halifax radio is really starting to irritate me
psyklopz
Over the last couple of years, I lived in Ottawa for several months.
Don't get me wrong-- Halifax is my home and I love it.
But things have to change on the FM dial.
Other cities actually have lots of decent modern rock music to listen
to. You'd think that q104 would be Halifax's answer, but I don't
think it is...
Go somewhere else and listen to a modern rock station. You get the
best of today, the 90's and a bit of the 80's.
If you listen to q104, you hear the word 'classic' every 5 minutes.
The best hour of rock music they have is the countdown-- so why do
they play the same old 'classic' music all day, and proportionaltely
less of today's actual hits? And for that matter, why not listen to
the hits from the 90's? Oasis? Nirvana? Why does it always have to
be April Wine or Meatloaf or something like that?
I'm 22 years old. Maybe I'm just a punk kid, but I *like* modern rock
music (and not the pop crap they play on c100). I *don't* like being
force fed 70's music all day. Yes, they try to play some modern
music, but let's face it, the majority is aimed at 35+ year olds (3:00
classic rock craving? I don't crave classic rock at 3:00, sorry).
The station seems generally out of touch with my demographic.
Why doesn't halifax have a decent modern rock station? Why can't I
just turn on the radio and listen to the music that my friends and I
love all day?
-=john-van-gurp=-
wrote:
>I may be a lone voice here, but I need to vent :)
No you're not. It all sucks! CBC has some interesting stuff once in a
while but there's not a single station that is dependably pushing out
good and new music. Q104 is almost total crap now. It was decent
enough a long time ago but now it's just a formula of old re-hashed
white man rock. I'm so sick of hearing Boston. Thank god for mp3
players
John!
-------------------------------
- remove YOUR SHORTS to reply -
-------------------------------
J.Weickert
larger selection of FM stations. Q104 went "classic" in the early nineties
and have sucked ever since. I understand they were a good station once but
now their constant repetition of tired top 40 music has rendered the station
useless to anyone with a memory span longer than two days. It actually
forced me to switch to CBC radio2 for something other than their crap list.
I dont know who listens to them, most people I know have the same opinion. I
am now in the 35-40 demographic but my dislike for q104 started along time
ago.
=)
"psyklopz" <cbm_ou...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cbf68a78.02110...@posting.google.com...
Brad Clarke
>>Why doesn't halifax have a decent modern rock station? Why can't I
>>just turn on the radio and listen to the music that my friends and I
>>love all day?
Since you've been to Ottawa, why not listen to The bear via the
internet?
Brad
Lucretia Borgia
-=john-van-gurp=- wrote:
>
> On 4 Nov 2002 14:19:33 -0800, cbm_ou...@hotmail.com (psyklopz)
> wrote:
>
> >I may be a lone voice here, but I need to vent :)
>
> No you're not. It all sucks! CBC has some interesting stuff once in a
> while but there's not a single station that is dependably pushing out
> good and new music.
If I want music I have tapes, I have CD's etc. etc. If I want radio
there is CBC and particularly between 0100 and 0530, it's great.
Who needs anything else!
Sheena
BuGGy
bear in your car.
"Brad Clarke" <bgcla...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:s7vdsukmvhshtbqj7...@4ax.com...
Brad Clarke
wrote:
>>That would be cool to listen to the Bear , but how would you listen to the
>>bear in your car.
You get a REALLY long piece of coax.....:)
I'm originally from Halifax, and when I left in 1993, Q104 was still a
decent station. Too bad it's ended up like Chez 106 here in Ottawa.
Brad
LennyZ
"Brad Clarke" <bgcla...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:jm2esu4a8jcm327ic...@4ax.com...
Derek M.
Nope, you're not alone. Radio in Halifax stinks.
I'm always amazed driving through the province at the music you can pick up
in or from the smaller communities, like Truro, through the Valley, and
towards Yarmouth. Some of it from across the bay in NB, some from Maine.
If towns in those areas can have decent music, why can't we?
Derek
demibee
<Lucreti...@florence.it> wrote:
>If I want music I have tapes, I have CD's etc. etc.
This pretty much describes me: I hate being "force fed" almost Any
kind of music, even music that I happen to like... especially when
it's interspersed with blaring ads that also have their own "music"
pumping through them. I don't think that commercial radio allows for
a single second of silence throughout the broadcast day.
When I'm in the mood for music, (which is often), I'd rather be
listening to something that I've specifically chosen rather than just
daydreaming along to whatever happens to be playing on a favourite
station.
The one exception is classical music... much of that I find
listenable, and I'm not so picky as to which piece it is. Ironically,
I have very little of it in my own collection.
Mostly, I tend to treat radio like TV... looking for news, talk, etc.,
and so I'm often drawn to the CBCs. Personally, I wouldn't mind
hearing an all-news CNN- or CBCN-style station. (I wonder if that
would fly here??)
But Psyklopz is right: we have very little variety. Once, while in
Boston, I brought along a walkman-style radio, and even the smallest
movement of the needle along the dial resulted in yet another station.
There must have been 30, maybe 50 on the FM dial alone!
Here in Halifax, we have 11 (as far as I'm aware)...
