• 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

Wave Goodbye To The WBMP...

27 spins on WRFF in the past 7 days. So approximately 4 spins per day. Or once every 6 hours. Well below the top spins it's getting on WLUM at 52x this week.

They have been up-ing the spins in the last few days...is ALT 92.3 beating it to death yet?
 
Here in Philly, RFF is playing that horrible soccer mom remake of Africa by Weezer at least once an hour, is this what the Alternative format is evolving into, much different than years back, when Better than Ezra, Screaming Trees and the Flys were on the airwaves...

That's funny, because I feel like people would have dismissed Better Than Ezra as a "soccer mom" band back in their heyday, compared to the edgier stuff on the format at the time. Don't get me wrong, I like some of their songs, but they were definitely one of the more Hot AC-oriented Alternative acts back then.

As for the "Africa" cover, it's fine. Weezer pretty much gets a pass because of their heritage, and I'd rather hear a perfectly competent cover of a classic song than one of their awful recent originals. Regardless, it's getting a lot of buzz so it makes sense to play it - we'll see how long it lasts.
 
Exactly. It’s getting a ton of buzz- you don’t see that much with rock bands anymore, so of course stations are going to play it. My guess is that the song is more of a novelty and will probably be on its way off of most playlists by September.
 
As for the "Africa" cover, it's fine. Weezer pretty much gets a pass because of their heritage, and I'd rather hear a perfectly competent cover of a classic song than one of their awful recent originals. Regardless, it's getting a lot of buzz so it makes sense to play it - we'll see how long it lasts.

To me, it's indicative of this format. A heritage band does a 30 year old cover song, and gets airplay and buzz. But does it further the genre? Not my job.
 
The last dozen posts are indicative of....the fact that ALT music, is like ALT Thinking: It's ok to think alternatively, as long as you agree with "my" alternative thinking.

It's almost impossible to be a mass media radio station and play this niche to any large and loyal audience that engages and buys the products. Any station that has any real signal power is not maximizing their audience, success, ratings or billings in 2018. No matter what an ALT or AAA station programs, musically, it is NEVER right to a large part of the small audience willing to "attempt" to listen. The audience is extremely finicky and highly opinionated on what the playlist should be. Hence, minimal TSL and ratings.

Now you get a 25+ year old band willing to take a "risk" and listen to their fan and have a little fun and play a classic hit live on Jimmy Kimmel and do something different and bam.....berate and hate 101. Cuomo is almost 50 years old. Hardly the age to be a cutting edge new artist to tear up the charts, but Weezer has managed to get millions of dollars of free publicity from nightly news to NPR and THAT may well help the format.

Could this all just be that the format has and is moving away from your tastes? It happens all the time. As we all age a year at a time, the music cannot just stand still. The same is true about the Classic Hits and/or "oldies" format, except there are obviously no new versions of the songs to freshen up the format. And we all have heard the cries to bring back the 50 and 60 year old "hits" because the 80's stuff sucks....except that the majority of today's most desirable audience that could listen and make the stations massively successful and popular have never heard of most of the songs of the 50's, 60's and even now the 70's.

I had the pleasure of interviewing Dave Gahan a few months ago. You cannot argue that his band was a major force in alternative music and the format and guess who attends their concerts...twenty-year-olds and soccer moms alike. Maybe I can publicly ask Depeche Mode to do a new version of "Enjoy The Silence" on this board so it will bring more life to a timeless song. How about it Dave? Weezer's version of "Africa" is timeless. Not Alt. BigA points out that the most impressive fact is ---- airplay/buzz/sales/success... more power to them. Sorry boring radio has ruined your listening pleasure. Thankfully, you have plenty of those perfect online sources and I am sure there are plenty of non-radio discussion boards to discuss this on. Right?
 
It's almost impossible to be a mass media radio station and play this niche to any large and loyal audience that engages and buys the products.

I agree. Alternative should be the antithesis of mass media, if its done correctly. But for a time, about 25 years ago, alternative music all of a sudden became well known. Those are the older hits stations like ALT92.3 are playing. The purists are calling for these stations to stick to the current stuff. But I know that the current stuff is simply less commercial than the older stuff. Which is what the fan base likes. And I'm not here to talk about music, but rather radio.

