Re: while in Portland....

[SteveOrdinetz <steveord@wavewizard.com>]

At 01:48 PM 12/7/99 -0500, Roger Kirk wrote:
>
>Conventional wisdom says "tighten the playlist and you
>won't offend so many listeners"  Therefore, it stands 
>to reason that a nationally syndicated show should have
>the tightest playlist of all because it has to appeal 
>to many audiences (in many states) each with their own 
>dislikes - i.e. intersection of sets of "likes" should 
>be smaller.
>
>WHY then do we hear so many oldies that have been silent
>in Boston because they "supposedly" don't test well?  
>Does this mean that Boston listeners are unlike listeners 
>anywhere else in the US?
>


Bartley has always thrown in some lesser-heard stuff on his show.  He did
10 years ago when I worked at a station that carried him, last time I heard
his show the formula hadn't changed much.

I don't listen to oldies all that much, but it doesn't seem to me that
Oldies 103 is any more repetitive than any other Boston station.  Kiss 108
seems to turn over their entire playlist every hour and a half...even songs
that I wouldn't even remotely classify as "power" songs.  WROR seems to
really flog their songs too...again even songs like "Taxi" which aren't
exactly power golds have shown up 3x in 24 hours in Mediabase.




>
>Li'l Walter apparently appeals to a significant number
>of OLDIES fans who love doo-wop and the other songs of 
>that era.  I listen to his show to learn about songs 
>I never heard on the radio when they first came out.  
>But outside of the 50+ year old crowd, I'm sure he's 
>batting less than .100.
>


My guess is that it's their way of showing they haven't totally abandoned
50s music (though Walter's stuff is a bit obscure for most people).  Over
the past few years the format has shifted into more of a 1962-73 format,
with only a few HUGE pre-1962 hits thrown in.  As one who doesn't
particularly care for 50s music, I don't mind.