CBHA 90.5 FM CBC Radio One
???? 92.? FM A French station
???? 96.5 FM Sun FM
CKDU 97.5 FM Dalhousie University
CIOO 100.1 FM C100
???? 101.9 FM Country 101
CBH 102.7 FM CBC Radio Two
CFRQ 104.3 FM Q104
CFDR 780 AM KIXX Country
CJCH 920 AM
CHNS 960 AM Oldies 96
Any corrections?... additions?
db
demibee
<jay...@accesswave.com> wrote:
>I've been here for over ten years now, I also moved from out west with a
>larger selection of FM stations. Q104 went "classic" in the early nineties
>and have sucked ever since. I understand they were a good station once but
>now their constant repetition of tired top 40 music has rendered the station
>useless to anyone with a memory span longer than two days. It actually
>forced me to switch to CBC radio2 for something other than their crap list.
>I dont know who listens to them, most people I know have the same opinion. I
>am now in the 35-40 demographic but my dislike for q104 started along time
>ago.
A friend of mine used to say that they might be half decent if they'd
only buy an 11th CD ;)
db
Lucretia Borgia
demibee wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 Nov 2002 19:31:32 -0400, Lucretia Borgia
> <Lucreti...@florence.it> wrote:
>
> >If I want music I have tapes, I have CD's etc. etc.
>
> This pretty much describes me: I hate being "force fed" almost Any
> kind of music, even music that I happen to like... especially when
> it's interspersed with blaring ads that also have their own "music"
> pumping through them. I don't think that commercial radio allows for
> a single second of silence throughout the broadcast day.
>
> When I'm in the mood for music, (which is often), I'd rather be
> listening to something that I've specifically chosen rather than just
> daydreaming along to whatever happens to be playing on a favourite
> station.
>
> The one exception is classical music... much of that I find
> listenable, and I'm not so picky as to which piece it is. Ironically,
> I have very little of it in my own collection.
Remind me, next HNO, I'll bring you a whole bunch of CD's to choose
from.
>
> Mostly, I tend to treat radio like TV... looking for news, talk, etc.,
> and so I'm often drawn to the CBCs. Personally, I wouldn't mind
> hearing an all-news CNN-
Mouthpiece of the White House I always think, wouldn't fly with the
minority of one here!
Sheena
Virtual MP3 Studio
radio drive me insane!) and at home its KJAZ from San Francisco (the actual
radio station went off the airwaves in the late 90's).
Good luck.
Virtual MP3 Studio
radio drive me insane!) and at home its KJAZ from San Francisco (the actual
Good luck.
"psyklopz" <cbm_ou...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cbf68a78.02110...@posting.google.com...
Virtual MP3 Studio
San Francisco http://www.timhodges.net/SPIRIT/ (the actual radio station
went off the airwaves in the late 90's).
Ah yes, internet radio in our cars!
Good luck.
"psyklopz" <cbm_ou...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cbf68a78.02110...@posting.google.com...
firecat
> Here in Halifax, we have 11 (as far as I'm aware)...
>
> CBHA 90.5 FM CBC Radio One
> ???? 92.? FM A French station
> ???? 96.5 FM Sun FM
> CKDU 97.5 FM Dalhousie University
> CIOO 100.1 FM C100
> ???? 101.9 FM Country 101
> CBH 102.7 FM CBC Radio Two
> CFRQ 104.3 FM Q104
>
> CFDR 780 AM KIXX Country
> CJCH 920 AM
> CHNS 960 AM Oldies 96
>
>
> Any corrections?... additions?
>
>
> db
>
The french station is 92.3. in case anyone cares. and, on
occasion, if the wind is blowing the right way, you can tune
in 94.5 CKBW from Bridgewater...
KP
it with Halifax radio myself.... I really do like alot of the older classic
stuff... but only if I hear it unexpectadly and very rarely... at this point
in these songs lives it should be an 'event' to hear them...not an everyday
occurance.
I believe a bid to put in a top 40 radio station was squashed last year. I
have no idea about the details. Possibly someone else does here though.
Yes internet radio!! That and www.kazaalite.com keep me happy when I'm home.
I used to buy my CD's but then I started to listen to the whinny record
companies complaining that I didn't buy enough of them. Like there was some
sort of quota I was supposed to reach. So now I only buy the CD's of bands
who actually come to Halifax. If they can't do it for me, then I'm not
about to drop $20 on a CD of theirs. Anyhoo that's a different topic all
together.
psyklopz
> That would be cool to listen to the Bear , but how would you listen to the
> bear in your car.
>
I agree, since the only time I listen to the radio is in my car.
But it's nice to hear that I'm not alone in all this. I've tried
emailing q104, but predictably with no reply.
So, what is there to do but wait things out?
Friar Donk
>
>
> If you listen to q104, you hear the word 'classic' every 5 minutes.
>
>
Q104 : "Eagles and Steve Miller, all day. everyday"
--
Friar Donk
"The knack of flying is learning how to
throw yourself at the ground and miss"
To email, rot-13 header address
Friar Donk
And the music industry wonders why we "pirate" their "intellectual"[1]
property to download mp3s and create our own CDs when one of their largest
advertising media (radio) is shyte in the Halifax area.
[1] I don't really like using that word, especially when "artists" as Puff
Daddy/P.Diddy/B.Shitty are still selling CDs.
Friar Donk
> On the road it is CBC radio 2 (the endless commercials on
> commercial
> radio drive me insane!) and at home its the internet radio station KJAZ
> from San Francisco http://www.timhodges.net/SPIRIT/ (the actual radio
> station went off the airwaves in the late 90's).
>
> Ah yes, internet radio in our cars!
>
> Good luck.
>
> "psyklopz" <cbm_ou...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:cbf68a78.02110...@posting.google.com...
For all you fellow headbangers out there, I recommend
http://www.knac.com.
Internet radio in cars isn't that far off. There are already cell phones
that can browse the Internet. The only limitation at this point is that the
puny amount of bandwidth a wireless system offers at this time doesn't
allow streaming media. Soon, though.
gman
> bear in your car.
XM radio is on it's way...no more commercials...etc. Q one oh bore and
sleep one hundred have a monopoly and really don't care...even Moncton
has better variety.
Dominic
Commercial radio stinks, simply because it is commercial radio. It
tries to play to the greatest number of listeners the greatest amount
of the time, just to push advertising revenue, which is where it gets
its income. Playing to one segment diminishes "appeal" to the mass,
and hence revenues drop.
My solution:
1) Get mp3's. Download 'em. Rip 'em from your CD's. Trade 'em like
hockey cards.
2) Burn said mp3's onto CD. 200+ to a CD with enjoyable quality (if
you're not a hardcore audiophile who can hear the soundman fart in the
background on a Metallica CD).
3) Invest $150 in a CD/Mp3 player with a car adapter.
4) Enjoy the music you like, when you like, where you like. No
commercial interruptions, no spoonfed pablum, and no endless
repetition of Shakira singing about what's underneath her clothes, or
whatever the hit of the moment might be.
Thanks.
Scott
q104 is about 50 -60 "classic" rock songs playing continuosly all day
every day.even on the requesta fiesta u would think people would
requset good music but they want the same crap they pump out all day.
i'm with u 100% on this one the radio stations around here do
suck..and bad. try going to toronto and having at least 6 radio
stations for each genre its great to have the option.
Martha Stewart's cousin
paladinf...@hotmail.com (Dominic) wrote:
> It
> tries to play to the greatest number of listeners the greatest amount
> of the time, just to push advertising revenue, which is where it gets
> its income.
This is only partially correct. They get a lot of their income from
the folks who provide the music. It just isn't payola anymore (but
amounts to the same thing). It is the distributors that make big money
on "hits". They pay big money for promotions in order to generate hits.
Lots of this goes to radio stations. It isn't that there is no demand
for non hits, it is that there is no money in it.
And, it is not just because of advertising. People will listen to
some radio station in their car or at work no matter what. For the most
part they just pick whatever is least offensive and sometimes even has
things that they like. The radio people know this.
G. Wayne Hines
<woulntyoul...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In article <8c85b263.02110...@posting.google.com>,
> paladinf...@hotmail.com (Dominic) wrote:
>
> > It
> > tries to play to the greatest number of listeners the greatest amount
> > of the time, just to push advertising revenue, which is where it gets
> > its income.
>
> This is only partially correct. They get a lot of their income from
> the folks who provide the music. It just isn't payola anymore (but
Last time I checked, radio stations pay fees to broadcast the
music, and may also pay for the CD's or to download some of the
music they play.
gwh
--
# G. Wayne Hines Kentville, Nova Scotia, Canada
#
# w.d....@ns.sympatico.ca
#
# Windows: A rich man's poor excuse for an operating system
#
demibee
<Lucreti...@florence.it> wrote:
>demibee wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 04 Nov 2002 19:31:32 -0400, Lucretia Borgia
>> <Lucreti...@florence.it> wrote:
>>
>> >If I want music I have tapes, I have CD's etc. etc.
>>
>> This pretty much describes me: I hate being "force fed" almost Any
>> kind of music, even music that I happen to like... especially when
>> it's interspersed with blaring ads that also have their own "music"
>> pumping through them. I don't think that commercial radio allows for
>> a single second of silence throughout the broadcast day.
>>
>> When I'm in the mood for music, (which is often), I'd rather be
>> listening to something that I've specifically chosen rather than just
>> daydreaming along to whatever happens to be playing on a favourite
>> station.
>>
>> The one exception is classical music... much of that I find
>> listenable, and I'm not so picky as to which piece it is. Ironically,
>> I have very little of it in my own collection.
>
>Remind me, next HNO, I'll bring you a whole bunch of CD's to choose
>from.
Thanks for the offer :)
>> Mostly, I tend to treat radio like TV... looking for news, talk, etc.,
>> and so I'm often drawn to the CBCs. Personally, I wouldn't mind
>> hearing an all-news CNN-
>
>
>Mouthpiece of the White House I always think, wouldn't fly with the
>minority of one here!
Well, CNN maybe... very Ameri-centric for a news station that's seen
around the world. But Some sort of radio news station would be nice,
be it in the style of CBCN, BBC, etc. (especially if it was commercial
free).
db
demibee
<sevn...@sevneqbax.bet> wrote:
>Q104 : "Eagles and Steve Miller, all day. everyday"
Been a while since I was forced to listen to Q104... a guy I worked
with several years couldn't get enough of it. Do they still play Van
Morrison's "Brown-Eyed Girl" every three hours? I actually liked that
song once upon a time; but a summer's worth of hearing it day in, day
out sucked the life right out of it.
db
Norma DeViller
"Martha Stewart's cousin" <woulntyoul...@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:woulntyouliketospamme...@news.dal.ca...
> In article <8c85b263.02110...@posting.google.com>,
> paladinf...@hotmail.com (Dominic) wrote:
>
> > It
> > tries to play to the greatest number of listeners the greatest amount
> > of the time, just to push advertising revenue, which is where it gets
> > its income.
>
> This is only partially correct. They get a lot of their income from
> the folks who provide the music. It just isn't payola anymore (but
> amounts to the same thing). It is the distributors that make big money
> on "hits". They pay big money for promotions in order to generate hits.
Actually, radio stations pay royalties to SOCAN, plus they pay for
subscriptions to various music companies to be sent samplers of this week's
hottest releases. Thousands of dollars per year to the recording industry
per station. The record companies do not pay radio stations to play their
tunes, not in Canada anyway, (okay maybe Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal),
the payola going on in the radio industry is mostly US based...to Billboard,
and other chart/tracking publications, and to big radio companies that own
200+ stations as they have the power to make or break an artist.
> Lots of this goes to radio stations. It isn't that there is no demand
> for non hits, it is that there is no money in it.
There's no demand for "non-hits" because they weren't hits, although there
are some great classic tunes that never hit the top 40. The CRTC
deregulated FM radio a few years back, and anything that was a hit I believe
prior to 1980 is now a non-hit (if that makes any sense). The problem with
many stations is that their music libraries are too small. Once upon a time
there was a fairly large room in every station filled with records, 45's and
"them new fangled CD's", now many stations store all their music on a
computer hard drive, and are automated. Instead of having 15,000 musical
selections they have 1500 (or less) and repeat their entire library every
other day, playing today's hot tunes ad nauseum.
> And, it is not just because of advertising. People will listen to
> some radio station in their car or at work no matter what. For the most
> part they just pick whatever is least offensive and sometimes even has
> things that they like. The radio people know this.
Commercial radio stations make ALL their money from advertising and station
promotions, except the CBC which gets their funding from you, and me. The
main reason people stick with local commercial radio is for the local news,
weather, temperature, cancellations etcetera...whether they are sticking
around between forecasts or newscasts is anybody's guess.
My latest hobby is car karaoke...hooked up a tape deck to my mp3 collection
of karaoke favourites, voila one karaoke tape with all the songs I want to
hear and sing...just plug it into the car cassette deck, put the car in
drive and away I go...30 minutes of non-stop caterwalling, the way I like
it. ;-) However I always wake up to a blaring radio listening for the news,
weather, school information pack, and to find out if indeed there is school
today...some of the music I could live without...it's the info I'm after.
However all that being said....if you're unhappy with your local stations
COMPLAIN...even suggest solutions. Most of them have websites with e-mail
addresses for the big wigs...let 'em rip.
Martha Stewart's cousin
"Norma DeViller" <njv...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> "Martha Stewart's cousin" <woulntyoul...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:woulntyouliketospamme...@news.dal.ca...
> > In article <8c85b263.02110...@posting.google.com>,
> > paladinf...@hotmail.com (Dominic) wrote:
> >
> > This is only partially correct. They get a lot of their income from
> > the folks who provide the music. It just isn't payola anymore (but
> > amounts to the same thing). It is the distributors that make big money
> > on "hits". They pay big money for promotions in order to generate hits.
>
> Actually, radio stations pay royalties to SOCAN, plus they pay for
> subscriptions to various music companies to be sent samplers of this week's
> hottest releases. Thousands of dollars per year to the recording industry
> per station. The record companies do not pay radio stations to play their
> tunes, not in Canada anyway, (okay maybe Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal),
> the payola going on in the radio industry is mostly US based...to Billboard,
> and other chart/tracking publications, and to big radio companies that own
> 200+ stations as they have the power to make or break an artist.
All of the programming for stations like C100 is pretty much
determined in To, Vanc. etc. So, it amounts to the same thing. I never
said that they don't have to pay SOCAN. But, they have to pay that
regardless of the music they play so it is coming out whether other
money is coming in or not. BTW, it isn't payola. It is not under the
table but above board promotions stuff (well, some folks don't make the
distinction and that's understandable). People seem to assume that
because the station is giving away tickets to a concert and talks about
a specific artist non stop for days on end it is because there is a
demand from the listeners. Whereas, in actual fact it is designed to
generate the demand. Now, who came up with that idea? The radio
station is really about the last group it benefits. The marketing of an
artist is where the big money is spent. Guess where a chunk of it goes?
Martha Stewart's cousin
"Norma DeViller" <njv...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> My latest hobby is car karaoke...hooked up a tape deck to my mp3 collection
> of karaoke favourites, voila one karaoke tape with all the songs I want to
> hear and sing...just plug it into the car cassette deck, put the car in
> drive and away I go...30 minutes of non-stop caterwalling, the way I like
> it. ;-) However I always wake up to a blaring radio listening for the news,
> weather, school information pack, and to find out if indeed there is school
> today...some of the music I could live without...it's the info I'm after.
Interesting idea, now we'll know how to recognize you in traffic. ;]
> However all that being said....if you're unhappy with your local stations
> COMPLAIN...even suggest solutions. Most of them have websites with e-mail
> addresses for the big wigs...let 'em rip.
Good point.
Dominic
The preceding arguments in defense of commercial radion only serve to
demonstrate why commercial radio stinks. Whether the money comes from
advertising revenue or industry payola, the fact remains that you will
only hear what someone else wants you to hear, according to the
demographic of the lowest common denominator as established by either
the music companies or the advertisers. It may be that some of this
music is good (although, IMO, most of it is not), and it may be that
you want to be part of the demographic. However, if you do choose to
be part, don't expect to hear anything fresh, creative, or
unusual...it may happen, but it will be by chance. I agree that news
is a valid use for commercial radio, just as it is about the only one
for television, but for entertainment value, give me my personal
collection any day. I can find more noteworthy artists in one
afternoon of surfing mp3.com than I could find in a year of listening
to commercial radio. Viva la revolucion! Damn the torpedoes! Up yer
antes!
Ta.
Norma DeViller
> determined in To, Vanc. etc.
