Rock Radio is Back ... but as what??

Dave Loudin · Post by **Dave Loudin** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:29 am

Damn straight!

BTW, does anybody really know why we call a collection of songs sold together an album? (I do, because I have a few at home.)

Bob Campbell · Post by **Bob Campbell** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 9:21 am

A collection of anything can be an album. i.e. photo, buttterfly, pressed flowers (NO, I don't have any).
Is there a really cool reason?

Zak Tyler · Post by **Zak Tyler** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 9:24 am

Bob Campbell wrote:Kick it Shockley. Hell, I think Foo Fighters are better than Nirvana.

we got the new foo fighters full lengths in earlier in the week, and i listened to it on my way to work this morning (yes, even before 5am, my comute is that long) maybe it's just my taste in music but i could only latch onto a couple of the tracks, The Pretender, Erase/Replace, and Home... most of the tracks sound very AC to me... as a matter of fact at least a couple of them sound like The Beatles...

Dave Loudin · Post by **Dave Loudin** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:17 am

The original music albums were groups of 78rpms kept in packaging that looked like a book.

AmpedNow · Post by **AmpedNow** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 4:51 pm

I'll be the lone Nirvana dissenter. They were good. They were not "just another band".

And Dave Grohl was the drummer.

I got "Nevermind" when it first came out, when I was still a metal head. And instantly loved it. Still do.

With that said, there were several great bands who deserve credit for the grunge thing. But everything seemed to ride the Teen Spirit wave. That was the breakthrough song of the genre.

It's interesting that Cobain is being ragged on for having severe depression, a shitty personal life, and a bitch for a wife. I guess not everyone can be so blessed to have it all together like the rest of you.

Ironically, I believe there's a direct correlation between his severe depression, shitty personal life, and a bitch for a wife and the music he made. Probably wouldn't have been as edgy if he was all happy and stuff...

Double ironically, the Foos probably would've never existed had Cobain not killed himself.

Interesting side note about Grohl: I had a friend who went to high school with him, when he lived in Springfield, VA. Said he was pretty crazy even back then.

Ace Purple · Post by **Ace Purple** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:16 am

Nirvana was an extremely influential band, and what they lack in longevity they make up for with the iconic Kurt Cobain frozen in time.

Though, to be sure, I'm with those of you who think Alice in Chains was a superior band.

SHOCKLEY · Post by **SHOCKLEY** » Sat Sep 29, 2007 3:12 am

Seattle bands that were superior to Nirvana:

Alice In Chains..

Soundgarden...

Pearl Jam...

Mother Love Bone..

Queensryche.. I know that they weren't grunge, but I'll take Mindcrime I over anything Nirvana did..

Ace Purple · Post by **Ace Purple** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:27 am

There was a jarring segue I heard on Rock 103 in Columbus, GA two weekends ago:

"Paralyzer" by Finger 11
--into--
"Move It On Over" by George Thorogood

I understand the idea that rock is rock and people like multiple genres, but I do question the scheduling of songs that would seem to appeal to vastly different demos.

Jay Nunley · Post by **Jay Nunley** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:07 am

Ace Purple wrote:There was a jarring segue I heard on Rock 103 in Columbus, GA two weekends ago:

"Paralyzer" by Finger 11
--into--
"Move It On Over" by George Thorogood

I understand the idea that rock is rock and people like multiple genres, but I do question the scheduling of songs that would seem to appeal to vastly different demos.

That's the quandry you run into constantly. However, "Paralyzer" is popular across the board 18+. Thorogood is a particularly difficult artist because 40% to 60% hate him and 40%-60% love him.

Jay Nunley · Post by **Jay Nunley** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:30 am

Arp2 wrote: ....which is why I continue to go against the grain du jour and keep histories a much bigger priority than the dream of a "perfectly-balanced" quarter hour within a "perfectly-balanced" hour. Who even knows for sure what those are?

When has more than just one freakish listener ever said, "Man, I loved hearing four of my all-time favorite songs in a row! I'm just amazed how my favorite radio station does that so often! One thing I noticed, though, is that the songs were '85 style A, '94 style B, '07 style C, and '01 style D; I think it really should have been '01 style C, '85 style B, '07 retro-sounding style A, and '94 ahead-of-its-time style D. If that would have happened, my enjoyment would have been even greater, and I know 10,000 other people would have tuned in right at that moment, enjoyed it just as much as I, and permanently become P1s for you!"

No, what you hear is, "Everytime I get in my car to go home from work, they're playing 'Song A.'" Or, "It seems like they play 'Song B' most Monday mornings right as I get to my desk, and I now hate 'Song B' because it means my weekend is definitely over."

Construct your clocks and categories and rules to help mix things up, try to make sure people don't hear the same song on both sides of work, watch the histories very closely, keep a somewhat attentive eye on the rest, and, otherwise, get on with life.*

Uh, unless you're doing "Jack."

* That's not to say you can be lazy about it...if you have to manually schedule almost every dang song to pull that off, then that's just what you have to do.

Agreed. I'm careful with quarter hours (much easier for a rock station as you should base it on core artists as opposed to titles), but my "Yesterday," "Friday to Monday," and "Week Ago" offsets are much more rigid. The difficult part on that is you still have to go on artist more than title.

But this is about rock, and I don't know anything about rock...

It is much the same as all formats, but there are a few major differences based on the audience. Rock people tend to be much more knowledgeable and passionate about the music. That is especially true with P1s. The P2s you share with other rock stations are much the same. The P2s you share with CHR and Country (a surprisingly large amount of people) are not like that.

That passion and knowledge leads to dealing with things I've never heard a CHR, AC, or Country PD talk about. If you play "too many" songs from "Pronounced Leh-Nerd Skin-Nerd" and "not enough" from "Second Helping" you piss them off. If you don't balance Bon Scott AC/DC and Brian Johnson AC/DC you hear about it. If you only play the big time testers off "Nevermind" and ignore the weaker testing tunes from "In Utero" you are going to start losing people.

The other major difference is that rock audiences have a hair trigger "bullshit" detector, they are resistant to hype, and if you even give them a whiff of "lame" or "uncool" you are immediately met with myriad complaints and P1 deterioration over a long term.

It is a "niche" format. It just happens to be the biggest "niche."

Ace Purple · Post by **Ace Purple** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 10:54 am

Jay Nunley wrote:"Paralyzer" is popular across the board 18+.

Understandably so; it's an outstanding song IMO.

Dave Allen · Post by **Dave Allen** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:03 pm

Its one of the few songs released over the past few years that I like.

AmpedNow · Post by **AmpedNow** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:07 pm

Yeah, those people are nuts... The ones with glazed eyes that whip out a 20-question trivia for you every time another song comes on the radio.

I wonder how alternative differs with active in terms of audience demographics... I do know that they're most likely to be male and under 35.

With that said, it seems to be the most "female friendly" of all the major rock formats, depending on how active they lean.

Z-Rock, for example, call themselves alternative, but they do have an active lean, IMO. Compare their playlist to Alt Nation on Sirius, or KROQ, and you will see the difference.

One thing that is amazing these days is how formats can be splintered a thousand different ways, and still be within a major format's boundaries.

Zak Tyler · Post by **Zak Tyler** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:12 pm

K-Rock wrote:Yeah, those people are nuts... The ones with glazed eyes that whip out a 20-question trivia for you every time another song comes on the radio.

I wonder how alternative differs with active in terms of audience demographics... I do know that they're most likely to be male and under 35.

With that said, it seems to be the most "female friendly" of all the major rock formats, depending on how active they lean.

Z-Rock, for example, call themselves alternative, but they do have an active lean, IMO. Compare their playlist to Alt Nation on Sirius, or KROQ, and you will see the difference.

One thing that is amazing these days is how formats can be splintered a thousand different ways, and still be within a major format's boundaries.

all 3 (mainstream, active and alt.) rock formats have so much crossover, i don't see it being to long before the "powers that be, that decide how many formal formats there are, and what they're called", decide to merge a couple of them. i spin a total of 15 currents, and here's how they lay out across the last 7 days (as of today) in mediabase.

mainstream chart
7 of 15 in top 10
14 of 15 in top 20
15 of 15 in top 30

active chart
10 of 15 in top 10
11 of 15 in top 10 and top 30

alternative chart
6 of 15 in top 10
9 of 15 in top 20
10 of 15 in top 30

another argument for going to only 2 "new" rock formats.

the only thing that separates the formats are the recurrents and golds, which none of the charts even track (with exception to mediabase) probably, because there's no record money for tracking those... i'm just sayin'......