• 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

KEARTH 101 (it's only 80's if we say so)

LARadioRewind said:
K.M., does anyone know which radio station was the first to use "research" to determine which songs to play? In the 1950s-60s, there were hundreds of top-40 stations but the first top-40 stations were broadcasting in the 1920s-30s, although the term "top 40" had yet to be created. I'm guessing that the announcers in the early years of radio could play any song they wanted...

By the 1950s-60s, we had thousands more stations and some played top 40, some played country, some played r&b, some played MOR, some played jazz, some played classical, some played beautiful music.....and most of them started doing "research." A few stations, such as KFWB, would allow the DJs to vote each week on which new songs they wanted to add to the playlist, but most stations started relying on research and music tests.
Click to expand...

The earliest research by all-recorded music "Hit Parade" recorded music stations was, in fact, the genesis of the format: jukebox plays. As Storz added stations and McLendon created more still, stations began to call the record shops as well as watching Billboard and Cash Box and Record World. This would be the standard well into the 70's.

In the mid-70's as the sale of 45's dwindled, folks like McCoy and Wallace came up with callout as a way to find out the hot currents. Soon, as stations added more and more gold to their lists, auditorium tests were developed.

Prior to the 1952 birth of Top 40, stations had musical "interludes" between drama, comedy, news and other such shows. Think of it as being more like the radio version of The Lawrence Welk Show than Top 40. Different hosts, different bands, many versions of the same hit songs but by different bands and singers. And quite a bit of live music, courtesy of the pressure of the AFM.
 
LARadioRewind said:
There is a short article---much too short---about 1930s music
Click to expand...

The assumption might be that those artists were popular because of radio airplay of their recorded music. However, thanks to the depression, sales of recorded music was very low during the 30s. As mentioned here, radio stations and networks feared legal action, so they often started their own live performance shows. Almost all of those performers were staples of either networks or local radio stations. This was the era of local Barn Dances, Hay Rides, and Oprys. All of the famous band leaders had live radio shows, either from the studio or various live venues. Rosemary Clooney became famous thanks to WLW in Cincinnati. Shows like WSM's Grand Ole Opry became popular because they were programmed like DJ shows, with a dozen or so performers each doing one or two hits. But it was pretty much the same cast every week, perhaps with a special guest artist.
 
Last edited:
LARadioRewind said:
There is a short article---much too short---about 1930s music at http://www.ecusd7.org/columbus/columbusstaff/rcanada/09kids/grant/musicinthe1930s.htm and a list of "most requested songs" which includes Guy Lombardo, Al Jolson, Big Bill Broonzy and the Hilo Hawaiian Orchestra. Top 40!
Click to expand...

Here is something that takes you back to 1935... "Your Hit Parade" was a national radio show that jumped to TV for a while, too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your_Hit_Parade

This was not "Top 40". It was a program of the biggest songs of each week, interpreted by the show's own band and singers (Who could forget a singer named "Snooky"). It really is a throwback to the days of sheet music where the song was the hit, not the singer or band.

Many of this kind of show were weekly affairs of perhaps an hour... not a format.
 
oldies76 said:
Exactly. Listening online for 4-5 hours the other night, W's onward. It was sort of mysterious as to which song would be next. Too bad they didn't play 1982's "You Should Hear How She Talks About You" by Melissa Manchester. One of my favs from the 80's.
Click to expand...

That song was my favorite song for 1982. Never got the accolades and recognition chart-wise to live up to it, but I loved the song. She didn't have too many hits.
 
For the most part, radio stations that did nothing but play records 24/7 or sign on to sign off were pretty rare until the rash of AM sign-ons in the late 1940s and early 1950s, with new, smaller independent stations going up against the larger, more powerful network owned or affiliated stations. It was in that environment that Todd Storz introduced his concept of simply playing the most popular records over and over, as he'd seen people do with jukeboxes. That, in its purest if primitive form, introduced research into the mix.
 
michael hagerty said:
Because, as we've been saying here for years now, a hit is only a hit for as long as it's a hit. Some songs fade off the mass radar earlier than others.
Click to expand...

I totally concur. That song and others that were my favorites those days I don't even miss hearing. Other songs from the 80s and earlier I never got into until later years.
 
K.M. Richards said:
It really would be easier if you would stop jumping in to every KRTH thread with your already well-known opinion of WOGL and why you think it "proves" KRTH is wrong.
Click to expand...

Some threads, not "every".

And as the old saying goes, there ALWAYS room for improvement......
 
K.M. Richards said:
I got the sarcasm. I just objected to the choice of words, as it makes you appear to still not accept the realities of music research and its process.
Click to expand...