Here's my view on alternative radio. It's done best when it's done right, which is as a non-commercial format. Stations like WFUV in NY are better at this, because they don't operate with the need to attract advertisers. Same with Sirius. Same with certain internet services. Take a look at WFUV's ratings, and they're dreadful. That's OK because as long as the listeners subscribe to the station, it will stay on the air. So my view is rather than complain about ALT92.3 and what they don't do, just change your station to WFUV. That's why they're there.
 
I agree. Alternative should be the antithesis of mass media, if its done correctly. But for a time, about 25 years ago, alternative music all of a sudden became well known. Those are the older hits stations like ALT92.3 are playing. The purists are calling for these stations to stick to the current stuff. But I know that the current stuff is simply less commercial than the older stuff. Which is what the fan base likes. And I'm not here to talk about music, but rather radio.

Here's my view on alternative radio. It's done best when it's done right, which is as a non-commercial format. Stations like WFUV in NY are better at this, because they don't operate with the need to attract advertisers. Same with Sirius. Same with certain internet services. Take a look at WFUV's ratings, and they're dreadful. That's OK because as long as the listeners subscribe to the station, it will stay on the air. So my view is rather than complain about ALT92.3 and what they don't do, just change your station to WFUV. That's why they're there.

It is 2018. At some point you would think radio stations would recognize if you want a music format to exist in the future that you should at least recognize the last 5 to 10 years at the most. This instead of continually stuck playing music that is 20+ years old.

I think those WFUV ratings unfairly give Alternative a bad rap. They are barely even a part time Alternative station and when they do play Alternative it is usually mixed in with everything else. People that want to listen to a full time Alternative station that plays new music and from the last 5 - 10 years are going to go elsewhere.

These points hardly make one a purist. I agree though that streaming and satellite gets it right. All they are doing is playing music that was high in the charts for this years. Even the Music Choice channels on cable TV get it right. Radio on the other hand, whether it is Rock or Alternative are stuck playing music that is 20-50 years old. They are making money it seems but isn't this kind of a false bubble since advertisers are missing out on the younger generation by stations focusing on what are effectively oldies formats?
 
It is 2018. At some point you would think radio stations would recognize if you want a music format to exist in the future that you should at least recognize the last 5 to 10 years at the most. This instead of continually stuck playing music that is 20+ years old.

Again, that's a music problem, not a radio problem. Radio shouldn't play weak music just because it's current. There is a lot of great music in other genres for radio to play, and those will be the genres that will continue to live 20 years from now.

I looked at WBMP's playist, and it's 46% currents and recents. That's very high for a station like this.
 
Why is it so difficult for so many to accept that rock is nearing the end of a long and eventful life as a mainstream genre? The changing demographics of America, and all the musical influences that are brought into play with that change, don't bode well for a genre that, after all, originated as white adaptation of black music. Rock has nothing in common with the genres many of this country's ascendant ethnic minorities (as a whole, soon to become the majority) bring to the table.
 
Why is it so difficult for so many to accept that rock is nearing the end of a long and eventful life as a mainstream genre? The changing demographics of America, and all the musical influences that are brought into play with that change, don't bode well for a genre that, after all, originated as white adaptation of black music. Rock has nothing in common with the genres many of this country's ascendant ethnic minorities (as a whole, soon to become the majority) bring to the table.

I find it curious one would believe formats with predominately white artists would some how disappear once whites become a minority. The radio dial is well represented with minority artists and if there is not any form of institutionalized racism at play in the industry then it should be no different for whites once becoming a minority.
 
Rock has nothing in common with the genres many of this country's ascendant ethnic minorities (as a whole, soon to become the majority) bring to the table.

"Soon" is somewhere in the 2050's decade, about 35 or so years from now.

See https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045216 for 2017 data.

