sound like the CD. But radio, technically, is imperfect technology and the sound quality will never be as good as your CD. And then you have all the programmers with their theories about "flavoring" the audio.....
Star has aggressive processing....it is very "loud." This is important to some programming types who learned their chops in the AM days....."loud" was/is important to AM stations for technical reasons. Loud is not *as* inportant for an FM station.....as a matter of taste, some difference between the loudest and quiet is very musical and desirable. But if the quiet parts get too quiet they will get buried in the background noise while driving. Some of the high end car stereo equipment actually offer a compressor to "squeeze" the dynamic range(difference between loud and quiet sounds)of CD's. People complain that they can't hear the quiet parts due to road noise....they want it a "little" louder!
There are quite a few other stations who are really pushing it. But Atlanta has reasonable audio quality.....go to NYC and check that out....the stations in New York sound like s**t!
The frequency balance on Star sounds identical to most other stations in town.....what is this "midrange" comment you keep making?
There is an engineer from Star who is a regular lurker/poster. I'm sure he has seen your comments.
As I suggested before.....why don't you call Don Benson and offer to "fix" it for them? An audio guru gets around $3K/day...... and all the continuity girl he can carry home!
taylorengineer said:
Well, you do have a good point. Loudness is definitely important here and maybe this is just Star's way of trying to achieve it. But (to my ear) they're not as loud as Q100...
My apologies for all the harping...Star is by far my favorite station and I know they've had better processing in the past. But, maybe others find the new sound more attractive than I do?
Whit ---
I think it's refreshing that you would go to the lengths that you do to make your case on Star's sound quality.
I think radio is one of the least user-friendly businesses out there, a complete turnaround from a decade ago
where listeners were kings (and queens.) Now consultants, pie-graphs and cost cutters rule. It's sad that the
pure entertainment factor has been sucked out of the very media outlet that it works best from.
Why Star's 9th is worth a lot of discussion. Maybe S & V have just played on to long, maybe the bells and
whistles of midday and PM drive are just tired, as well. Maybe the music is just off it's game and Q-100 has
certainly seemed to make huge strides, that a year ago were just the opposite views on this board. But, if
that many people are jumping ship for various reasosn to Q or elsewhere, someone inside Star has to be
trying to figure out a fix. You don't let yourself drop like that, especially if you're in a stand alone situation
and continue to bleed. Will anyone step up and fix it? I dunno. Years ago, yes. Now, seems like the energy
to better yourself is only a cause for concern when the revenues drop 10-20%, and only as an after effect
of the bottom line. Status quo is what is killing Star. Maybe it's just time for something all together new.
Ideas?
I think it's refreshing that you would go to the lengths that you do to make your case on Star's sound quality.
I think radio is one of the least user-friendly businesses out there, a complete turnaround from a decade ago
where listeners were kings (and queens.) Now consultants, pie-graphs and cost cutters rule. It's sad that the
pure entertainment factor has been sucked out of the very media outlet that it works best from.
Why Star's 9th is worth a lot of discussion. Maybe S & V have just played on to long, maybe the bells and
whistles of midday and PM drive are just tired, as well. Maybe the music is just off it's game and Q-100 has
certainly seemed to make huge strides, that a year ago were just the opposite views on this board. But, if
that many people are jumping ship for various reasosn to Q or elsewhere, someone inside Star has to be
trying to figure out a fix. You don't let yourself drop like that, especially if you're in a stand alone situation
and continue to bleed. Will anyone step up and fix it? I dunno. Years ago, yes. Now, seems like the energy
to better yourself is only a cause for concern when the revenues drop 10-20%, and only as an after effect
of the bottom line. Status quo is what is killing Star. Maybe it's just time for something all together new.
Ideas?
B
billard
Guest
All I heard on Star this weekend was them givin away tickets to Taylor Hicks and Larry the Cable Guy...Q100- Justin Timberlake and Fall Out Boy. (Hell My girlfriend won't shut up about Justin). And whats with Star doing A Club Broadcast? Sounds like someones followin around Q100. I didn't Star's because I was already in a bar in Buckhead but did they edit out every song in their mix like they normally do? I've heard Usher Yeah edited to death on that station!
whit979 said:
They basically take to radio what WSB-TV takes to television...if it ain't broke, don't fix it (resistance to change - their GM has been there since the WKXI days in the 60's).
When mainstream CHR went rythmic-heavy in the late 90's, Star 94 didn't change. The only big change they took was adding Cindy and Ray a few years ago.
The only reason Q100 is behind is signal strength (12.5 kW on 100.5 vs. 100kW on 94.1. 100.5 was 3kW until two years ago).
BTW, when Star 94 launched in 1989, they were a hot AC. They went back to top 40 with the demise of Power 99. Star 94 needs to be classified by the format it is...Modern AC (Hot AC is 80's-90's-now, whereas Modern AC is currents only). Star fits the modern AC format to a tee.
With 99X heading into the toilet, Cumulus needs to move Q100 to the 100kW 99.7 signal. Then we will see what happens.
I gotta' give credit to Q100 for sounding a little less mid-rangey than Star 94, but even they cranked it up a bit since 2004, compression and mid-range. Atlanta radio is blessed with the audio processing our stations have, especially compared to San Antonio, Texas.
But while we're on the subject of audio processing, how would you describe this type of processing on mms://wm5.spacialnet.com/KVRY54089? Is this what engineers call the "drop everything and drive it uphill" arrangement.
But while we're on the subject of audio processing, how would you describe this type of processing on mms://wm5.spacialnet.com/KVRY54089? Is this what engineers call the "drop everything and drive it uphill" arrangement.
Tibbs2 said:
Thanks for the compliment, Tibbs! I should also point out that I'm a Program Director of a Hot AC station in eastern Alabama, so I'm picky about things like processing. ;D
Star has always been one of my favorite stations, even before I got into radio. To see them suffering in the ratings is disappointing -- kinda like when your favorite sports team is consistently losing. LOL.
- Status