I accept the research as one form of ultimately programming certain radio stations. There are aspects of it, I cannot agree with. For that reason, I side with other types of programming methods offered by smaller classic hits stations and specials presented by WOGL. Is that fair enough?
 
oldies76 said:
I accept the research as one form of ultimately programming certain radio stations. There are aspects of it, I cannot agree with. For that reason, I side with other types of programming methods offered by smaller classic hits stations and specials presented by WOGL. Is that fair enough?
Click to expand...

I'm afraid not, because it has also been explained to you that different markets call for different music mixes, different specials, different programming. It has also been explained to you that smaller markets often cannot afford to research properly (if at all) and therefore may not even be serving their own market properly.

Let me put it another way. WOGL, WCBS-FM and KRTH are all under common ownership (CBS). If the "other" types fit all stations, as you imply, why doesn't CBS have a single program director for all three and use the exact same library, exact same presentation, exact same imaging, exact same specials? Because all three stations are programmed uniquely to their markets, that's why.

Is that fair enough?
 
K.M. Richards said:
Let me put it another way. WOGL, WCBS-FM and KRTH are all under common ownership (CBS). If the "other" types fit all stations, as you imply, why doesn't CBS have a single program director for all three and use the exact same library, exact same presentation, exact same imaging, exact same specials? Because all three stations are programmed uniquely to their markets, that's why.

Is that fair enough?
Click to expand...

Each station should be uniquely programmed to their markets, no question.

WOGL has a set of songs they play weekly, KRTH has a set of songs they play weekly. WOGL can go "above and beyond" and have a 2000 song A to Z, involving nearly five decades of hit music. KRTH won't go "above and beyond" with lackluster "specials".

That's the difference. I'm not referring to the actual songs titles (which I know Philly residents much prefer over L.A.), I am referring to the point that KRTH does not deviate, one millimeter from it's rock hard approach to do even ONE "above and beyond" special. The 80's special does not count, because it involves songs already incorporated in their core 250.

For this, I do not agree on aspects of programming research methods done to stifle the residents of L.A. with....you guessed it....250 played to death songs, played ad nauseam.

KRTH, to myself and others, is not a classic hits station, the way it's meant to be. Not anymore.

A fair assessment.
 
Last edited:
When was the last time KRTH did a special weekend or week playing music that went beyond their playlist? If KRTH did a similar special WOGL did playing 2000 songs in alphabetical order and featuring songs they don't normally play, would this cause mass audience tuneout? Probably not I have a feeling their audience would love it. Is it set in stone KRTH has no leeway whatsoever in their music? Yes, I know the station does quite well with their extremely tight 80's centric playlist, but would an occasional detour from their norm really hurt them? As said, I'm sure many Southern California listeners would have loved a 2000 song A to Z special that WOGL did,
 
benale said:
Yes, I know the station does quite well with their extremely tight 80's centric playlist, but would an occasional detour from their norm really hurt them?
Click to expand...

Do other LA stations do these contrived "specials?" How often, in your commute home, do you take a completely different route, not because of traffic, but just for the heck of it?
 
oldies76 said:
KRTH, to myself and others, is not a classic hits station, the way it's meant to be. Not anymore.

A fair assessment.
Click to expand...

Fair by your standards, not by mine.

Now ... I am going to politely ask you, now that you've given us your "assessment" for what feels like the 1,847th time ... don't bring it up again. I promise not to bait you, and I will not argue with you unless you bring it up again.

I know, you're going to tell me that you have the right to post. However, given the acrimony that has resulted in the past when you criticize KRTH, I am asking you -- again, politely -- not to fan the flames by bringing it up again in the future. It isn't changing anything (and you have admitted that in the past, to your credit) but it is making you sound like you have nothing better to do all day then come in here and repeat your criticisms of KRTH. Most people want to look rational and reasonable, but with every revival of your position, you look a little more irrational and unreasonable.

There's bound to be a limit that Boz won't accept going beyond. Why tempt fate?
 
oldies76 said:
KRTH, to myself and others,
Click to expand...

OK, so both of you would prefer something else. In the last released week, KRTH had a cume of over 3 million.

is not a classic hits station, the way it's meant to be. Not anymore.
Click to expand...

The term "classic hits" was defined by the radio industry to distance those stations playing 70's and beyond from "oldies" stations. This was because of the negative image among advertisers of oldies stations, which were perceived as being "too old" demographically.

As time has passed, "classic hits" has realigned itself with late 70's and 80's to stay relevant among the sales demos.

And all the term "classic hits" was ever meant to be was "gold for the upper end of the 25-54 demo". That is how it was meant to be. Always.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom