Re: Lowry Mays speaks

["Steve West" <stevewest106@hotmail.com>]

Rick sez:
> As the keeper of a web site that specializes in pre-voice-tracked radio,
> I must (probably surprisingly) say that I'm with Mr. Ordinetz on this
> one.  As a matter of fact in some ways voice tracking ends up sounding
> better than what was going out on the air 25 years ago, especially on
> smaller stations.

Rick, I hate to agree on this one, otherwise this whole schtick I've been
working on for the last 3 years goes out the window LOL... Unfortunately, as
one who also owns a website dedicated to pre-VT radio.... AND as one who
voice tracks a station on a regular basis, I must agree to some limited
extent.
>
> > Listening to several old 80s airchecks of WHTT & Kiss 108 didn't
> > reveal a
> > lot of audience interaction either.  Drake radio was pretty sterile
> > for the
> > most part too, with the exception of a few high profile ones most
> > jocks
> > were pretty interchangeable.  Sure it sounds good to us now, but
> > that's
> > what most of us on this list grew up with...back then "personality"
> > jocks
> > were screaming about how Drake "ruined" radio...took away all the
> > "soul".

Well, that's what they were saying, yes... BUT there's a huge difference
between then and now.  'Personality' radio AKA Roscoe in many places was all
over the road.  Sure, it had a cult following with it's fans fiercely loyal,
but many times that fan loyalty didn't equate to ratings.  One *might* argue
there was too much personality and not enough music at some stations.  Enter
Bill Drake.  Love him or hate him, he streamlined radio to achieve a
relative balance, and in the beginning, at least, that balance between the
jock and the music worked well.  Trouble was, Drake took it too far, and the
balance shifted too far into the music and liner cards and away from the air
talent - so the Drake/Chenault Top 40 experiment ended up a victim of it's
own success some 10 years after it began.  Its the ol' tale of trying to
build a better mouse trap, it was hard to improve on the original.  If only
Drake had adopted the southern adage 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it...'

>
> Yes, there were HUGE battles in the trades in the 1960's (well, there
> really only one major trade at the time... Billboard) about that very
> subject... as I recall, the charge was lead by Claude Hall, stating that
> Drake was ruining radio.  Not everyone on WRKO was Dale Dorman or Shadow
> Stevens... and yeah, a lot of it really did sterile.  Us radio folk tend
> to forget that, though...

Same as today.  Trouble is, I have to defend the voice track machine now.
Instead of a PD settling for whatever talent he/she can find for a weekend
gig, he/she can now pick and choose one or two formerly full time now out of
a job good jocks and let them voice track with the occasional live weekend
gig, and have a quality product all the time.

I think, lost in the arguement against voice-tracking and modern radio,
there is an acceptance that technology has helped and overall improved radio
immensely.  Yet, it's not the machine, per-se, the trouble with it is how
badly that technology has been abused.  The VT machine now takes the place
of warm bodies at stations that really should be live during the day and
evening.  It is used to throw people out of work, and justify meager
salaries, all because certain companies sacrifice ethical business practices
and a desire to serve their city of license for the 'bottom line' and the
profit margin.  There's a pervasive attitude among owners and management
these days that says everyone else is voice tracked, so why not us?.  As
long as the sales department can sell an idea, we'll put it on the air, as
long as it isn't expensive.  While we're at it we'll just keep the playlist
safe and make sure we don't offend anyone and we'll be just fine.  Worst
part is, while automation like Scott Studios, Maestro, etc and it's VT
capabilities frees up the air talent to be more productive, it's so
over-used.  VT'ing a shift is fine for overnights, weekend evenings and
holidays but except for a few sleepy formats like soft AC, Smooth Jazz,
Classical, etc, radio has no business being voice tracked during prime
weekday shifts except on stations tucked away in far away towns far from
large population centers.  As my PD said to me today - a new guy from your
neck of the woods - Chip Miller formerly of WPKX Springfield... 'We rely too
much on the music.  Need more audience participation'.  Well, you're not
going to get much of that while voice tracked.  (and, we aren't... much)

I wrote earlier:
> > but perhaps I've lost the ability to grow and adapt to the
> > new way of
> > doing business...
>
Rick responded:
> I'm sure radio professionals have been saying this all along... in the
> 20's, the networks were gonna put local people out of their radio jobs,
> in the 50's, the rise of TV was gonna put local people out of their radio
> jobs, in the 70's the rise of FM was gonna put local people out of their
> radio jobs, and in the 90's the internet was gonna put local people out
> of their radio jobs.  The beat goes on

True to an extent.  The difference here is with SO MANY different
entertainment choices available to listeners these days, and as I pointed
out earlier, with listenership down some 17%, it could be said that this
time, radio might be in real trouble.

Having said that, one has to think that if listenership drops to the point
that advertisers say to hell with it and quit buying radio time, one would
think owners would find something to attract listeners.  Its hard to imagine
what, though, if not through 'traditional' type music/news/talk programming.
One thing's for sure, unless there's a re-write of FCC rules, radio will
never be a pay service.  Maybe that's one thing that scares me about IBOC.
Rules can be changed.  We have Michael Powell (gulp!)...  But that's another
topic altogether.

Steve West
www.airchexx.com