-yeah by consultants who are paid for their time
So, it amounts to the same thing. I never
> said that they don't have to pay SOCAN. But, they have to pay that
> regardless of the music they play so it is coming out whether other
> money is coming in or not. BTW, it isn't payola. It is not under the
> table but above board promotions stuff (well, some folks don't make the
> distinction and that's understandable). People seem to assume that
> because the station is giving away tickets to a concert and talks about
> a specific artist non stop for days on end it is because there is a
> demand from the listeners. Whereas, in actual fact it is designed to
> generate the demand.
Actually the record companies and promotors seldom give away tickets to
their artists' concerts unless they're worried about ticket sales. Any
tickets received by the radio station for give-away are usually paid for,
whether it's by contra (ie: tickets for commercial air time), or out and out
purchasing of the tickets by the radio station, then creating a sales based
promotion around the concert. On air promotions generate listeners who
don't want to pay for the tickets who wouldn't mind going to the concert if
it was free.
Now, who came up with that idea? The radio
> station is really about the last group it benefits. The marketing of an
> artist is where the big money is spent. Guess where a chunk of it goes?
Generally not much money is spent by the recording industry in this
province...Halifax certainly benefits more than smaller markets do that's
for sure.
You may think that the recording industry is greasing the palms of the radio
moguls but it's just not the case. Heck many radio DJ's barely make a
living wage. Radio is not as glamourous as many people think it is.
Norma DeViller
> The preceding arguments in defense of commercial radion only serve to
> demonstrate why commercial radio stinks. Whether the money comes from
> advertising revenue or industry payola, the fact remains that you will
> only hear what someone else wants you to hear, according to the
> demographic of the lowest common denominator as established by either
> the music companies or the advertisers. It may be that some of this
> music is good (although, IMO, most of it is not), and it may be that
> you want to be part of the demographic. However, if you do choose to
> be part, don't expect to hear anything fresh, creative, or
> unusual...it may happen, but it will be by chance. I agree that news
> is a valid use for commercial radio, just as it is about the only one
> for television, but for entertainment value, give me my personal
> collection any day. I can find more noteworthy artists in one
> afternoon of surfing mp3.com than I could find in a year of listening
> to commercial radio. Viva la revolucion! Damn the torpedoes! Up yer
> antes!
>
> Ta.
I wasn't defending commercial radio, I was explaining why things are the way
they are. Doesn't make it right.
One of the main reasons radio is the way it is, is the fact listeners are
generally apathetic...they don't hear what they want to hear they either put
up with it or turn the dial.
If enough listeners wrote letters and complained to company owners and the
CRTC...even the advertisers...especially the advertisers...things might
change.
While record companies may be "losing" money...I don't think music sharing
(through Napster or AudioGnome, insert your favourite file sharing software
here) is the problem...I think the problem is the industry in general is
just putting out too much crap.
Add into the formula many radio stations are hiring broadcast students out
of school for high profile positions, and you wind up with very generic
radio. Although some of these people are extremely talented they would be
better served cutting their proverbial teeth on the all night, evening and
weekend shifts to hone their talents, and leaving the daytime to more
experienced...and often more entertaining vetrans. But in a day in age
where fewer commercial stations are owned by individuals...and are being
bought up by corporations the interest isn't in the listener...it's in the
bottom line...so it makes sense to pay less for talent, and automate.
Unfortunately it's the listener who suffers from this downsizing, not to
mention the radio vetrans whose personalities and voices are no longer on
the air.
So instead of complaining in a newsgroup what can we do as listeners to
change things?
J Dexter
Well - as it happens I have something is test right now which might
appeal to you if you are tech savvy enough to download and install
realaudio 8 player..
I've built a private online radio station here in Halifax that might fit
the bill - check it out and let me know.. Lor knows - it's not like
anyone in town is willing to hire me for this sort of work.. It could be
I'm actually doing it right..
webmaster - http://www.dexterdyne.org/
All tunes, no cookies, no ads,
no news, no weather, no phone in, All the Time..
Dominic
I wasn't slamming you for your response, just adding my two cents in
response. I agree that the industry puts out a lot of crap, as does
any aspect of the entertainment industry. What can interested people
do about it? Turn it off. Leave it alone. Sure, you could try calls
and letters to the radio stations, but it would require a lot of
people doing that to effect any change, and I think that if this
newsgroup proves anything, it's that its rare for any number of people
to agree on anything. And you could only send so many letters or make
so many calls on your own before being branded a nut.
While I don't support the illegal sharing of mp3's, and I have rules
about which ones I will swap myself, I think the overwhelming success
(on a usage basis, not necessarily a legal one) of file-swapping
programs and of sites like mp3.com indicates that it is time for a
change in revenue model for the music industry. With the possibility
of unlimited choice and instant accessibility (due to leaving out the
middle men of the radio stations and the record stores), artist and
music producers should address the changing possibilities of the
market by speaking to the current demand. By choosing to make full
use of the formats and technologies available to listeners instead of
clinging to old delivery systems (i.e. radio, cassette, CD, etc.), we
can force the producers to address those possibilities by virtue of
market power. If we don't buy what they are selling, they will have
to sell us what we will buy.
For example, why is it that no record company or artist has yet to
produce an mp3 compilation of an artist's work? Think of the low cost
of production and collectibility of a complete compilation of the
works of your favorite artist. How much would you pay for that?
Certainly more than the cost of an average CD, but less than the cost
of a complete set of CD's, no doubt. How wide would the market appeal
be, especially considering the amount of material that would be
available on one disc? Yet, as far as I know, no one has tried it.
Why can't someone drag on old favorite out of mothballs and put their
library on disc as mp3, just to see how it sells? As a longtime
collector of cerain musicians, I have gone through a laborious process
of converting all my old tapes to mp3 just to have instant access to
their full catalog. I would gladly have paid a reasonable amount
(say, $50 for 100 tracks for any older material) to save myself the
time and effort, and have a better quality product at the end.
Following that, better players could be made available (why do so few
stereos currently on the market support mp3?). For those who like old
style radio, why couldn't those stations broadcast in mp3 and enlarge
their library at a lesser cost?
This is only one possibility of the new market, but I think the fact
that I came up with this in a few minutes of thought indicates that
there are a large number of other new revenue possibilities available
for anyone who cares to pursue them. Unfortunately, as long as old
models are clung to, these possibilities will not be explored, or will
be a long time in coming. I'm looking forward to the first producer
brave enough to take that first big step forward, but I suspect that
it will only be the pressure of the market that drives them to do it.
Storm the ramparts! No guts no glory! More skin on prime time!
Ta.
Dwight Roberts
"Brad Clarke" <bgcla...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:s7vdsukmvhshtbqj7...@4ax.com...
> On 4 Nov 2002 14:19:33 -0800, cbm_ou...@hotmail.com (psyklopz) wrote:
>
>
> >>Why doesn't halifax have a decent modern rock station? Why can't I
> >>just turn on the radio and listen to the music that my friends and I
> >>love all day?
> Since you've been to Ottawa, why not listen to The bear via the
> internet?
>
> Brad
Halifax radio is absolutely pathetic! I listen to q-104 for 5 mins a day.
News weather and sports from 7:30 to 7:35 AM on my way to work, and that is
it. This city DESPERATELY needs a modern rock/alternative station. In the
meantime, however, try WJRR.com. They're a station in Daytona, Florida, and
they ROCK!! Cheers
demibee
wrote:
>While I don't support the illegal sharing of mp3's, and I have rules
>about which ones I will swap myself,
Out of curiosity, what rules do you employ? One of mine is that I
won't share local or new, up-and-coming artists' material. I figure
thay should have the opportunity to become successful through the
sales of their CDs. As for something from, say, Elton John, yeah, I'd
share that. IMHO, someone with his fortune shouldn't whine about
losing a sale here and there.
>For example, why is it that no record company or artist has yet to
>produce an mp3 compilation of an artist's work?
That'd be a good idea. I'd love to "compress" my collection from 360
CDs, 200 LPs, and a few 45s and cassettes to about 30 or 40 mp3-laden
CDs. Much more convenient. And I think I'm past the stage where I
consider every CD and LP, in mint condition and complete with liner
notes, to be some sort of collector's item. (I'd probably put them in
storage, though, and free up some shelf space.)
db
Dominic
My rules on mp3 are more related to a recognition of an artist's
rights:
1) Anything I own (have bought, on CD or cassette) can be converted to
mp3. Whether or not I subsequently share that file depends on the
following rules.
2) Any artist who is deceased is fair game, as they can no longer
derive material benefit from their own work (and please don't argue
with me about estates...I don't support any child's right to mooch to
the nth generation). So, for example, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Jimi
Hendrix, or Buddy Holly would be on my list. The Rolling Stones would
not be, as unfortunately, the walking dead don't count.
3) Any artist or group who is no longer producing work is also fair
game, as they are no longer creators, and have already made their
expected revenue from their product. For example, most 80's hair
metal bands would be on my list (if I owned any of their stuff) as
they no longer exist as groups. ELP, Moody Blues, and the Traveling
Wilburys would also be fair game. You could make an argument for
Metallica being added to the list, as although they still release
music, they have long ago stopped creating anything, but that's really
subjective.
3) Any artist who has publicly asked for their material not to be
traded would be off the list. Enter Metallica again; the rule would
not apply, for example, to Prince, or the artist, or &, or whatever he
calls himself these days.
4) Any music made available through legal internet sites will be
traded. For example, Spitfire Records has an mp3 page with downloads
from the artists in their catalog. This included music by such
creators as Alice Cooper, Deep Purple, Twisted Sister and Gary Numan.
Any of this stuff is easily available right now, but even if the site
goes offline, I would still trade the mp3's as they were made
available for free distribution. I would not trade files from illegal
sites like mpshits.com (shhh...I didn't say that), no matter how much
anyone begged me to do so.
I'm sure that my own rules don't exactly fit the letter of the law
when it comes to file swapping, but more important is that they do not
negatively impact any of the creators involved by depriving them of
any of the material benefit of their work. Thus, I can listen to my
own collection with a clear conscience, knowing that I'm not ripping
off anyone (please don't start on me about the record
companies.....they don't have any moral high ground when it comes to
music distribution, or to ripping off artists).
Ta.
Martha Stewart's cousin
"Norma DeViller" <njv...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> You may think that the recording industry is greasing the palms of the radio
> moguls but it's just not the case. Heck many radio DJ's barely make a
> living wage. Radio is not as glamourous as many people think it is.
Actually, given that there isn't much money then one doesn't need a
heckuva lot of grease does one? I didn't say that they were giving away
tons of cash, just that they influenced the way radio is done. The
latter is true.
And, I was a good friend with one of those programming consultants
and they aren't paid to get listeners in, they are paid to get money in.
They aren't necessarily the same thing and it doesn't contradict
anything I've said. Distributing a million copies of Britney Spears
latest is way cheaper than distributing 1000 copies from 1000 artists.
The hits make money even if you have to spend a lot on promotions. The
radio stations are complicit in this and influenced by the distributors
to make it happen.
J Dexter
Well folks - the legal aspects of exactly this all revolve around the issue of
Fair Use and the technology of .mp3.. Very basically - there is a huge
difference between sharing your music is such a way as folks can listen in and
sharing your music in such a was as folks have to download it.. Moreover - there
are huge differences between the Law in various countries - but the bottom line
is that .mp3 is by it's technical nature a copyright infringement
Here's what legal opinion I was able to afford -
http://www.dexterdyne.com/303.HTM
You can also read my rant on .mp3 and why it came about in the first place here:
http://www.dexterdyne.com/200.HTM
In the end - the RIAA and CARP and associated record labels are only really
interested in a solid dip into your wallet for .mp3 and that's what the whole
shooting match was all about in the first place.. My hope is that they will get
burned for MP3 format rights payments sometime soon.. However, that aside - the
decision only came down that way because .mp3 is a 'third party copy' to a
'media not recognized by Fair Use law.'
I specifically use RealAudio because I can prove legit action to disallow
download while still allowing anyone who wants to listen in to my collection
anytime they want.. Which - and this is important too - I actually own the
original copies of..
Yes - if you are technically savvy enough - you can 'record' the stream. But the
Library of Congress - (which doesn't mean Canada yet by the way) has decided a
royalty scheme of .02 cents per play per tune (say $20 per thousand plays per
song) is fair if I remain a non-profit broadcaster.
If I want to be a for-profit site - it goes up to .04 cents per thousand plays
(or say $40.00).. Exactly like normal radio royalty payments when they play a
tune or the copyright tax on blank Tapes and CD's..
I think this is fair actually as I don't want people to rip off my copyrighted
code any more than musical artist's want people to rip off their copyrighted
music..
I would argue that as I'm not making dime one on anything on my station - I'm
doing the artist a favor by buying their record and adding the song to my
playlist and picking up the costs of Bandwidth and I would prefer to offer them
a piece of the advertising action if I took any - which I don't. They would
argue that my code is useless without their music and insist .02 cents instead..
That's not true as it works for any binary object - but fair enough..
Anyway that's my '.02 cents' on the issue - Tune in anytime you want..
webmaster - http://www.dexterdyne.org/
All tunes, no cookies, no ads, no news, no weather, no phone in, All the Time.
-=john-van-gurp=-
- about as ecclectic as one can get. Well done,
John
On Fri, 08 Nov 2002 14:37:43 -0400, J Dexter <web...@noaddress.org>
wrote:
-------------------------------
- remove YOUR SHORTS to reply -
-------------------------------
J Dexter
Well I like to think a head food diet with some variety best - thank you very
kindly sir.. Please pass the link around if you have a mind to.. If you happen
upon particularly wrong tune for you - skip ahead or hit the play button again
and it'll try to reorder the playlist on the server for you..
your pal
J Dexter
webmaster - http://www.dexterdyne.org/
All tunes, no cookies, no ads, no news, no weather, no phone in, All the Time.
Mr Ed
-=john-van-gurp=- wrote:
> I'm listening and actually it's pretty darn entertaining. Good variety
> - about as ecclectic as one can get. Well done,
> John
Now if it happens to be night time and you're out in your car (or at home with a real
good antenna on your AM radio), you can pick up the following signals:
660 - WFAN - New York - Sports
880 - WCBS - New York - News / Sports / Traffic / Weather
1010 - WINS - New York - News / Sports / Traffic / Weather
1390 - WEGP - Presque Isle Maine - News / Talk
1500 - WTOP - Washington DC - News / Sports / Traffic / Weather
Best times for reception are anytime after 6:00 pm until just before sunrise....
Enjoy them now before Ottawa begins jamming foreign radio broadcasts! ;)
Mr. Ed
"The FAMOUS Mr. Ed"
J Dexter
Ok - great - but I'm not entirely sure you are getting the good bit about of
Radio Free Dexterdyne..
your pal
J Dexter
webmaster - http://www.dexterdyne.net/
All tunes, no ads, no news, no weather, no phone in, All the Time..
demibee
wrote:
>Salutations:
>
>Well folks - the legal aspects of exactly this all revolve around the issue of
>Fair Use and the technology of .mp3.. Very basically - there is a huge
>difference between sharing your music is such a way as folks can listen in and
>sharing your music in such a was as folks have to download it.. Moreover - there
>are huge differences between the Law in various countries - but the bottom line
>is that .mp3 is by it's technical nature a copyright infringement
>
>Here's what legal opinion I was able to afford -
>http://www.dexterdyne.com/303.HTM
>
>You can also read my rant on .mp3 and why it came about in the first place here:
>http://www.dexterdyne.com/200.HTM
Just gave it a quick read. I'm a little more "liberal" with mp3s :)
But I can understand where you're coming from, and the way you've got
things set up seems fair enough to me. It wouldn't surprise me,
though, that when more and more sites like www.dexterdyne.org are
around (and there are more than a few now), we may be finding that CD
collections (and possibly mp3 collections) become less common. I.e.,
when people realize that they can listen to just about any song of
their choice whenever they want, they may start to ask themselves why
they should go out and pay $25 for it.
So, it seems to me that, whether one chooses the file-sharing route or
the online playlist route, over time, fewer and fewer CDs will be sold
as a result.
>I specifically use RealAudio because I can prove legit action to disallow
>download while still allowing anyone who wants to listen in to my collection
>anytime they want.. Which - and this is important too - I actually own the
>original copies of..
My main problem with the RealAudio format is the player itself. I've
never seen a more intrusive piece of software than RealOne Player
(except, possibly, some of MS's stuff). Upon installation, it put
links to both itself and to AOL...
- on the Desktop
- in the Quick Launch toolbar
- in the Start Menu
- in the Programs submenu off the Start Menu
- in the Real submenu off the Programs submenu off the Start Menu
- in IE's Favorites menu
- in IE's Links folder
... and I think I'm forgetting a few. But that's 14 right there.
On top of that, despite my choices during the installation, it took
over the association for audio CDs (from Sonique). If I once again
made Sonique the default CD application, RealOne would re-associate
itself as the default the next time it was invoked.
As well, I've downloaded MS's Tweak-UI 1.33 -- I recommend it for
anyone who wants easier and more centralized control over many of
their system's settings. One of the options is "Play audio CDs
automatically." (They have a similar setting for data CDs.) Since I
don't like to have my CDs start up as soon as I close the CD drawer, I
turn this off. But RealOne and the older RealJukebox turn it back on
every bloody time! Then, of course, they assume control of the CD,
once again making themselves the default CD players. Arrrggghhh!
After a few days of frustration with RealOne, I completely "de-Realed"
my system. Eventually, I gave in and re-installed an older version --
RealPlayer 8 Basic" (player only) -- which is somewhat intrusive too,
but less so.
db
J Dexter
Could you please forward me some links to other like minded sites? I'm kinda
developing in a bubble as it were and would dearly like to find some other folks
who are running online realaudio stations like mine..
> things set up seems fair enough to me. It wouldn't surprise me,
> though, that when more and more sites like www.dexterdyne.org are
> around (and there are more than a few now), we may be finding that CD
> collections (and possibly mp3 collections) become less common. I.e.,
> when people realize that they can listen to just about any song of
> their choice whenever they want, they may start to ask themselves why
> they should go out and pay $25 for it.
>
> So, it seems to me that, whether one chooses the file-sharing route or
> the online playlist route, over time, fewer and fewer CDs will be sold
> as a result.
I stand by my rant on why .mp3 came about in the first place.. Currently the
company sites want around a $1.00 per tune as a watermarked download - so - not
only do I get to pay the blank CD/Tape copyright tax - but I get to pay it twice
when I buy the download.. Of course all the extra spyware is simply a courtesy
they extend to their most valued customers as matter of course.. Weasels..
Arrrrgggg....
> My main problem with the RealAudio format is the player itself. I've
> never seen a more intrusive piece of software than RealOne Player
> (except, possibly, some of MS's stuff). Upon installation, it put
> links to both itself and to AOL...
>
Yeah - I'm of two minds on the player myself - I'm mirroring a copy of RealAudio
8 for download at dexterdyne as I was developing for G2 Players - Sadly -
RealOne is kinda of - not - great to my mind..
With RealOne you must custom install the sucker and turn everything off on
installation.. Register the free version and DON'T pick the 'Full Feature'
package after you've registered.. They don't send spam though - I'll give them
that..
After you've got it all set-up - go to RealOne preferences and - again -
carefully turn off everything and I always redirect everything to the 'My Music'
directory it creates.. Easier to rm later..
Finally - I rename a file it installs called 'realsched.exe' and it stops
sending me messages now too..
Anyway - the Radio Free Dexterdyne works for the older - better - RealAudio 8
version just fine and I've gotta think their weasels will see their day come too
as most everyone has complained exactly as you outlined in writing to
RealNetworks..
your pal
J Dexter
webmaster - http://www.dexterdyne.org/
All tunes, no ads, no news, no weather, no phone in, All the Time..
demibee
wrote:
>Salutations:
>
>Could you please forward me some links to other like minded sites? I'm kinda
>developing in a bubble as it were and would dearly like to find some other folks
>who are running online realaudio stations like mine..
I don't know how many sites out there are set up exactly as yours is.
I'm most familiar with yahoo.com's internet radio...
http://launch.yahoo.com/launchcast/
And here's one (a classical site) that allows you a choose from their
playlist...
http://www.classical.com/listen/front.php
And a pop playlist...
... but they are commercial (visually, that is... there are no audio
ads), and so they encourage you to buy the CDs.
Unfortunately, none of these work well with anything but IE. And due
to my 36K dialup speed, I don't make a whole lot of use of streaming
audio anyway :)
On several occasions, while searching the Web for hard-to-find mp3s,
I've come across other privately operated mp3 "online playlist" type
sites where listening is possible but downloads are difficult, perhaps
impossible (if you hover the mouse over the mp3 link, you don't get
"SomeArtist - SomeSong.mp3" in the status bar, and so you can't
right-click and select "Save target as...").
Since I've run into these sites by accident, I haven't generally noted
their URLs. If I come across any more in the future (and I'm bound
to) I'll post them here.
As well, when looking for a specific artist, one can always go to
Google and type in something like "mp3 listen free beatles" and a few
sites will generally pop up.
>I stand by my rant on why .mp3 came about in the first place.. Currently the
>company sites want around a $1.00 per tune as a watermarked download - so - not
>only do I get to pay the blank CD/Tape copyright tax - but I get to pay it twice
>when I buy the download.. Of course all the extra spyware is simply a courtesy
>they extend to their most valued customers as matter of course.. Weasels..
>Arrrrgggg....
Is there another non-proprietary format out there? For that matter,
are the .ra and .ram formats proprietary?
db