Currently:

Black/African American 13.3%
Hispanic: 17.8%
Asian: 5.7%
Native American: 1.3%

White: 76.9%
(Remember, "Hispanic" is an ethnicity, not a race. Many Hispanics are racially self-defined as "white)
 
I find it curious one would believe formats with predominately white artists would some how disappear once whites become a minority. The radio dial is well represented with minority artists and if there is not any form of institutionalized racism at play in the industry then it should be no different for whites once becoming a minority.

White appreciation of black music has been substantial since the 1960s, maybe longer. It continues today with the preference for hip-hop/rap among a big chunk of the 18-34 white demo that used to belong to rock. Black listeners' interest in rock, however, has been minimal for decades and may be at a low ebb now. Hispanic listeners who aren't listening to tropical, Mexican or Latin CHR/AC are generally listening to rhythmic African-American genres, either on urban stations or rhythmic CHRs. The sort of rock that has evolved over the past 20 to 30 years has nothing to attract the interest of musical tastes that are hardwired for rhythm, rhythm and more rhythm. Distorted guitars and Cookie Monster vocals are never going to appeal to these listeners.

I never said rock was going to disappear from radio, although if advertisers continue to believe its fans -- or at least the fans of new rock -- are too cynical/underemployed/slacker/whatever to easily make a buck off, then it certainly might. What I am saying is that demographic shifts and longstanding racial/ethnic differences in listener preferences could relegate current rock to lesser signals, HD Radio or college/community radio.
 
Rock has nothing in common with the genres many of this country's ascendant ethnic minorities (as a whole, soon to become the majority) bring to the table.

It depends. The genre itself was originated by black Americans. Over 100 black Americans are in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. But since the genres creation over 60 years ago, it has taken on a largely white suburban hue. There have been attempts to broaden the audience of rock. Certainly Jimi Hendrix was a pioneer in this area. The best recent example was Aerosmith's duet with Run DMC. But actually what that song seems to do is bring the rock audience to rap. By the 90s, a lot of former rockers became rap fans. This gets bac to my criticism that rock hasn't really evolved or grown in the last 25 years, while other genres have.
 
Hispanic listeners who aren't listening to tropical, Mexican or Latin CHR/AC are generally listening to rhythmic African-American genres, either on urban stations or rhythmic CHRs.

It all depends. For example, one of the country stations in San Antonio has 50% Hispanic listeners. AC stations and classic hits stations do extremely well with Hispanics, generally indexing very well against people of that ethnicity.

And in Latin America, there are plenty of rock stations, most playing all or mostly English language rock. Many of the CHR stations in Latin America play a majority of their songs from the US pop charts.

I don't know of any "tropical" Spanish language station in the US (outside of one in Puerto Rico). Most contemporary stations play Urbana (reggaeton, trap, and other rhythmic songs) or are adult Rhythmic CHRs; if one or another tropical (salsa, merengue, cumbia) song is a crossover hit, it may get played.
 
It depends. The genre itself was originated by black Americans. Over 100 black Americans are in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. But since the genres creation over 60 years ago, it has taken on a largely white suburban hue. There have been attempts to broaden the audience of rock. Certainly Jimi Hendrix was a pioneer in this area. The best recent example was Aerosmith's duet with Run DMC. But actually what that song seems to do is bring the rock audience to rap. By the 90s, a lot of former rockers became rap fans. This gets bac to my criticism that rock hasn't really evolved or grown in the last 25 years, while other genres have.

You and CTListener keep saying "Rock" however this thread and the discussion is about Alternative Rock, big difference. Rock and Alternative sound nothing alike, different artists, different sound, especially the last 8 years where Alternative sounds more popish and has more rhythm.

If anything has evolved it is Alternative replacing rock on the airwaves as far as new music.
 
If anything has evolved it is Alternative replacing rock on the airwaves as far as new music.

I agree that they're not the same, and I agree that there's more willingness for musicians to adapt in alternative. However, some of those changes aren't being embraced by the larger audience (which is one of the things that has also hurt rock's evolution). So yes, while there are some new things happening in alternative, I see that it doesn't always attract a consensus audience, which once again causes these radio stations to remind people of its past with classic songs.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom