This board has discussed the oldies format in the past and shifts in music tastes over time that saw the loss of KBSG-FM for example. Looking forward over the next 5 or 10 years would it be fair to say that the number of artists with pre-1970s hits that are heard across the Seattle FM dial will be less than a dozen. Will there always be listeners wanting to hear Satisfaction by the Rolling Stones, Light My Fire by the Doors or Purple Haze by Jimi Hendrix. With 46% of the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue metro area currently over the age of 50 will FM radio in Seattle (and maybe across the United States) continue to be programmed for the other 54%. There are now three country stations on the FM dial and classic rock now includes the 90s. Will the early pioneers of rock music, Motown, British invasion, psychodelic, folk-rock and doo-wop be relegated to streaming servies and satellite radio labeled nostalgia and/or MP3s, CDs, cassettes, 8-track or vinyl.
-
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
Pre-1970 Music on Seattle FM dial
- Thread starter DMK
- Start date
True oldies are done, completely done. Aside from a few select tracks, I expect to hear less of the 60’s and 70’s over the next few years (even less than we hear already). I wouldn’t expect more than one song from the 60’s per hour on 95.7. Their core is focused on the 80’s, with 90’s mixed in (and perhaps a few songs from the 2000’s, since I’ve heard Maroon 5 mixed in).
KZOK may play a few more, since I can’t imagine them not playing a few tracks by The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, etc. However, they’re now focusing on music from the 80’s and 90’s as well.
It will be interesting to see what happens ten years from now. I think the KZOK and KJEB will continue to focus on the 80’s and 90’s, since it will be challenging to move the music forward into the 2000’s (where popular music became fragmented and rock began to die off). Not to mention, music from the 80’s continues to test well, so I don’t think anyone will be in hurry to dump it.
For those of us who continue to have an interest in true oldies, streaming will probably have to suffice. I grew up listening KBSG every day, so I’m more than happy to stream the songs I want to hear. But these songs aren’t going to be heard on the radio again.
KZOK may play a few more, since I can’t imagine them not playing a few tracks by The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, etc. However, they’re now focusing on music from the 80’s and 90’s as well.
It will be interesting to see what happens ten years from now. I think the KZOK and KJEB will continue to focus on the 80’s and 90’s, since it will be challenging to move the music forward into the 2000’s (where popular music became fragmented and rock began to die off). Not to mention, music from the 80’s continues to test well, so I don’t think anyone will be in hurry to dump it.
For those of us who continue to have an interest in true oldies, streaming will probably have to suffice. I grew up listening KBSG every day, so I’m more than happy to stream the songs I want to hear. But these songs aren’t going to be heard on the radio again.
Last edited:
I think that's an interesting question. The past would suggest that the 80s will be seriously limited on radio in 10 years, but in society in general we're seeing the blurring of age lines. Look at some of the older songs suddenly propelled back into the spotlight by either new TV/streaming series or TikTok. We're also seeing mainly second CHRs in markets moving to a mix of currents and 2000s gold, something that would have been unheard of at CHR even 10 years ago. Another thing is stations don't seem to know what they want to do with the 90s, which may keep the 80s on radio for longer than they otherwise would be. One thing that my friend complains about all the time with these 90s and 2000s stations is they are so 2000s focused. In her mind, if you're positioning as 90s and 2000s, you should be playing a 50/50 mix of those decades, but what's actually happening is that in a five song set you may hear one 90s cut, one post 2010 cut, and the rest being 2000s cuts.
Those wanting oldies will go where the AAA, Smooth Jazz, Old-School R&B (1970's version), New Age, Americana, and other reject formats went: YouTube, Spotify, Pandora (and similar) channels. My phone has Pandora. I haven't used it yet, but it looks interesting. Several AAA channels (or flavors of what you could call AAA). Several oldies channels (including a dedicated "Surf Music" channel). Radio can't serve 'em if it doesn't make them money. And the listeners who prefer those dead formats eventually find the online versions.
Interesting take on what happens to Classic Rock when the 00's era is 30+ years old. What's "classic" when a format has already become a niche? I suppose by the time 00's rock becomes oldies, an increasing amount of "radio" listening will be online, so "Classic" rock from the '10s and '20s may not matter much. There were some decent tracks that were on the radio in the 2010's, not massive stars but there was new rock then that got a considerable amount of airplay. So maybe the Classic Rock format will continue on as it has.
Interesting take on what happens to Classic Rock when the 00's era is 30+ years old. What's "classic" when a format has already become a niche? I suppose by the time 00's rock becomes oldies, an increasing amount of "radio" listening will be online, so "Classic" rock from the '10s and '20s may not matter much. There were some decent tracks that were on the radio in the 2010's, not massive stars but there was new rock then that got a considerable amount of airplay. So maybe the Classic Rock format will continue on as it has.
The Big A, I have nothing against oldies not being on the radio. In fact, I came to that realization awhile ago. Maybe it goes back to joining the Columbia House Record and Tape club (then onto the CD clubs) that started a passion for collecting music (some of which wasn't always found on Seattle radio or dropped from re-currents and hardly played). Since I don't spend a whole lot of time in the car (remote work does that), I find myself curating cd's and sd cards that are almost exclusively music between 1960 and 2000 from my vast digital collection of music and I'm fine with that.
To David's point about the 18-54 demo, I see it like a conveyor belt in a constant loop picking up new 18 year olds and dropping off those turning 55 every year going forward. Radio periodically adjust (maybe every decade) to match 18-54 musical tastes and at some point the 70s will become passe.
Boombox4 is correct it will be interesting to see how classic rock evolves when the 00s are 30 years old. The Oxford Dictionary defines classic as, "judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind." As a Gen X'er it hard for me to believe that Top 40 music from the past 20 years will meet the definition of classic.
To David's point about the 18-54 demo, I see it like a conveyor belt in a constant loop picking up new 18 year olds and dropping off those turning 55 every year going forward. Radio periodically adjust (maybe every decade) to match 18-54 musical tastes and at some point the 70s will become passe.
Boombox4 is correct it will be interesting to see how classic rock evolves when the 00s are 30 years old. The Oxford Dictionary defines classic as, "judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind." As a Gen X'er it hard for me to believe that Top 40 music from the past 20 years will meet the definition of classic.
You're probably the last generation that will have that experience of owning music and building a collection. But I know what you mean. I hear a lot of mythology about how radio used to have deep playlists. If so, why did so many people of your generation build personal record collections, and then make home tapes or CDs that they played in their cars? It became such a huge problem that the music industry got congress to pass a blank tape tax to help record labels replace revenue from home-taping. If radio was so good in the 80s, why did people do that?
We don't have to wait 5 to 10 years. I don't think Classic Hits stations play many pre-1970 titles at all. And they are limiting their 1970 to 1979 songs to one or two per hour.
Classic Rock may have a few more. The Beatles are in slow rotation on most Classic Rock stations. The Stones, Hendrix, Creedence, Doors, Steppenwolf and other pre-1970 acts are in the same category, maybe a few plays per week. Sure, Classic Rock stations are staying with big artists from the 70s: The Eagles, Fleetwood Mac, Zeppelin, Billy Joel, Elton John. They haven't lost their appeal.
I guess we should also mention KIXI 880, which airs an adult standards format, has plenty of 1960s and 50s titles. But it's on AM. And who knows for how long?
The wrinkle in that formula is that the conveyor belt isn't working so well anymore. The 54 year olds may still drop off when they turn 55, but increasingly those 18 year olds are never getting on the conveyor belt to begin with since many of them just aren't listening to broadcast radio much.
So unless something changes, that conveyor belt is going to get emptier and emptier over time. And that actually is relevant to what is going to happen to older songs on the radio -- because eventually we may see some radio stations getting a little more interested in the over 55 audience when that's all they can get to listen to them.
I turned 55 last month. Radio doesn't care about me anymore. 
I turned 55 last month. Radio doesn't care about me anymore.
Depends on the station.
I listen to KISM, KISW AND KZOK.
Then, what about those younger listeners who actually want to hear older music? Shawn Ross wrote just yesterday that country PDs are hearing excitement from younger listeners when they add older titles. Of course we can't forget a couple summers ago when Running Up That Hill, a 35 year old record, suddenly was everywhere thanks to a Netflix series. Outside of this, I know several people my age and a bit older who love music older than they are.
It's available if they look for it. There's a difference between creating a curated list, which is what radio stations do, and just playing everything. The process of creating a curated list is about reaching a specific audience. If a person isn't in that target, then that station isn't for them, and they should look for another station that's more to their liking.
The problem with adding older titles is they crowd out the new stuff. Then you have a situation where those who want the new stuff are hearing less of it. The musicians who're making the new stuff have to sit on it or find another way to get the new stuff out. That's what we're seeing in country. There are so many musicians making new music that stations have an over-abundance of good stuff. If they play too much old stuff, the station sounds old and stale.
I have been listening to a lot more KISM lately. They actually have a surprisingly good variety of rock, and they will play a fewer tracks as well.
KISM (and Saga in general I believe) tried to goose that conveyor belt a bit by adding a "future classic rock" selection once an hour. They were playing new (or newish) music that still sounded like it could fit in with the feel of the classic rock format. This went on for the better part of a year, and just was not able to gain traction. I applaud them for the effort, but for every younger person recruited they likely lost 10 older folks who didn't like what they already didn't know.
Once again, people say they are tired of the same songs over and over, but play any other song than those 300 and there's hell to pay.
Once again, people say they are tired of the same songs over and over, but play any other song than those 300 and there's hell to pay.
I'm 28, so I am barely inside their target demographic, but whatever they are doing right now works pretty well (in my opinion). I grew up with KZOK, but now find it to be a little too repetitive. It's still the number one preset on my radio, but the playlist is pretty predictable.
KISM seems to dive a little deeper, and play tracks that I don't hear on KZOK anymore. I was driving around last week and they played "Runaway" by Bon Jovi and "Bye Bye Love" by The Cars. Both great songs that don't see airplay on KZOK anymore. Obviously, they shouldn't go too rogue, but it's been cool to hear a few songs that don't normally make the cut.
But I will agree, I am not sure a "future classic rock" feature really moves the needle much for me. I'd rather they just stick with the core, but play some different songs once in a while.
I have both KISM and KZOK on my presents. My challenge is I never got into grunge (ironic since I've lived my entire life in Washington) or 90s rock and their showing up more on both stations. It's ok because I just move along the dial and find something I do like or switch to a a CD I made.. By the way I'm closer to 55 than 50 so I'll be getting off the conveyor belt soon.