WZLX vs. WBOS

[MarkW]

Well stated, BigA. There are a LOT of titles played on WBOS that would make classic rock fans change the station (or avoid 92.9 in the first place). Similarly, the 90s stuff they play isn't sufficient, in most cases, to entice fans of more recent rock music to endure all the 80s (and select 70s) titles the station plays.

90s rock pairs much better with post-2K rock in most cases than with 80s rock, in my opinion.

WZLX does a good job of mining the 90s titles that actually are compatible with the older titles, and they don't OD on the hairbands like WBOS has a propensity of doing at times.

 

[Retro]

Well stated, BigA. There are a LOT of titles played on WBOS that would make classic rock fans change the station (or avoid 92.9 in the first place). Similarly, the 90s stuff they play isn't sufficient, in most cases, to entice fans of more recent rock music to endure all the 80s (and select 70s) titles the station plays.

90s rock pairs much better with post-2K rock in most cases than with 80s rock, in my opinion.

WZLX does a good job of mining the 90s titles that actually are compatible with the older titles, and they don't OD on the hairbands like WBOS has a propensity of doing at times.

I.further correct myseld with it being Black Sabbath who did "Iron Man" and "Paranoid" as well! Just another oops, I meant to say instead!

 

[ScottBurns]

WAAF, as competitors over the years noted, was a Worcester station that tried to be a Boston station.

 

[TheBigA]

It is quite ironic that Beasley has a huge play list in comparison to WBOS, go figure!

Huh? Beasley owns WBOS.

Well stated, BigA. There are a LOT of titles played on WBOS that would make classic rock fans change the station (or avoid 92.9 in the first place)

My take on it is whoever does their scheduling doesn't actually know the music. Whereas iHeart knows the music.

 

[DavidEduardo]

Wasn't WKAF part of the Boston market?

The Worcester Metro is not part of the Boston market, although part of the county is in the Boston market. A slight change was done only very recently to change the COL to a county location that is in the Boston market, making the station home to Boston,.

 

[jlehmann]

The Worcester Metro is not part of the Boston market, although part of the county is in the Boston market. A slight change was done only very recently to change the COL to a county location that is in the Boston market, making the station home to Boston,.

107.3's COL changed from Worcester to Westboro a long time ago, maybe 15 years. 97.7's has never changed.

 

[Retro]

Huh? Beasley owns WBOS.



My take on it is whoever does their scheduling doesn't actually know the music. Whereas iHeart knows the music.

Apparently, somebody is not paying attention! I made a side comment about 2 separate Beasley stations. WBOS with what appears to be a limited playlist, and WROR, which seems to have a large one instead. I did not mention Beasley, because I did not want to insult anyone's intelligence.

107.3's COL changed from Worcester to Westboro a long time ago, maybe 15 years. 97.7's has never changed.

I specifically mentioned the WKAF call letters, which was licensed to Brockton, MA. And not WAAF, being licensed to Westboro instead.

 

[Deleted User]

WAAF got into Boston way back in the day because of some funky way the signal propagated.... it wasn't designed that way. it was just a happy accident, plus in the late 70's and for a while after they were a good alternative to WBCN

Then some genius decided if they could get their stick closer to Boston, it would be even better... right?

Wrong! The new transmitter site not only robbed them of listeners to the west of Worcester, but it did nothing and IMHO reduced their coverage in some southern Boston suburbs.

Later in life, WAAF bought 97.7 from Radio One or someone, and used it to fill in the void in the now expanding South Shore.

Then some genius at Entercom (?) decided WAAF was not worth the effort and 97.7 went away.

We can have a long discussion of why WAAF died, the lack content , etc etc etc but we have covered all this more than 2 years ago when WAAF was sold .

But my last comment on WAAF is this.... they had big dollar owners in their last 10 years, who should have had a cracker jack engineering staff capable of using every available method to increase their presence in Boston and the suburbs where their P1 was.

They missed their chance, the station floundered, and was sold of for pennies on the dollar compared to prior sales.

THe new owners came in, and within months made some moves with the main stick, and then filed for on channel repeaters to fill in the voids giving them almost full Boston coverage for not a lot of money or effort.

And they do it with a main stick with a whole 2100 watts ERP at 1100 feet

 

[Andy Travis]

And, of course, about half of all US stations don't make money.

Is that possibly an "on paper" situation where the owners DO make a living but there's not much else there? Otherwise, how are they staying on if they're not at least breaking even?

 

[Least]

WAAF's demise was the product of several variables. There was the decline of ratings in Active Rock, which was pointed out here for years. In how many threads did members suggest over and over to flip WAAF? EMF buying 107.3 became a running speculation, much to my personal disdain. One suggests that signal was the issue. I point the finger at Audacy throwing in the towel when they moved Greg Hill to WEEI and didn't put on a new morning show. They systematically aimed to drive listeners away from WAAF to give Hill as much of a combined audience of the original WAAF and WEEI morning shows. To me, Hsu and Carrie should have became the morning team, and LB should have went to WEEI will Hill. That's from an outside perspective.

My suggestion remains the same from over the years. Big A, David, and other insiders will use data to program a station that maximizes as much return in advertising revenue. That means that an Active Rock WBOS will mainly be the 90s era Classic Rock, with some current songs thrown in. That was part of WAAF's downfall. Too little differentiation from WZLX. Modern fans don't want to hear much of the classic rock. And classic rock fans don't want to hear much of modern rock. The 90s were left as a placeholder of songs that test well, since the early 2000s. In 2022, they are now 23 to 32 years old. They are classic rock.

If we are hypothetically going to flip WBOS to active rock, my suggestion is that they gut everything pre-2010 and focus on modern rock. Leave classic rock for specific times (request hours with Adam 12 or "90s throwback weekends." But is there enough of an audience left who would try it out? Here we are with six in one hand, and a half dozen in the other. Pre-COVID, successful formats played new songs, where Active Rock in Boston relyed on aging songs. It relied for too long that it lost its meaning. I enjoy both WBOS and WZLX as Classic Rock stations. But if they were to flip WBOS to Active Rock, I implore that someone take a chance and design it new, with an emphasis on modern bands.
As for Alternative, it's also floundering across the country. Is there really a format hole with Alternative right now?

 

[ScottBurns]

WAAF's demise was the product of several variables. There was the decline of ratings in Active Rock, which was pointed out here for years. In how many threads did members suggest over and over to flip WAAF? EMF buying 107.3 became a running speculation, much to my personal disdain. One suggests that signal was the issue. I point the finger at Audacy throwing in the towel when they moved Greg Hill to WEEI and didn't put on a new morning show. They systematically aimed to drive listeners away from WAAF to give Hill as much of a combined audience of the original WAAF and WEEI morning shows. To me, Hsu and Carrie should have became the morning team, and LB should have went to WEEI will Hill. That's from an outside perspective.

My suggestion remains the same from over the years. Big A, David, and other insiders will use data to program a station that maximizes as much return in advertising revenue. That means that an Active Rock WBOS will mainly be the 90s era Classic Rock, with some current songs thrown in. That was part of WAAF's downfall. Too little differentiation from WZLX. Modern fans don't want to hear much of the classic rock. And classic rock fans don't want to hear much of modern rock. The 90s were left as a placeholder of songs that test well, since the early 2000s. In 2022, they are now 23 to 32 years old. They are classic rock.

If we are hypothetically going to flip WBOS to active rock, my suggestion is that they gut everything pre-2010 and focus on modern rock. Leave classic rock for specific times (request hours with Adam 12 or "90s throwback weekends." But is there enough of an audience left who would try it out? Here we are with six in one hand, and a half dozen in the other. Pre-COVID, successful formats played new songs, where Active Rock in Boston relyed on aging songs. It relied for too long that it lost its meaning. I enjoy both WBOS and WZLX as Classic Rock stations. But if they were to flip WBOS to Active Rock, I implore that someone take a chance and design it new, with an emphasis on modern bands.
As for Alternative, it's also floundering across the country. Is there really a format hole with Alternative right now?

Very well said, Least. I agree with everything you wrote.

In terms of WBOS, what about programming it like WMMR in Philadelphia? That covers much of what you suggested, but 'MMR plays some Classic Rock too.

 

[CTListener]

None of these "fixes" addresses the root cause of the rock problem, namely that the kids and teens who used to cut their musical eye teeth on rock now are more likely to prefer hip-hop and other rhythmic genres. As thrilling as a virtuoso guitar solo may be to boomers and Gen X'ers, it has no appeal to a millennial addicted to the aggressive rhymes and synthesized beats of rap. And they're not "growing up" to become rock fans either. I know people in their 40s and 50s who chose rap over rock in the '90s and still have no interest in rock.

 

[DavidEduardo]

Is that possibly an "on paper" situation where the owners DO make a living but there's not much else there? Otherwise, how are they staying on if they're not at least breaking even?

Stations that lose money seem to always find a buyer, so there are many that lose for a while and then are sold and the cycle repeats itself. And, yes, there are smaller market stations with an owner/operator that make a living for that person through a salary and traded cars and store credits. And there are stations within groups that don't make money, but they are not sold because of the impact of the write off being greater than the annual loss.

And lots of stations are, indeed, just breaking even. Costs are cut to the minimum, equipment is out of date, and the bathroom does not have toilet paper and eventually it all falls apart.

And, as we are seeing more and more, many AM are just turning in the license.

 

[Least]

None of these "fixes" addresses the root cause of the rock problem, namely that the kids and teens who used to cut their musical eye teeth on rock now are more likely to prefer hip-hop and other rhythmic genres. As thrilling as a virtuoso guitar solo may be to boomers and Gen X'ers, it has no appeal to a millennial addicted to the aggressive rhymes and synthesized beats of rap. And they're not "growing up" to become rock fans either. I know people in their 40s and 50s who chose rap over rock in the '90s and still have no interest in rock.

People can say the other way around, with rock fans in their 40s and 50s not preferring rap. I actually disagree. There are the one genre people, but I don't think it defines the norm. From my little subpopulation of white suburbanites in their 40s and 50s, the ones who swore up and down that they were gangsta rappers in the 90s now wear cowboy hats and say how the hats make them "look like Tim McGraw (that's a statement I once heard, and I'll leave the insult about what part of McGraw's anatomy that I said it made the person look like 😆)." Talk about a polarization from then to now. For people who live in the city, perhaps you're accurate?

To me, 20+ years of relying too heavily on the 90s alt rock hits gradually drifted young listeners away, over time. It became too much of "Dad's music." To make it worse, most of what is still being played is "Dad's music." Although I love Ozzy, G&R, and so on; some of it is "Grandpa's music." Yet, Active Rock still relies on it. It isn't new bands that haven't changed their sound. It's the same bands and same songs. You can try to attract a young audience that way; but as we see, it doesn't relate to them. That's what other music formats that aim young are doing, de-emphasizing the older songs and bands. Active Rock celebrates when they play a new song, yet it's usually either from Foo Fighters, Pearl Jam, Green Day, and so on. Rap/Hip-Hop have a new sound. Alternative (be it still failing) is going rhythmic, as you point out. Even country made a hard separation between the old twang and the current sound.

The big question for big companies is whether to take a risk. Corporations focus on income, so the answer will be "no." It will have to be tested and proven. To me, that's part of the issue regarding Active Rock. They aren't going to take a chance, because for every one that succeeds, there are five to ten that fail.

So, we have a detachment from newer bands. We have record companies that aren't pushing newer bands. We have over saturation of "Dad's/Grandpa's songs." And at the same time, rhythmic music that is new and different from "Dad's/Grandpa's music" is being pushed by record companies through mediums that the youth relate with. That's how your deduction comes to be reality. It wasn't that "the kids only like rhythmic." It's that by unintentional design, the entire music and radio industry prefabricated the result into existence. None of it was an intentional war on Rock. Rather, it was a chain of events that brought us here.

Honestly, this is why I say leave WBOS as an alternative to WZLX. ZLX is like WBCN in the 80s l, where BOS is like WBCN in the 90s. Flip WBOS to Active Rock, and it will be the same station with a few songs by Halestorm, Volbeat, and so on thrown in. It won't move a needle. Don't bother, until either they want to take a chance with mostly new music or it's tested and proven in another market.

 

[TheBigA]

It won't move a needle. Don't bother, until either they want to take a chance with mostly new music or it's tested and proven in another market.

The decision won't be based on music. It'll be based on revenue. If you can quantify the specific number of additional listeners and demographics this change will deliver, or identify major advertisers who support this music, you might have a case. Or if you can show synergies and strategies that exist within Beasley. Otherwise, as I always say, radio is not in the music distribution business. It makes no money from breaking new bands or new music. In other words, how does playing unknown music by unknown bands make the station more money than they're making now. That's the question. Otherwise, they'll stick with what they know.

 

[Least]

The decision won't be based on music. It'll be based on revenue. If you can quantify the specific number of additional listeners and demographics this change will deliver, or identify major advertisers who support this music, you might have a case. Or if you can show synergies and strategies that exist within Beasley. Otherwise, as I always say, radio is not in the music distribution business. It makes no money from breaking new bands or new music. In other words, how does playing unknown music by unknown bands make the station more money than they're making now. That's the question. Otherwise, they'll stick with what they know.

I said that as a quick sentence in my earlier posts. I comes down to revenue.

 

[TheBigA]

I said that as a quick sentence in my earlier posts. I comes down to revenue.

