WHY CORPORATE RADIO IS KILLING OLDIES

[michael hagerty]

So your station is just like all the others: you play Happy Together and Brown Eyed Girl and Oh Pretty Woman every four hours!

Oh wait...you said "four weeks." My mistake.

In 2004-05 KSUR, located in Mission Hills but licensed to the ritzier-sounding Beverly Hills, simulcast a 1950s-60s oldies with XESUR-Tijuana. "Oldies 1260 & 540" played almost every top-40 pop hit from 1955 to 1969. The emphasis was on lower-charting songs; if a song was regularly played on FM oldies station KRTH, it would be heard on KSUR only once a week. They took requests too. John Regan had a weekend doo-wop show and didn't have a copy of the Harps' Marie but he tracked down a copy and played it in response to my request. Wow! Unfortunately the station was---and still is---owned by Saul Levine, who tends to change formats every year or two. The oldies gave way to standards in 2005; the station is now classical. We need to have a greater number of independent station owners who aren't afraid to play what we want instead of telling us that "nobody wants to hear those old songs anymore."

Saul is an independent owner, and has had only three formats on his FM in 54 years.

Beyond that, he gets big points for trying things on 1260 that no one else will. But he still has bills to pay for that frequency. Every time someone busts Saul (whom I've never met or had any contact with), I have to ask:

What would you have done with 1260 the last 22 years, and how do you think that would have worked out for you?

 

[PirateJohnny]

There are a few indies out there. I rebuilt the studio for a small Gospel AM in Elkton, KY about 11 years ago. It's still on the air. In my county in Tennessee is a daytimer that plays a w-i-d-e selection, and features "Daddio On The Patio", who I'm sure is the subject of a story Tom Kent told on the air one night on his syndicated show.

WSGI only streams when they are the air:

http://www.wsgi1100.com/

 

[Thomps2525]

Southern gospel, eh? How I miss the old KHIS in Bakersfield. Sister station KFSG in Los Angeles had a Christian music format but in 1980 featured southern gospel on Saturdays. Both stations are long gone.

In Los Angeles, 1260 has had several different oldies formats and standards formats. They've also tried Beates, show tunes, jazz, syndicated talk, and now classical. Michael, if it was up to me, I'd bring back the 1950s-60s oldies format. There are probably millions of people who would love to hear those songs again---and on the radio, not the Internet.

 

[davideduardo]

WRONG...DAVID!!! Good business is to play something for everyone!!! which radio isn't doing.

That's is farther south than Absurd.

When the top 100 markets in the US... where you have something like 70% of the US population... have 25 to 100 stations each, you can't have every station try to please everyone. That's also why Vogue does not have a muscle car section.

If I hear a station I am otherwise enjoying insert songs I don't like or of a genre I don't like (whether that be standards, big bands, doo wop, active rock, classic rock, etc.,) I will instantly tune out and if such a thing happens more than once, I likely will never use the station again.

Most people... I dare say 99% of them... don't want a station that plays something for everyone. They want a station that plays things they like a lot.

As far as your comment of "100 people an hour" again....WRONG!!! the station e-mailed me the stats, the Doo Wop Vault had, on Sunday, over 2,300 listeners on Sunday from 10:00am to 12:00pm.

How many at any given time? That sounds like a cume figure. What is the average connection time? I would still bet that with 2,000 cume your AQH listening is more like 100 to 200.

As far as your comment of "not really being a radio station" they run a low power FM transmitter with a stream.

Their site shows no FM. The licensing data for Ireland (or, if this thing is in Northern Ireland, for that jurisdiction) shows no facility under that name.

But let's go back to your uninformed comment about stations having to "earn their keep", my response is.......I refer back to WLN's comment of all the stations that ARE EARNING THEIR KEEP by playing real oldies, 1950's Doo Wop....you know David, the music you always said "DOESN'T SELL" lol lol

It doesn't sell. Nothing that appeals to 70+ listeners has much, if any, sales appeal.

 

[michael hagerty]

Southern gospel, eh? How I miss the old KHIS in Bakersfield. Sister station KFSG in Los Angeles had a Christian music format but in 1980 featured southern gospel on Saturdays. Both stations are long gone.

In Los Angeles, 1260 has had several different oldies formats and standards formats. They've also tried Beates, show tunes, jazz, syndicated talk, and now classical. Michael, if it was up to me, I'd bring back the 1950s-60s oldies format. There are probably millions of people who would love to hear those songs again---and on the radio, not the Internet.

Yes, but Saul, who has proven with his FM that he's not a flake, couldn't make a go of the 50s and 60s oldies.

 

[landtuna]

Nothing that appeals to 70+ listeners has much, if any, sales appeal.

And yet there are many, MANY TV stations that program and advertise to that very demo and judging by their continued existence appear to be financially successful.

 

[Thomps2525]

David, KFWB in Los Angeles pretty much played "something for everyone" during its top-40 years, 1958 until 1968, and often had a 40% audience share. I know that the ethnic makeup of the country has changed and I know that music styles have changed, but I wonder how a station in 2013 would do with a true top-40 format that featured the biggest hits (and older songs) of all formats: pop, rock'n'roll, AC, country, jazz, r&b and hip-hop. Such a station wouldn't be boring or predictable...but would it be able to attract---and keep---a large audience?

And if any station owner wants to try such a format, please sign here:

______________________________________________

 

[michael hagerty]

David, KFWB in Los Angeles pretty much played "something for everyone" during its top-40 years, 1958 until 1968, and often had a 40% audience share. I know that the ethnic makeup of the country has changed and I know that music styles have changed, but I wonder how a station in 2013 would do with a true top-40 format that featured the biggest hits (and older songs) of all formats: pop, rock'n'roll, AC, country, jazz, r&b and hip-hop. Such a station wouldn't be boring or predictable...but would it be able to attract---and keep---a large audience?

And if any station owner wants to try such a format, please sign here:

______________________________________________

KFWB had those 40 shares in the very brief time (less than 2 years) when they had no direct format competition with a fulltime signal. By 1963, they were losing to KRLA, which was tighter and more focused. By late 1965, KFWB and KRLA were losing to KHJ, which was tighter and more focused still.

By fall, 1966, KFWB had a 4 share, not a 40.

 

[davideduardo]

David, KFWB in Los Angeles pretty much played "something for everyone" during its top-40 years, 1958 until 1968, and often had a 40% audience share. I know that the ethnic makeup of the country has changed and I know that music styles have changed, but I wonder how a station in 2013 would do with a true top-40 format that featured the biggest hits (and older songs) of all formats: pop, rock'n'roll, AC, country, jazz, r&b and hip-hop. Such a station wouldn't be boring or predictable...but would it be able to attract---and keep---a large audience?

And if any station owner wants to try such a format, please sign here:

______________________________________________

The first generation of Top 40 stations got huge shares because pop music had not yet fragmented... that happened in the late 60's and early 70's and we got AOR and AC derivitives.

But there was still a 60 share of people listening to real MOR, country, r&b and other formats. But those alternatives were much less likable to Top 40 listeners who typically might dislike a third or more of the songs on the station or stations they liked.

Not only did Top 40 fragment, but the arrival of viability of FM and the changes in AM listening gave us all news, talk stations, beautiful music, jazz and even oldies by the time the 70's arrived.

At that point, listeners did not have to put up with as many songs they did not like.

And today, nobody* is going to listen to a station that plays such a broad spectrum of music.

* I am sure both of the people who actually would listen will soon post a rebuttal.

 

[davideduardo]

Nothing that appeals to 70+ listeners has much, if any, sales appeal.

And yet there are many, MANY TV stations that program and advertise to that very demo and judging by their continued existence appear to be financially successful.

TV is bought by the program, not the format.

And much "senior focused" TV advertising is PI, not paid by the spot.

There is essentially no money in radio targeting 55+.

 

[oldies76]

They want a station that plays things they like a lot

True, but not everyone listening at the same time, likes what's being heard at that time. Not everyone will like every song that tested. Some want their own personal favorites that are never aired. And I've always believed that everyone listening should hear at least some of their own favorites. Everyone will never be pleased, but a station should try to please their listeners or potential listeners.

 

[oldies76]

WRONG...DAVID!!! Good business is to play something for everyone!!! which radio isn't doing.

That's is farther south than Absurd.

It's not absurd David..most stations can get away with playing 1 or 2 lost songs an hour. Some listeners may tune out, but others also tune out when any song plays...even tested ones.

 

[michael hagerty]

They want a station that plays things they like a lot

True, but not everyone listening at the same time, likes what's being heard at that time. Not everyone will like every song that tested. Some want their own personal favorites that are never aired. And I've always believed that everyone listening should hear at least some of their own favorites. Everyone will never be pleased, but a station should try to please their listeners or potential listeners.

And one more time:

They play the songs that the greatest number of their listeners and likely listeners have in common as songs they love, like or are neutral about. Yes, people tune out (and in), but a relatively consistent number of people are listening in any given quarter-hour because the people replacing those tuning out are having their expectations met.

Mess with that balance by playing one or two songs that test less well per hour, and you've introduced disruption that will result in quicker tune-outs and, if repeated, less frequent visits to the station.

 

[PirateJohnny]

They want a station that plays things they like a lot

True, but not everyone listening at the same time, likes what's being heard at that time. Not everyone will like every song that tested. Some want their own personal favorites that are never aired. And I've always believed that everyone listening should hear at least some of their own favorites. Everyone will never be pleased, but a station should try to please their listeners or potential listeners.

And one more time:

They play the songs that the greatest number of their listeners and likely listeners have in common as songs they love, like or are neutral about. Yes, people tune out (and in), but a relatively consistent number of people are listening in any given quarter-hour because the people replacing those tuning out are having their expectations met.

Mess with that balance by playing one or two songs that test less well per hour, and you've introduced disruption that will result in quicker tune-outs and, if repeated, less frequent visits to the station.

You might be able to tell that I both agree and disagree with Michael and David about testing. I understand it's necessity. Let's say we rate the likability of a song on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the least liked and 10 being the most liked. We are being told that stations do best playing the 4s, 5s and 6s, as a 10 for one listener will be another listener's 1, and will cause a tune out.

The question being raised by a group of posters here is "How do you keep the listeners who never hear their 8s, 9s and 10s?"

We on this board are an elite group of listeners. I will listen to my 4s, 5s and 6s for a while, but after never hearing a 9 or 10, I'll tune out, even if I'm hearing a 6 at the time.

We are being told that the average listener is more tolerant of never hearing all of their 10s.

 

[michael hagerty]

They want a station that plays things they like a lot

True, but not everyone listening at the same time, likes what's being heard at that time. Not everyone will like every song that tested. Some want their own personal favorites that are never aired. And I've always believed that everyone listening should hear at least some of their own favorites. Everyone will never be pleased, but a station should try to please their listeners or potential listeners.

And one more time:

They play the songs that the greatest number of their listeners and likely listeners have in common as songs they love, like or are neutral about. Yes, people tune out (and in), but a relatively consistent number of people are listening in any given quarter-hour because the people replacing those tuning out are having their expectations met.

Mess with that balance by playing one or two songs that test less well per hour, and you've introduced disruption that will result in quicker tune-outs and, if repeated, less frequent visits to the station.

You might be able to tell that I both agree and disagree with Michael and David about testing. I understand it's necessity. Let's say we rate the likability of a song on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the least liked and 10 being the most liked. We are being told that stations do best playing the 4s, 5s and 6s, as a 10 for one listener will be another listener's 1, and will cause a tune out.

The question being raised by a group of posters here is "How do you keep the listeners who never hear their 8s, 9s and 10s?"

We on this board are an elite group of listeners. I will listen to my 4s, 5s and 6s for a while, but after never hearing a 9 or 10, I'll tune out, even if I'm hearing a 6 at the time.

We are being told that the average listener is more tolerant of never hearing all of their 10s.

I've never said that, nor have I ever seen David say that.

What we've said is that stations play (using your scale) the songs that the greatest percentage of listeners and likely listeners have in common as their 10s, 9s, 8s, 7s and maybe 6s.

The average listener needs to hear their 10s on a fairly regular basis, which is why rotations are structured so that the average listener hears the biggest records roughly every three weeks.

Remember, they're not tuning in for eclecticism, they're tuning in because they want 15 minutes of a certain mood from dependable old favorites.

 

[davideduardo]

What we've said is that stations play (using your scale) the songs that the greatest percentage of listeners and likely listeners have in common as their 10s, 9s, 8s, 7s and maybe 6s.

Exactly.

Now, with results being computer tabulated, we generally look at a variety of subsets together. Commonly viewed would be heavier and lighter users, the younger and older halves, male and female, ethnic subsets if any, and cluster analysis groups.

And another technique is to plot each song with a distribution graph. This allows us to see the statistically significant high and low score range and other characteristics.

A lot of this is done so songs that have a big like component but also a large hate component can be seen, and, usually, not played.

 

[davideduardo]

You might be able to tell that I both agree and disagree with Michael and David about testing. I understand it's necessity. Let's say we rate the likability of a song on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the least liked and 10 being the most liked. We are being told that stations do best playing the 4s, 5s and 6s, as a 10 for one listener will be another listener's 1, and will cause a tune out.

Actually, stations look for songs that score perhaps a 65 to 70 and above on all listeners.

Songs that score well with some listeners and not so well with others tend to be avoided, as they would alienate a large percentage of listeners.

We are being told that the average listener is more tolerant of never hearing all of their 10s.

The really big songs... in the case of a classic hits station meaning around 200 or so... will tend to score in the "love" range of 80 and above with just about everyone. That's why those are the onces that are played the most often as "everyone" loves them.

 

[davideduardo]

It's not absurd David..most stations can get away with playing 1 or 2 lost songs an hour. Some listeners may tune out, but others also tune out when any song plays...even tested ones.

We've been over this before. In PPM markets, where over 50% of the US population lives, we know from looking at M-Scores that playing several bad songs an hour is mortal.

If the songs were good, they would get good test scores and would be in regular rotation. If they don't test, it means that 30% to 40% or more of "all listeners" (based on a statistical sample) dislike the songs... they are not even neutral on them, they dislike them... and they would go away.

Even more than that, listeners come to a station to find good songs every time. If a station consistently puts a turd in their punchbowl, they stop even coming back.

 

[PirateJohnny]

OK, I see I wasn't clear with my scale. In my thinking I was combining individual scores and group total scores. I meant for the scale to relate to the overall scoring by the total group, where songs that scored highly by the majority would score in the middle of the scale (4, 5 sand 6). The 1s and 10s on my scale represent the songs disliked or liked by a minority in the sample. The 4s, 5s and 6s represent the songs liked by the majority.

So what I meant to say in my example is the 4s, 5s and 6s are the songs that score highly with the majority. The 1s and 10s are the extremes that only score low or high with a minority. Maybe that makes more sense?

I 'm actually combing two scales in a strange way. I understand what You (David) are saying, I'm just not so clear in expressing it in different terms, What the minority likes/dislikes aren't weighted as heavily as what the majority likes/dislikes.

 

[PirateJohnny]

Now that I've had a cup of coffee I think I can be a little clearer. I was thinking of a Bell Curve where the majority of the desired results (liked by the majority) are in the middle and the edges are the minority results (disliked or liked by the minority).