The big problem active rock and alternative formats have is that the new acts, whether solo or band, are not the mass appeal acts they once were, and the record labels know that. That's why they don't fund radio promotion in those formats to the degree they once did. They won't get return on investment. The business model if you're a new rock or alt act is to tour endlessly, build a small but dedicated fan base, and sell directly to them using social media. Radio is not part of that business model. It's too expensive. If somehow a new act connects with a mass audience, that will be a game changer, in the way it was 30 years ago. But no one is investing in rock or alt acts to make that happen. If it does, it will be completely accidental.

 

[Least]

The big problem active rock and alternative formats have is that the new acts, whether solo or band, are not the mass appeal acts they once were, and the record labels know that. That's why they don't fund radio promotion in those formats to the degree they once did. They won't get return on investment. The business model if you're a new rock or alt act is to tour endlessly, build a small but dedicated fan base, and sell directly to them using social media. Radio is not part of that business model. It's too expensive. If somehow a new act connects with a mass audience, that will be a game changer, in the way it was 30 years ago. But no one is investing in rock or alt acts to make that happen. If it does, it will be completely accidental.

I agree with this. I just don't say it with insider language. The record companies don't push rock acts, so the radio companies play what tests well, so the music that last tested well stays in rotation longer, so the listener observes it as overplayed and moves on, so the record company says "less people are listening and we're going to push another genre," which forces the cycle to continue until we get here.

I do theorize that when radio was a bunch of smaller companies, they did take more chances. However, the medium had far less competition back then. There wasn't satellite radio, YouTube, streaming, podcasts, and so on. Heck, the worst enemy of radio was the blank cassette. There wasn't even mass CD-R yet, let alone a handheld computer in our pockets that could circumvent radio.

As I said in my post from early this morning, many variables play into why WAAF failed and why Active Rock (and even Alternative) are not performing.

 

[TheBigA]

I do theorize that when radio was a bunch of smaller companies, they did take more chances.

But the music situation was very different then. It was easier to take chances because the music attracted an audience and you were selling from strength, not weakness. Now the music doesn't attract a consensus, so taking a chance means you alienate someone. It has nothing to do with the size of the company. It's all about mathematics. It was hard to tell John Kluge he could make money by playing long haired, drug-taking rock stars. But once he saw the money coming in, he was all in, and flipped all of his Metromedia FMs to rock. If he still owned radio, he'd do what iHeart is doing.

Heck, the worst enemy of radio was the blank cassette.

I agree. It caused people to make their own personal playlists and stop listening to radio. It's why streaming is popular now. Streaming has become the new blank cassette.

 

[raccoonradio]

>>The business model if you're a new rock or alt act is to tour endlessly, build a small but dedicated fan base, and sell directly to them using social media. Radio is not part of that business model. It's too expensive. I

Yes, social media is important these days. Local and national indie bands use YouTube, Facebook etc to spread the word about new releases and gigs. College radio isn't a big expense but labels do find it easier to send releases as downloads and not actual CDs. For
example:

Red on Red--Boston local music label
Alligator--well known blues label. Stations can download releases from All. or Airplay Direct or a select few get actual CDs

A group like Foxes and Peppers build up a fanbase among furries and they place their songs on YouTube. During the pandemic
they may play a virtual gig on Facebook Live. Bluesman Dave Keller from VT did a live gig from home and had a virtual "merch table"
where you could go to his site and order a CD or download.

Facebook has acts mentioning their gigs. Sometimes local acts will send physical CDs to a station (Bird Mancini, Peppermint Kicks)
or sometimes they will spread their music via downloads.
A college station can publicize music via a phone interview, like when WUML talked to Western MA bluesman Wildcat O'Halloran.
I will play his CDs and mention "he's doing a gig at..."

College radio is out there, but so is social media. Oh, and don't forget podcast and streamers. WBZ radio's Kristen Eck has something right here in Beverly called BumbleBeeRadio.

Frequently I'll play the acts I mentioned and get grateful thank yous from the artists on Facebook. So yes you have college radio but many other streams, podcasts, etc.

>>
Hello! I'm Kristen Eck -- founder, host, and program director of BumbleBee Radio! We're an independent, online streaming radio station, broadcasting 24/7 out of Massachusetts, playing the latest and greatest in alternative, indie, and electronic music. If it's good, we play it.
You'll hear bands and artists like Pixies, Björk, The B-52's, The Smiths, and Radiohead, but you'll also encounter a ton of new tunes you might not be familiar with. I host the weekly BumbleBee Brunch live on Fridays at 10 a.m., playing a mix of new releases and classic alternative. We also proudly feature Boston & New England acts artists side-by-side with everyone else. Come on in and join the fun -- we're BumbleBee Radio! Also BOSTON EMISSIONS with Angelle Wood https://www.bumblebeeradio.com/

--
WATD and WBOQ also have done local spotlight segments and shows.