Alternative radio stations
David Bailey
I've just posted this article within B.C. I moved out here from Ontario
last Sept. and I've been dying to find a good radio station in Vancouver
that plays "alternative" stuff .. a la Jane's Addiction, Nine Inch Nails,
Pixies, Clash, etc. I live a bit far from the UBC campus so my radio can't
pick up the campus radio station that well.
Thanks in advance,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Bailey
Oceanography Dept., UBC, Vancouver, B.C., CAN
(bai...@biosci.ocgy.ubc.ca)
"I'm in the midst of a trauma, leave a message, I'll call you back ..."
- Perry Farrel, "Pigs In Zen"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Bailey
Subject: Alternative radio stations
Sender: David Bailey (bai...@biosci.ocgy.ubc.ca)
Distribution: bc
Organization: University of British Columbia
David Bailey
David Bailey
Robert L. Sutton
>In article <1992Mar6.2...@unixg.ubc.ca> bailey@.unixg.ubc.ca (David Bailey) writes:
>>Hi,
>>
>>I've just posted this article within B.C. I moved out here from Ontario
>>last Sept. and I've been dying to find a good radio station in Vancouver
>>that plays "alternative" stuff ..
You might try tuning to KUGS-FM Bellingham, WA 89.3 at night.
Mostly alternative rock in the evenings. On a good day
you might be able to pick it up in Vancouver.
Also, when in Seattle, try KNND (the 'End') 107.7 FM. They are mostly
alternative rock with a slightly more mainstream twist in the daytime.
Rob
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert L. Sutton "Life's like a jigsaw, you get the straight
bits, but there's something missing in the
n911...@henson.cc.wwu.edu middle." -Andy Partridge (XTC)
Eli Messinger
> A few points to your list . . . .
>
> KUOW (94.9) in Seattle is classical music
Another short point. The original list was a list of college/non-commercial
radio stations, NOT a list of "alternative" radio stations. I have no idea
what constitutes the latter.
--
"Route 66 is a giant chute down which everything loose in this country
is sliding into Southern California" --Frank Lloyd Wright
CSNET: e...@almaden.ibm.com / UUNET: ...!uunet!almaden.ibm.com!ebm
The Wanster
>
>
>
>
>A few points to your list . . . .
>
>KUOW (94.9) in Seattle is classical music
>station, which is pretty nice and puts on some damn fine concerts.
>
>And one of the finest alternative stations (at least as of 6 months
>ago, when I was last through that part of Ohio,) is 101.1 (?) FM in
>Columbus. You never know where decent music will pop up.
I'd also like to add that Chicago's own "do your own thing"
alternative radio station that is the best IMO alternative around
is WXRT 93.1 (I forget the actual station number but it's 93. something.
:)
--
/\ /\//\//~
/~~\ /~ ac...@midway.uchicago.edu
~~
The Wanster
I just joined the BMG Music Club and was wondering if anyone who's
been in the club longer has seen them offer Kate Bush and/or
Crowded House's WoodFace albums. (I know their offerings are pretty spartan)
Email please. Thanks.
Stephen Jonke
>
>
> Though this list is NOT current, it might help you out. Anyone out there
> who's willing to update this list, by all means go ahead....
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
>
> Alternative Radio List March 11, 1989 Alternative Radio List
> *WHFS* commercial/alt. Anapolis, MD 99.1
> WCVT Towson State Towson, MD (?)
HFS is not only commercial, but it isn't even alternative any more (or at
least only marginally so -- they call themselves a "modern rock" station
now).
WCVT (89.7) is no longer. It has been turned into WTMD a light jazz, folk
and new age music station. I sorely miss WCVT, yet another lost alternative
station. Blame it on a greedy program manager that doesn't give a damn
about music, especially alternative/progressive music.
Baltimore no longer has any alternative stations -- it's a sad day. If
someone knows otherwise, please tell me quickly as I'll go crazy if we don't
get a good alternative college station soon!
Steve
Jack Kobzeff
>
> Robert S. Goheen...
>
> > A few points to your list . . . .
> >
> > KUOW (94.9) in Seattle is classical music
>
> Another short point. The original list was a list of college/non-commercial
> radio stations, NOT a list of "alternative" radio stations. I have no idea
> what constitutes the latter.
> --
Well, for 'commercial alternative' stations I would include....
KROQ Los Angeles 106.7
Pretty much the grandaddy of them all. With the exception of a short stint
as a 'AOR' station in the mid '70s, 106.7 in L.A. has been alternative
(sometimes almost by accident) since the late '60's, when it started as KPPC,
about three or four owners ago. (They only count time 'officailly' from one
of their music director changes (during whose tenure they 'hit it big'),
so their '10th Anniversary' a couple of years ago was bogus. I was listening
to them playing alternative many years before that.)
(I have heard of a alternative station in NY that also goes way back, but
have no hard facts about this.)
MARS-FM Los Angeles 103.1
A very recent challanger to KROQ started with an ex-KROQ owner and several
ex-KROQ jocks, and with a more house/industrial/rave sound. Actually, this
is TWO small stations ON THE SAME FREQUENCY but in different parts of LA,
simulcasting.
XETRA Tijuana/San Diego 91.1
Called '91 X'. A Mexican station that has 99.9% of it's listeners in the US.
Their high power transmitter and directional antenna means that you can get
them in LA on most days. On a REAL good day, you can get them in Bakersfield.
(No Joke! Mountains and all!)
(Ummmmm) San Francisco 105.3
(Damn, can't remember the call letters!) Live 105.
Also, supposedly there is an alternative station in the Phoenix, AZ area.
Jack Kobzeff (ja...@jato.jpl.nasa.gov)
Brendan P. McFeely
user Jack Kob...@jato.jpl.na writes:
>(I have heard of a alternative station in NY that also goes way back, but
>have no hard facts about this.)
You _may_ be thinking of 92.7 WDRE (formerly WLIR), based in my hometown
of Garden City, NY, although these days they like to say "Garden City,
New York City!" like that makes them something special. Yes, as LIR
they went way back, but IMHO, and in the HO of many other Long Island
listeners, the station has gone straight down the tubes since the name
change. Yeah, they're still "alternative," but hell, I can only hear
"Love Shack" so many times in one day, if you know what I mean.
Basically, they need to shoot the program director and get rid of the
old shit like their "Rock of the '80s Lunch Hour."
blech.
Avoid it if you can. WRHU, the Hofstra University station, is a much
better bet.
bpm
============================================
Brendan P. McFeely / (bm...@andrew.cmu.edu) /
Creative Writing, Carnegie Mellon University
"Be regular and orderly in your life, that
you may be violent and original in your work."
Erik S. Chen
I think you're reacting a bit too far - I've listened to WHFS while IN
Baltimore, and despite "calling" themselves a "modern rock" station, I don't
think you'd find it too much different than most of the other "alternative"
stations on the planet. I don't want to get into a heated discussion about
the difference between "alternative" and "modern rock" or whether something
is strictly "alternative." Just keep in mind that a station does not have to
stick with a black-and-white air schedule to suit "alternative" music
listeners.
Meanwhile, here's a few stations on both sides of the country:
106.7 WFNX(Boston, MA)
92.7 WDRE(Westbury, NY)
105.3 KITS(San Francisco, CA)
106.7 KROQ(Los Angeles, CA)
All are "commercial." Remember that college radio stations can sometimes have
distinctive hours when the musical taste is enslaved by that of the particular
DJ at the time.
michael huffner
>
>
>
>
>KUOW (94.9) in Seattle is classical music
>station, which is pretty nice and puts on some damn fine concerts.
>
>And one of the finest alternative stations (at least as of 6 months
>ago, when I was last through that part of Ohio,) is 101.1 (?) FM in
>Columbus. You never know where decent music will pop up.
The station is WWCD, and they have recently changed their format somewhat.
They still play alternative music, but I've heard them play some
Dire Straits and other classic rock bands that I don't consider the
least bit alternative. Unfortunately, the station keeps getting
worse and worse.
Also, there is a station out of Miami U.(Ohio) at 97.1 FM, I believe.
Erik S. Chen
Ahem. I grew up on DRE and LIR and I thought that the stations were just fine,
thank you. Songs like Love Shack and Losing My Religion, i.e. songs that were
new music songs that went top 40 nearly disappeared on DRE, thus attesting to
their "daring to be different" (LIR slogan, heh?) The Rock of the 80's lunch
was fine for a while, I must admit it is getting a bit stale. And Dennis
McNamara was a lot better as the programming director than Tom Calderon, but
still the station is a hell of a lot better than the stations I now have to
listen to because of geographical reasons (i.e. KITS 105.3, etc.).
Enjoy.
- Erik
Mary Bellmar
>Well, for 'commercial alternative' stations I would include....
>KROQ Los Angeles 106.7
>Pretty much the grandaddy of them all. With the exception of a short stint
>as a 'AOR' station in the mid '70s, 106.7 in L.A. has been alternative
>(sometimes almost by accident) since the late '60's, when it started as KPPC,
>about three or four owners ago. (They only count time 'officailly' from one
>of their music director changes (during whose tenure they 'hit it big'),
>so their '10th Anniversary' a couple of years ago was bogus. I was listening
>to them playing alternative many years before that.)
>(I have heard of a alternative station in NY that also goes way back, but
>have no hard facts about this.)
The station in New York I believe you are refering too is WDRE 92.7. Until
about 1988/89 or so it was called WLIR and played cooler stuff. Now the
format is a bit more repetitive. I don't know how old the station is, but
it has been around for as long as I can remember.
Mary
>Jack Kobzeff (ja...@jato.jpl.nasa.gov)
Clayton Glad
>You _may_ be thinking of 92.7 WDRE (formerly WLIR), based in my hometown
>of Garden City, NY, although these days they like to say "Garden City,
>New York City!" like that makes them something special. Yes, as LIR
>they went way back, but IMHO, and in the HO of many other Long Island
>listeners, the station has gone straight down the tubes since the name
>change.
WLIR certainly had a long history, but not as anything that might be
termed "alternative".
All throughout the seventies WLIR was the staunch defender of big-hair,
good-time radio. While even conservative stations in the city like
WPIX and WNEW were beginning to play new music, WLIR stuck by their
guns, and by the Good Rats.
If it hadn't been for WLIR, Twisted Sister would *never* have hit the
big time.
>Yeah, they're still "alternative," but hell, I can only hear
>"Love Shack" so many times in one day, if you know what I mean.
There's some sense in which WDRE is very much the same station that
WLIR was in the seventies: it provides a standard of conformity for
suburban youth. In 1978 it was long curls, tank tops and Zeppelin;
today it's asymmetrical cuts, black leather and Depeche Mode.
-- Clay
Mike Mustaine
The station you are referring to in Columbus, is CD101.1, WWCD. It has been
a very cool station, and fairly new. However, the station has undergone
some management and personnel changes and they are not quite as good as they
were about six months ago. That of course doesn't mean that they are no longer
listenable. They are still the closest thing to alternative this city has.
--
Mike Mustaine |"...and like most intellectuals,
Starving College Student (tm) | he's intensely stupid."
smus...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu | - Glenn Close,
st...@cis.ohio-state.edu | Dangerous Liasions
Clayton Glad
>KROQ Los Angeles 106.7
>Pretty much the grandaddy of them all. With the exception of a short stint
>as a 'AOR' station in the mid '70s, 106.7 in L.A. has been alternative
>(sometimes almost by accident) since the late '60's, when it started as KPPC,
>about three or four owners ago.
I've logged only about 20-30 hours listening to this station, but the
impression I've come away with is that it's sort of a greatest-hits-of-
the-early-eighties format. Eurhytmics, the Romantics, Oingo Boingo, Devo,
Flock of Seagulls, those are the sorts of artists I remember featured.
In other words, nothing you would be surprised to see on prime-time MTV.
I understand that KROQ was free-format in the early seventies but they
obviously operate with a playlist now, and one which is heavily weighted
with music that's nearly ten years old. How do they count as "alternative"?
-- Clay
Eli Messinger
> I understand that KROQ was free-format in the early seventies but they
> obviously operate with a playlist now, and one which is heavily weighted
> with music that's nearly ten years old. How do they count as "alternative"?
KROQ really hit their ROQ-of-the-80's stride during the tenure (some might
say reign) of erstwhile radio consultant Rick Carroll. Carroll used his
success at KROQ as a launching pad for a ROQ-of-the-80s consultancy that
included perhaps a dozen stations around the country. I believe they have
all since changed format.
It sounds to me as if KROQ is simply repeating the programming with upon
which they made their early-80s success.
Paul Rank
>In article <1992Mar6.2...@unixg.ubc.ca> bailey@.unixg.ubc.ca (David Bailey) writes:
>>
>>I've just posted this article within B.C. I moved out here from Ontario
>>last Sept. and I've been dying to find a good radio station in Vancouver
>>that plays "alternative" stuff ..
>
>
>who's willing to update this list, by all means go ahead....
>
One station that was not in your list is WCBN 88.3, the University of
Michigan's (Ann Arbor) student run and operated station. This has to be one
of the most diverse stations I've ever heard, with everything from punk,
grunge, country, jazz, show tunes, noise, skipping records, you name it....
Free-form dominates the programming, but there are many specialty shows
featuring New Orleans, Live Music, Kiddie stuff, Dance, Jazz, Rockabilly,Ska...
(I wish I had the program guide next to me). You rarely hear the same song
played more than once in a given month or 2. It's definitely great
for checking out new (and unusual) music.
And, just cause I'm bored, I have a short summary of some of the "decent"
radio stations in the Detroit-Ann Arbor Area.....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WDET 101.9 Detroit's NPR station. Some good shows, but I don't listen
to DET to much any more since Judy Adam's show has been reduced to 1
day a week.....
CBC 89.9 WINDSOR-Canadian Government Sunday-Thursday nights starting at
around 11 pm (or is it midnight) is "Brave New Waves", a truely wonderful show
(that's been discussed enough on the net). Sat and Sunday Night, starting at
10 or 11 (I can never remember) is night lines, hosted by David Wisedom(sp?),
another great alternative show. (This weekends show will be all covers.)
CJAM 91.5 A great alternative station from the University of Windsor.
Unfortunately, it's a very weak station that can not be picked up
in Ann Arbor, but people in Detroit can.
89X 88.7 (I don't know the "real" call letters) Detroit's Commercial
alternative station out of Windsor. Very repetitive.....(This is the
only COMMERCIAL station on this list).
There's a couple of other stations that you can pick up that are decent
from time to time. The detroit public school station (90.9 ?) has
some worthwhile shows and there is a high school station from Plymouth/Canton
at 88.1 that can be interesting. It is also possible to pick up MSU's
station (sometimes) at 89 or 90 something. An OK station more like 89x
than WCBN.
That's all for now..... If you're in the area,give WCBN a listen.
paul
nc...@caen.engin.umich.edu
Paul Silver
> I'd also like to add that Chicago's own "do your own thing"
>alternative radio station that is the best IMO alternative around
>is WXRT 93.1 (I forget the actual station number but it's 93. something.
*----------*
WXRT is actually a very commercial station. Many years ago, they were
alot more adventurous than they are now. They are also a for-profit
station.
Also in this category is WCBR Arlington Heights-Chicago. They're
located at 92.7 FM, and play stuff which is very similar to WXRT.
Also a commercial station, in both programming and profit motive,
even though they claim to be "Chicago's Only Alternative", a slogan
they *stole* from WZRD Chicago.
IMHO, the only radio station really worth listening to in Chicago
is WZRD, which is true alternative radio. They're at 88.3 FM.
WNUR in Evanston-Chicago (at 89.3 FM) is sometimes worth listening to,
as well.
--
"Life is inhuman when you are too old to be young." -Bill Nelson
--------------------------------------------------------------------
/ Paul Silver / Dischord Records /
/ pa...@tellabs.com / putting the D.C. in harDCore /
--------------------------------------------------------------------
All opinions expressed are strictly my own, unless I stole them.
David Blackman
--
Dave Marquardt
(no, the festival WASN'T there, but that's another story). They play
alternative music, but only at selected times, which, unfortunately, I
can never quite figure out. They also play a lot of jazz and a little
classical. Their daytime stuff usually tends away from top 40 and
"heavy metal."
-Dave
Bill Wisner
>will be removed from this list soon.
What idiocy. I've listened to a few commercial stations that play
better music than any non-commercial, college station.
Bill Wisner <wis...@ims.alaska.edu> Gryphon Gang Fairbanks AK 99775
Lisa E Peterson
Ditto. The closest thing we have to an alternative station in the Ames, Ia
area is a *Commercial* station in Des Moines (103.7 KDMG). Our college station
plays more heavy metal than anything and is also a slave to whatever DJ is
working during the alternative time slot.
Lisa Peterson (min...@iastate.edu)
Joe Finete
In article <1992Mar10....@Csli.Stanford.EDU> gl...@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Clayton Glad) writes:
>>KROQ Los Angeles 106.7
>impression I've come away with is that it's sort of a greatest-hits-of-
>the-early-eighties format. Eurhytmics, the Romantics, Oingo Boingo, Devo,
>
>with music that's nearly ten years old. How do they count as "alternative"?
>
>-- Clay
This seems to be a problem with all the alternative stations that I've
had a chance to listen to(KITS-Live 105 in SanFrancisco, KROQ, and XTRA-91X
in SanDiego) I guess they're only trying to hold on to their listeners, but
it really sucks when you hear nothing but early-eighties music all day.
In a couple years, these stations will seem as out of date as those AOR
classic rock stations that play nothing but late 60's and 70's music.
--
___________________________________________________________________
|Joe Finete jfi...@cats.ucsc.edu|
|_________________________________________________________________|
mpf...@tesla.njit.edu
> On 10-Mar-92 in Re: Alternative radio
> user Jack Kob...@jato.jpl.na writes:
>>(I have heard of a alternative station in NY that also goes way back, but
>>have no hard facts about this.)
>
> You _may_ be thinking of 92.7 WDRE (formerly WLIR), based in my hometown
> of Garden City, NY, although these days they like to say "Garden City,
> New York City!" like that makes them something special. Yes, as LIR
> they went way back, but IMHO, and in the HO of many other Long Island
> listeners, the station has gone straight down the tubes since the name
> change. Yeah, they're still "alternative," but hell, I can only hear
> "Love Shack" so many times in one day, if you know what I mean.
>>> GOD, anyone with a tiny bit of good taste knows what you mean. It is just
>>> impossible listening to them. Police, INXS 10 times in one hour, Cure's
>>> "Pictures Of You" every 45 minutes.......ARGGHHHH!!!!
> Basically, they need to shoot the program director and get rid of the
> old shit like their "Rock of the '80s Lunch Hour."
>
>>>> KILL HIM ! KILL HIM !!!!
>>> But now I am happy boy, since I found 106.3 WHTG...This is ALTERNATIVE !
>>> Their music director got this years' Gavin convention's prize for best
>>> alternative radio station music director. The station is based in
>>> Eatontown, New Jersey.
> blech.
>
> Avoid it if you can. WRHU, the Hofstra University station, is a much
> better bet.
>
> bpm
> ============================================
> Brendan P. McFeely / (bm...@andrew.cmu.edu) /
> Creative Writing, Carnegie Mellon University
> "Be regular and orderly in your life, that
> you may be violent and original in your work."
>>>>KILLL HIM KILL HIM
<>>> Nuno
Kenneth Settle - 522.3
>--
>david
>blac...@hodgkin.med.upenn.edu
WKDU was actually voted the best radio station in Philadelphia a couple of
years ago by Philadelphia Magazine. I agree that it's a very cool radio
station, though I haven't heard it in a while.
Stephen Jonke
>
> In article <1992Mar10....@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov> jo...@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov (Stephen Jonke) writes:
> >HFS is not only commercial, but it isn't even alternative any more (or at
> >least only marginally so -- they call themselves a "modern rock" station
> >now).
> >
> >WCVT (89.7) is no longer. It has been turned into WTMD a light jazz, folk
> >and new age music station. I sorely miss WCVT, yet another lost alternative
> >station. Blame it on a greedy program manager that doesn't give a damn
> >about music, especially alternative/progressive music.
> >
> >Baltimore no longer has any alternative stations -- it's a sad day. If
> >someone knows otherwise, please tell me quickly as I'll go crazy if we don't
> >get a good alternative college station soon!
> >
> >Steve
>
> I think you're reacting a bit too far - I've listened to WHFS while IN
> Baltimore, and despite "calling" themselves a "modern rock" station, I don't
> think you'd find it too much different than most of the other "alternative"
> stations on the planet. I don't want to get into a heated discussion about
> the difference between "alternative" and "modern rock" or whether something
> is strictly "alternative." Just keep in mind that a station does not have to
> stick with a black-and-white air schedule to suit "alternative" music
> listeners.
>
I have been listening to WHFS (or rather had) for many years. The
change that they have undergone has been monumental. They are now a
programmed station that plays only the mildest and most popular of
progressive SINGLES mixed in with rap, traditional rock, etc.. They now have
DJs that try emulate the worst of the top 40 DJs. They have a tremendous
amount of the most incredibly annoying commercials. Etc, etc.. None of
this was true a few years ago. The most popular songs are played in
"heavy rotation." Yes they do play progressive music, but they are NOT a
progressive/alternative station. They have the slogan "the coolest station
in the nation" -- that's as bad as the worst of the "Adult contemporary"
station slogans. They never say the word "progressive" anymore (I mean
this, NEVER.)
They are also doing poorly. The owners spent a tremendous amount of money
in buying the station, found that progressive/alternative music just didn't
sell that big and proceded to convert the station into a more traditional
one. The owners/managers have said that they are doing this, you can
not argue with it!
They only play the most popular progressive music along with all the other
crap described above and you can't call that "alternative."
The really horrid thing is that they ARE the best station recievable in
Baltimore and surrounding areas. Ughhh.
Steve
ERIC JOSEPH LAMB
evenings (maybe between 6 and 10) they do a really good job of playing
progressive tunes. There's also WXDU in Durham. Both are very small college
type stations.
Eric Lamb |\ "Funny thing about weekends when /|
(ejl...@eos.ncsu.edu) |/ you're unemployed: they don't mean \|
North Carolina State |\ quite so much; you just get to hang /|
University |/ out with all your workin' friends..." \|
Les Claypool, PRIMUS
Matthew Keith Egan
> change that they have undergone has been monumental. They are now a
> programmed station that plays only the mildest and most popular of
> progressive SINGLES mixed in with rap, traditional rock, etc.. They now have
> DJs that try emulate the worst of the top 40 DJs. They have a tremendous
> amount of the most incredibly annoying commercials. Etc, etc.. None of
> this was true a few years ago. The most popular songs are played in
> "heavy rotation." Yes they do play progressive music, but they are NOT a
> progressive/alternative station. They have the slogan "the coolest station
> in the nation" -- that's as bad as the worst of the "Adult contemporary"
> station slogans. They never say the word "progressive" anymore (I mean
> this, NEVER.)
True. Much too true. They do play music which is fairly good, but they
don't play music which is less well known, and they do play music many
times a day. I delivered pizzas this last summer and so was in my car
often lisatening to HFS; in about 5 hours I would hear 'Bob's Yer
Uncle' by the Happy Mondays at least twice. This was probably in light
rotation by their standards....
Sean Eckton
> 92.7 WDRE(Westbury, NY)
> 105.3 KITS(San Francisco, CA)
> 106.7 KROQ(Los Angeles, CA)
>
and listen to KROQ there):
104.9, 92.7 KJQ(Salt Lake City, Provo, and Ogden, UT)
96.1 KXRN - X96(Provo, UT) <- started about a month ago when KJQ lost
all their DJ's except one because of management conflicts. X96 has all the
old DJ's. They make run of KJQ all the time.
Both stations say they are "Utah's Modern Rock" but I don't know about that.
I would rather have alternative music.
Just for the group, here are some of my favorite groups:
Dead Can Dance (listening to Within the Realm of a Dying Sun right now)
This Mortal Coil
Lowlife (Lowlif)
The Cure
Depeche Mode (OLD STUFF, not necessarily new stuff)
Xymox
(notice quite a few are 4AD groups, or where 4AD groups). I wish that 4AD
was easier to find in the US. Usually it is in the import stores. Dead Can
Dance did release one in the US though. In my opinion, 4AD is the best
record company. They have not become extremely commercial and they don't
seem to be afraid of making the kind of music that they want, not the kind of
music that will SELL LOTS!
--
Sean Eckton
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Internet: eck...@sirius.byu.edu Brigham Young University, Provo, UT.
Packet Radio: kd6bik @ wb7esh.#orem.ut.usa.na
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jack Kobzeff
Can't really argue that they do play too much 'late '70s-early '80s' stuff.
I think that they do, too. But one problem that they face is that the early
'80's stuff is still popular. Recently, a jock on KROQ mentioned that the
'Flashback Lunch', (where they play nothing but 'late '70s-early '80s' stuff
during lunch hour) has been expanded to 90 minutes 'because it's so popular'.
But they do also play newer stuff, just not as much as many (including me)
would like. Indeed, looking over the list of artists listed in the message
headers of this newsgroup, I have heard all but a couple on KROQ at one
time or another. You might have to wait a while for some of the new stuff
to come up, but KROQ will eventually get around to it. (One of their more
adventurous jocks (Swedish Eagle) is one of the people now over on MARS,
so they lost a good 'new music fan' there). And, if they have to play some
early 80's stuff to pay the bills (remember, this is a COMMERCIAL station)
as long as they play some new stuff, I'm not going to complain too much.
I like a lot of it, too. (I just want it played a little less.)
As to how it counts as alternative, here in LA, we have a couple of AOR type
stations (who are still stuck in the 'Van Halen-ZZ Top-Eagles-Def Lepperd'
mold). Also one metal-only station, a bunch of top-40/dance music stations,
etc. But we have several college stations (KXLU, KSPC, etc.) that play
alternative at least part of the time. And then we have KROQ and MARS.
I feel pretty lucky that we have a choice between the two commercial
stations (3 if you count 91X from Mexico), and the college stations.
I guess that makes KROQ easier to take, since when they play the B-52's
for the umpteenth time, I can just switch over to something else.
(That I will have pretty broad tastes helps, too...)
Jack Kobzeff (ja...@jato.jpl.nasa.gov)
Rory Delapaz
>Meanwhile, here's a few stations on both sides of the country:
>
>106.7 WFNX(Boston, MA)
Ummm, minor correction there, that's 101.7 WFNX(Lynn, MA).
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ro...@ctp.com | "I'd unravel every riddle...
Rory M. Dela Paz | If I only had a brain"
Cambridge Technology Partners, Inc. | - The Scarecrow
Christopher Pettus
>KROQ Los Angeles 106.7
>Pretty much the grandaddy of them all. With the exception of a short stint
>as a 'AOR' station in the mid '70s, 106.7 in L.A. has been alternative
>(sometimes almost by accident) since the late '60's, when it started as KPPC,
>about three or four owners ago. (They only count time 'officailly' from one
>of their music director changes (during whose tenure they 'hit it big'),
>so their '10th Anniversary' a couple of years ago was bogus. I was listening
>to them playing alternative many years before that.)
KROQ, unfortunately, has almost completely petrified. They almost
never break new bands, and their response to new issues by older
artists tends to be to play the airplane single to death, intermixed
with older tracks. I still hear pretty much the same music on them
now that I did in 1981.
>MARS-FM Los Angeles 103.1
>A very recent challanger to KROQ started with an ex-KROQ owner and several
>ex-KROQ jocks, and with a more house/industrial/rave sound. Actually, this
>is TWO small stations ON THE SAME FREQUENCY but in different parts of LA,
>simulcasting.
An excellent station, if only because it got the old KSRF (one of the
nominal "real" stations it broadcasts on) off the air.
>(Ummmmm) San Francisco 105.3
>(Damn, can't remember the call letters!) Live 105.
KITS. Better than KROQ, although they still play way too many oldies
for my taste. If they could just get Alex Bennett off of their
morning show, I'd listen to them more.
--
-- Christophe
"The human spirit is a very hard thing to kill. Even with a chainsaw."
Andrew Karanicolas
good thing Melbourne had WFIT because there are least 2 oldies
stations in that area; well, one is usually enough :-)
I would say WFIT is somewhat better than WFNX in the Boston area.
WFIT has a pretty extensive new-age collection, but that's another
newsgroup :-)
I am not affiliated with either station!
Andrew Karanicolas
MIT Microsystems Technology Laboratory
ankl...@mtl.mit.edu
Tim Cottle
> ____________________________________________________________________
>
> Alternative Radio List March 11, 1989 Alternative Radio List
>
>
> Name School City Frequency
>
> Southeast:
>
WRFL Radio Free Lexington Lexington, KY 88.1
Also:
> Stations between asterisks (*) are commercial stations. They
> will be removed from this list soon.
Being needlessly elitist/close-minded, aren't we? Hmmm? Is commercial
somehow interently evil? Why is alternative music to be provided to the
public airwaves only at taxpayer expense? If some enterprising entrapreneur
is willing to take the chance that he can sell commercial time with an
alternative music format, why should not we fully support that? If someone in
this town were to start a commerical alternative station, I would fall to my
knees and thank God. Why does the funding outlet take precedence over the
availability of the format? It seems to me that you are attempting to limit
the availablilty of alternative music for reasons I cannot fathom, unless it
does your soul some sort of good to be able to set yourself apart in public
by being able to smugly discuss with your friends bands no one else in earshot
has heard of, and to look askance at those cretins who are not as cool as you.
I hope you do not watch "120 Minutes" on MTV, otherwise you are not being true
to yourself.
--
| Timothy A. Cottle | |
| Workstation Systems Development | Mit der Dummheit kampfen |
| Intergraph Corp. | Gotter selbst vergebens. |
| Huntsville, AL 35894-0001 | |
| cot...@gman.b11.ingr.com | --Schiller |
Brian Falardeau
In article <1992Mar10.0...@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>,
ja...@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Jack Kobzeff) writes:
|> KROQ Los Angeles 106.7
|> Pretty much the grandaddy of them all.
Definitely. I spent 8 months in LA and never put a single tape in my car
stereo because of this radio station. Great morning show, too.
|> (I have heard of a alternative station in NY that also goes way back, but
|> have no hard facts about this.)
Probably talking about WDRE - I think it's 92.7
Anyone spending time in Minneapolis should tune in KJJO 104.1
This might be an idea for another thread, but there are some good bars
in Minneapolis that play alternative music:
Glam Slam - Friday is KJ 104 night - DJ
Pacific Club - DJ on Friday and Saturday
First Avenue - Always have good bands playing
(Check schedules available at record stores)
Just in case you're visiting and looking for something to do. All of
them are located within walking distance from each other in downtown
Minneapolis.
As for radio stations, there's also WHFS in Washington DC.
Also, thanks to those that reponded to the Route 66 question. Turns out
that the "name that tune" remix is the Beatmaster's remix (CD BONG 15).
It's a German import.
Brian Falardeau (205) 730-5747
Intergraph Corporation uunet!ingr!b11!bdf!brianf
Huntsville, AL bri...@bdf.b11.ingr.com
cs201329
>> Alternative Radio List March 11, 1989 Alternative Radio List
>
>> *WHFS* commercial/alt. Anapolis, MD 99.1
>> WCVT Towson State Towson, MD (?)
>
>HFS is not only commercial, but it isn't even alternative any more (or at
>least only marginally so -- they call themselves a "modern rock" station
>now).
Agreed. WHFS has been pushed ever closer to the
mainstream by market conditions. It isn't the
exact same stuff you hear on the pop channels,
but it's extremely conservative.
>WCVT (89.7) is no longer. It has been turned into WTMD a light jazz, folk
>and new age music station. I sorely miss WCVT, yet another lost alternative
I've talked to various people at WTiMiD, and their
argument is "Well, our market share has doubled
since the format change." It doesn't matter to
them that their college audience has decreased
(remember, you're supposed to be a college station),
and they don't sell commercials anyways, so what's
the importance of market share?
>Baltimore no longer has any alternative stations -- it's a sad day. If
>someone knows otherwise, please tell me quickly as I'll go crazy if we don't
>get a good alternative college station soon!
Sorry, there aren't any. College Park's WMUC was
consumed by Journalism or some such, and Baltimore
County's WUMD is only on carrier current. The
general manager here says that they had a viable
proposal to go FM broadcast a couple years ago,
but the state Dept of Education (who controls
U of MD's funding) spiked it. I don't know why.
Maryland is total hell in terms of alternative radio.
I wish I was still in Cleveland. Speaking of which,
I'd advise anyone passing through that Eerie city to
listen to WRUW 91.1, it's way out there on the
alternative scene.
Steven Barash
>> >HFS is not only commercial, but it isn't even alternative any more (or at
>> >least only marginally so -- they call themselves a "modern rock" station
>> >now).
>> >
>> >WCVT (89.7) is no longer. It has been turned into WTMD a light jazz, folk
>> >and new age music station. I sorely miss WCVT, yet another lost alternative
>> >station. Blame it on a greedy program manager that doesn't give a damn
>> >about music, especially alternative/progressive music.
>> >
>> >Baltimore no longer has any alternative stations -- it's a sad day. If
>> >someone knows otherwise, please tell me quickly as I'll go crazy if we don't
>> >get a good alternative college station soon!
>> >
>> >Steve
>>
Yes, the wasting of WCVT was extremely painful. I had even moved up to Laurel
a few years ago so I could pick up the station better.
As Gary Hutchins, the DJ on "Rock and Roll Radio" said on his last
day, there used to be one station in the area that plays rock and roll,
now there are zero. (But we got 6 light jazz stations now. :-( )
And WTMD has gotta be the worst station in the world, more airy than elevator
music.
Recently I've heard some guy on 90.5, a station east of Balt. at Whorton
high school (!) playing progressive rock on tuesday evenings, but I'm not
sure if he's still there.
And how about WMUC 88.1 College Park? Is that still progressive?
(I've been away for a while). But you have to be on campus to
hear it, after WJHU (also 88.1) upped the wattage on their classical
station.
And yes, WHFS sucks now, but I still listen when I drive because it's
either that or road noises. Does anyone remember HFS at 102.3 and those
decadent DJs Milo and Jim Dunbar?
Steve Barash
Robert S. Goheen
>>
>>KUOW (94.9) in Seattle is classical music
>>"The End" (106.something) in Seattle is a new commercial alternative
>>station, which is pretty nice and puts on some damn fine concerts.
>>
>>And one of the finest alternative stations (at least as of 6 months
>>ago, when I was last through that part of Ohio,) is 101.1 (?) FM in
>>Columbus. You never know where decent music will pop up.
>
>The station is WWCD, and they have recently changed their format somewhat.
>They still play alternative music, but I've heard them play some
>Dire Straits and other classic rock bands that I don't consider the
>least bit alternative. Unfortunately, the station keeps getting
>worse and worse.
I have to admit, I'm sorry to here this. It may have been a station
that leaned more toward the "pop"ier side of alternative music, but it
was still a favorite of mine.
And as someone has already pointed out, it is 107.7 FM in Seattle, and
though in the beginning their idea of alternative music included Billy
Idol and The Cars, after a few months on the air they have improved
significantly. They still play Dire Straits though . . . .
The words I thought I brought
I left behind
So, never mind . . . .
-The Replacements
Bruce Becker
|
|sorry if this is a repeat but cfny (102.1) is a great station out of
|Toronto, Ontario, CA.
CKLN (88.1) is a *fantastic* station out of
Toronto, Ontario, CA...
--
,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario
a /i/ Internet: b...@becker.gts.org Uucp: ...!lsuc!becker!bdb
`\o\-e "Kennedy said he was a Berliner,
_< /_ so someone put a hole in his donut" - Warren C. Mission
Jerri L Hopper
>In article <1992Mar9.1...@Princeton.EDU>, rsgo...@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Robert S. Goheen) writes...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>A few points to your list . . . .
>>
>>KUOW (94.9) in Seattle is classical music
>>"The End" (106.something) in Seattle is a new commercial alternative
>>station, which is pretty nice and puts on some damn fine concerts.
>>
>>And one of the finest alternative stations (at least as of 6 months
>>ago, when I was last through that part of Ohio,) is 101.1 (?) FM in
>>Columbus. You never know where decent music will pop up.
>
>
>Toronto, Ontario, CA.
>
have the balls to play the songs other radio stations would get
axed for playing.
J.L.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
#########################
to be or not to be?
is that the question?
########################
Is it nobler in my mind to suffer these slings and
arrows of torture? or to take arms against this sea
of trouble?
-an English Major with a Cause:
J.L.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Dale Drummond
irginia.EDU (Charles Y. Choi) writes:
|>
|> Though this list is NOT current, it might help you out. Anyone out there
|> who's willing to update this list, by all means go ahead....
|>
WOXY U of Miami (OH) Oxford, OH (near Cinci) 97.7
This is definetely an "alternative" radion station. For those who saw Rain Man,
it's the Future <BAM!> of Rock 'n' Roll.
-- Dale Drummond
Matthew Keith Egan
Joseph Wei-Cheng Ku
Round Eyes
>In article <1992Mar10....@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov> jo...@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov (Stephen Jonke) writes:
>>In article <1992Mar8.1...@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, cy...@csissun11.ee.Virginia.EDU (Charles Y. Choi) writes:
>>>
>>> Alternative Radio List March 11, 1989 Alternative Radio List
>>
>>> *WHFS* commercial/alt. Anapolis, MD 99.1
>>> WCVT Towson State Towson, MD (?)
>>
>106.7 WFNX(Boston, MA)
>92.7 WDRE(Westbury, NY)
>105.3 KITS(San Francisco, CA)
>106.7 KROQ(Los Angeles, CA)
93.3 KTCL (Fort Collins, Colorado -- serving also Boulder/Denver with
translator link K276BJ at 103.1)
Jason T Milhoan
WWCD 101.1, but the owner sold it. Now, they still claim to be "modern rock"
and alternative.. I dunno, but do you think Tom Petty or Rolling Stones, or
better yet, Bonney Rait is real progressive? What a bunch of BS! They still
claim to be progressive and alternative, but come on!
I'll go turn it on...
hmmm... Stevie Ray Vaughn. Whatever....
M. COOPER / B. McQUAID
-"
-" I probably have this wrong but this is my understanding on what
-" happened to KROQ: sometime back, one of the PDs or other high managers
-" left to go to 91X down south and took their playlist with them. 91X
-" proceded to do well. When KROQ's PD died a few years later, they
-" replaced him with a guy from 91X who programmed KROQ into the ground
-" to get ratings thus creating a station mostly stuck in the 80s.
-"
-" Joachim Vance
Hahahahahaha.... even if this is true, it's so dead-on
(no pun intended) horrible that I have to laugh. Two radio stations
destroying each other! I don't know too much about KROQ, but I
live in San Diego county and 91X has long been garbage from sunrise
to midnight. You can hear some pretty decent stuff from 12:00 AM
until dawn, sometimes. I rely on 120 Minutes for good music more
than I do 91X, and it's a freakin' MTV program! College radio still
rules.
- MILO D. COOPER '92
-Negro Extraordinaire
--
/-----------------This message brought to you by: ------------------\
| BRAD McQUAID: Programmer. | MILO D. COOPER: Graphics artist. |
| Flynn Rainbow Nurseries | Park Place Productions |
\-------------------------------------------------------------------/
Joachim Vance
>I've logged only about 20-30 hours listening to this station, but the
>impression I've come away with is that it's sort of a greatest-hits-of-
>the-early-eighties format.
You hit it right on the nose. KROQ is a station stuck in the early
80s. Even the techno/ravey slanted MARS is more akin to a college
radio station now.
I probably have this wrong but this is my understanding on what
happened to KROQ: sometime back, one of the PDs or other high managers
left to go to 91X down south and took their playlist with them. 91X
proceded to do well. When KROQ's PD died a few years later, they
replaced him with a guy from 91X who programmed KROQ into the ground
to get ratings thus creating a station mostly stuck in the 80s.
At least LA and Orange County have some of the best college stations
in the nation....
Joachim
--
Joachim Vance
^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
I am antisesquipedalian--Opposed to the use of long words.
^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
Erik S. Chen
>
>you know what pisses me off!! all the good 'ol alternative stations .. well
>most.. have changed call letters, format, advertising (and alot of it), and now
>call themselves "modern rock" bleah! the music sucks on these stations!! i feel
>like i am listening to a format of a top 40 station with a few alternative
>tunes sprinkled here and there for good measure!
>
>true.. they are "alternative" compared to others, but still pale in comparison
>to what they were...
>
>in my area it was wlir.. now it's wdre...
>
>
>--
>Darcy D. Lee
> BI BY NATURE!
>da...@panix.com
>cmcl2!panix!darcy
How about the "Party-out-of-bounds" or daring to be different? I think that
stations are now trying to be alternative to alternative to some extent.
- Erik
cs201329
>>>
>>>> *WHFS* commercial/alt. Anapolis, MD 99.1
>>>> WCVT Towson State Towson, MD (?)
My first post on this subject got eaten by the machine
(I think). Anyways:
I suppose, from a very generous standpoint, you could
call WHFS alternative. But not very. Not even very
much. They play slightly less popular, but still pop-
ish music, and they do it like a commercial station.
That is -- the bouncy verbose annoying DJs (although
less so than most), the hideous playlists + rotation
schedules (I swear, "Life of Riley" is a good song,
but if I hear it one more time I'll scream), and a
generally obsequious approach characteristic of
commercial radio.
And as for WCVT, God rest its soul. It was pretty damn
conservative for college radio, but in Maryland it was
the only choice available.
It's replacement, WTiMiD, has doubled its market share
by playing "light adult contemporary", but it totally
ignores its previous college audience, and what the hell
does market share mean if you don't sell commercials?
There is currently NO alternative broadcast radio in
MaryLand. If good radio is important to you, stay out
cs201329
>>>> Alternative Radio List March 11, 1989 Alternative Radio List
WRUW Case Western Reserve U. Cleveland, OH 91.1
WCSB Cleveland State Cleveland, OH 89.3
WUJC John Carrol ???, OH (?)
WBGU Bowling Green ???, OH (?)
(and others)
Cleveland has a whole lot of things going for it
(except that it's still Cleveland), and one of the
best is its enormous profusion of college radio.
My being a former student there notwithstanding, I'd
have to call WRUW the best of the bunch. WRUW takes
the concept of Alternative extremely seriously. It
has an unwritten policy: "If it's played commercially,
don't play it here. In fact, if anyone's ever heard it
before, try to avoid playing it." Considering their
record library exceeds 80,000 discs, this is a viable
policy.
24 hours a day, 7 days a week, if I were in Clevo, I'd
be listening to WRUW.
Jack Kobzeff
>
> Some additions to the list for Cleveland:
>
> My being a former student there notwithstanding, I'd
> have to call WRUW the best of the bunch. WRUW takes
> the concept of Alternative extremely seriously. It
> has an unwritten policy: "If it's played commercially,
> don't play it here. In fact, if anyone's ever heard it
> before, try to avoid playing it." Considering their
> record library exceeds 80,000 discs, this is a viable
> policy.
I find this to be an incredibly stupid policy. Basically, this is
an elitist attitude that excludes the vast majority of the population
from listening. I have no problem with a station trying to emphasise
new music, but you have to provide some points of reference or
guideposts for most listeners. This doesn't mean you have to play the
B-52s or the Police. But there is a huge gray area between playing just
the 'commercial' stuff, and this policy of no 'commercial' stuff, and it
worries me when I see people trying to say that it's just black and white.
I don't see how if an artist like Nirvana (or B.A.D, or...) is played
on a commercial station, they suddenly become 'un-alternative'. The
MUSIC should be the determining factor, not 'how popular' they are.
Jack Kobzeff (ja...@jato.jpl.nasa.gov)
Eli Messinger
> I don't see how if an artist like Nirvana (or B.A.D, or...) is played
> on a commercial station, they suddenly become 'un-alternative'. The
> MUSIC should be the determining factor, not 'how popular' they are.
Absolutely. Programming based on what commercial stations play simply
punishes your listeners by forcing them to tune to commercial outlets if
they want to hear something good that just happened to become popular.
It's too bad records aren't issued in white jackets with blank labels.
--
"Phish is good." --James Treworgy, March 18, 1992
CSNET: e...@almaden.ibm.com / UUNET: ...!uunet!almaden.ibm.com!ebm
M. COOPER / B. McQUAID
-" In article <1992Mar23.1...@umbc3.umbc.edu>, cs20...@umbc5.umbc.edu (cs201329) writes:
-"
-" > My being a former student there notwithstanding, I'd
-" > have to call WRUW the best of the bunch. WRUW takes
-" > the concept of Alternative extremely seriously. It
-" > has an unwritten policy: "If it's played commercially,
-" > don't play it here. In fact, if anyone's ever heard it
-" > before, try to avoid playing it." Considering their
-" > record library exceeds 80,000 discs, this is a viable
-" > policy.
-"
-"
-" I find this to be an incredibly stupid policy. Basically, this is
-" an elitist attitude that excludes the vast majority of the population
-" from listening. I have no problem with a station trying to emphasise
-" new music, but you have to provide some points of reference or
-" guideposts for most listeners. This doesn't mean you have to play the
-" B-52s or the Police. But there is a huge gray area between playing just
-" the 'commercial' stuff, and this policy of no 'commercial' stuff, and it
-" worries me when I see people trying to say that it's just black and white.
-"
-" I don't see how if an artist like Nirvana (or B.A.D, or...) is played
-" on a commercial station, they suddenly become 'un-alternative'. The
-" MUSIC should be the determining factor, not 'how popular' they are.
-"
-" Jack Kobzeff (ja...@jato.jpl.nasa.gov)
But the music IS the determining factor of a band's popu-
larity. Record label execs aren't going to push a band that they
don't feel the masses can swallow. I really, really wish that
you advocates for commercial radio tendencies would wake up and
realize the cold hard fact that BANDS GET COMMERCIAL AIRPLAY
WHEN THE QUALITY OF THE MUSIC IS AVERAGE, BECAUSE, BY DEFINITION
OF THE WORD "AVERAGE," MOST PEOPLE HAVE AVERAGE MUSICAL INTELLI-
GENCE, PERIOD. Some music is below that mainstream level, some
is above. Radio stations that refuse to play common music fea-
ture these extremes, and I find that it is often the case that
the music is above average. If you would rather play it safe and
listen to middle-of-the-road chart pabulum, then that's a per-
sonal problem that I can only hope to elucidate. I prefer to
take the mostly great with the seldom awful instead of the always
plain. Good morning, Mr. Bond. Chew thee on that, Caesar.
M. COOPER / B. McQUAID
-" Jack Kobzeff...
-"
-" > I don't see how if an artist like Nirvana (or B.A.D, or...) is played
-" > on a commercial station, they suddenly become 'un-alternative'. The
-" > MUSIC should be the determining factor, not 'how popular' they are.
-"
-" Absolutely. Programming based on what commercial stations play simply
-" punishes your listeners by forcing them to tune to commercial outlets if
-" they want to hear something good that just happened to become popular.
-"
-" CSNET: e...@almaden.ibm.com / UUNET: ...!uunet!almaden.ibm.com!ebm
What? Give me a break. Popular music will reach the ears
of all listeners regardless of their preferences. Music that
becomes popular will probably have already been played on a truly
alternative radio station beforehand; this is often the case.
Music warmly welcomed by the everyman is usually of a lesser quali-
ty. This is the type of stuff that commercial stations thrive
upon. Therfore, if a DJ decides to play that which some commercial
jockey would probably shun, then it's either better or worse
music. Why not take a chance on something different? History's
shown me that the best music is always less popular than the more
ubiquitous music. I don't tune in to any local radio stations
(except for 91X late night semi-obscure stuff) and I've heard
Nirvana songs left and right. They're a good band, but I'm not
going to filter through loads of shite just to hear "something
good that just happened to become popular" because when I DO
hear it (as is the case with Nirvana), it'll be mediocre. Good,
but mediocre. And I really don't care to waste my time with
mediocrity. I'd much rather filter through creatively unique
and inventive crap and come upon something fabulous. These no-
commoner's-music DJ's realize that popularity suggests mediocrity.
If I can hear lots of original, intelligent, and challenging
music along with a little shite, then why would I choose to go
with lots of uninspired and hackneyed music and a little above
average?
Eli Messinger
> ... Popular music will reach the ears
> of all listeners regardless of their preferences. Music that
> becomes popular will probably have already been played on a truly
> alternative radio station beforehand; this is often the case.
Well, there's an awful lot of hit material that I rarely hear. Some of it
I like, some of it I don't. Given that DJ's at my favorite college station
may also like some of this music, I have no problem with them mixing it in
with the less commercially successful records that they play. As a listener
I prefer to hear it mixed amongst the other things the station plays, rather
than having to play home DJ by dialing up and down the radio band.
> Music warmly welcomed by the everyman is usually of a lesser quali-
> ty. This is the type of stuff that commercial stations thrive
> upon.
Yeah, so? This evades the point. If there is something that a DJ on a
non-commercial station likes, thinks listeners will like, and thinks will
mix nicely with whatever s/he is playing, why should its exposure on other
outlets preclude its playing? I didn't advocate playing music of lesser
quality, I simply suggested that not playing something only because it is/
was being programmed on commercial outlets shorts your listeners.
> Therfore, if a DJ decides to play that which some commercial
> jockey would probably shun, then it's either better or worse
> music.
I don't understand this at all. If a DJ decides to play something that a
commercial DJ shuns it's because the commercial DJ's consulting service did
not list it in his or her logs. It has nothing at all to do with the
"quality" of the music. I can't imagine why records shunned by commercial
radio would necessarily be better or worse or just-the-same.
> Why not take a chance on something different? History's
> shown me that the best music is always less popular than the more
> ubiquitous music.
Again, you seem to have problem with quantifiers. I haven't suggested
that the top-40 is a goldmine of high quality, innovative and interesting
music. I have suggested, however, that it is not a complete black hole
of such qualities. For programmers to refuse to program something solely
based on its label affiliation or current Billboard status evades, for me,
the purpose of the DJ being there: to play an interesting, entertaining
and (perhaps) educational program of music and other material.
> ... These no-
> commoner's-music DJ's realize that popularity suggests mediocrity.
The question originally begged, however, was not whether the DJ's refused
to play music that had made the top-40 because they didn't like the music,
or that they didn't like the notion that it had made the top-40. If the
former, if the DJ simply didn't like the tracks, then I wouldn't suggest
they play them any more than any other tracks they disliked. If, however,
they refuse to play them solely because they are popular elsewhere, then,
as I said at the start, I think they sell the listeners short.
> If I can hear lots of original, intelligent, and challenging
> music along with a little shite, then why would I choose to go
> with lots of uninspired and hackneyed music and a little above
> average?
Again you have turned the discussion inside out. No one has suggested you
program or listen to anything other than that which you think is the best
available material. The question was whether being in the top-40 soured
your opinion on music simply because it was popular.
--
"Phish is good." --James Treworgy, March 18, 1992
Clayton Glad
up there.]
\"Ubermensch mbu...@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (M. COOPER / B. McQUAID) writes:
>I really, really wish that you advocates for commercial radio
>tendencies would wake up and realize the cold hard fact that
>BANDS GET COMMERCIAL AIRPLAY WHEN THE QUALITY OF THE MUSIC IS
>AVERAGE ...
Who's advocating "commercial radio tendencies"? Eli and Jack have
questioned the policies of stations which refuse to play a record
solely because it's attained some degree of commercial success.
In other words, they object to stations making programming decisions
based on extra-musical reasons.
Perhaps you want to argue that only inferior music can ever attain
such success. I'd think you'd have a hard time doing that, though,
and I'm sure you'll need to do more than type the claim in caps.
>BECAUSE, BY DEFINITION OF THE WORD "AVERAGE," MOST PEOPLE HAVE
>AVERAGE MUSICAL INTELLIGENCE, PERIOD.
We've seen this an awful lot lately. Do you think you could take
time out from your ratiocinations to explain your little mantra to
us? What's "musical intelligence"? Is there a test? Can you tell
me how Cecil Taylor stacks up against Lush?
>History's shown me that the best music is always less popular than
>the more ubiquitous music.
Don't know much about history, do you? In the pre-bop era the very
best jazz was also very popular. The same's true of the early rock
era. It might be true of your *personal* history that the best music
has been less popular, but, as you make clear at every juncture, this
history has been brief and narrow and is ill-suited to serve as the
basis of your grand proclamations.
>These no-commoner's-music DJ's realize that popularity suggests
>mediocrity.
Sure, it *suggests* mediocrity. That's the whole point: that there
are teeming masses of DJs out there who are making programming
decisions based on associations, marketing labels, and cover art --
almost everything other than the actual music. That belies pretty
minimal intelligence since they never even get to point where they
could employ their "musical intelligence".
By the way, Milo, every artist we've ever seen you post about has been
a CMJ chart mainstay. Are we justified in concluding that you're someone
of average college-musical intelligence?
-- Clay
andrew.j.whitman
>What's "musical intelligence"? Is there a test?
Indeed there is. It's 50% multiple choice and 50% essay. Here it is:
1) The father of reggae is a) Jacob Marley b) Bob Marley c) Stevie
Wonder d) Black Uhuru e) Nichelle Nichols
2) The name of Michael Jackson's previous group is a) The MC5 b)
Wings c) The Michaels d) The Jacksons e) George Michael
3) The objectifiably best alternative and/or college and/or cool
band is a) The Pixies b) My Bloody Valentine c) Sonic Youth
d) New Order e) The Smiths
4) When Giuseppi Verdi moved to New York he changed his name to a) Al
Green b) Jerry Vale c) David Blue d) Jimmy Lee Vaughn e) Hugo
Montenegro
5) The Irish rocker Van Morrison was named after what famous musician?
a) Jim Morrison b) Van Cliburn c) Jim Cliburn d) Arturo Toscanini
e) Morrissey
6) The American Civil War favorite "Dixie" was written by a) Charlie
Daniels b) Daniel Decater Emmett c) Emmett Rhodes d) Happy Rhodes
e) Rhoda Morgenstern
7) Who was in the kitchen with Dinah? a) Burt Reynolds b) Burton
Cummings c) Richard Burton d) e.e. cummings e) It's a trick
question. The song never says, nor do we know what banjo tune
(s)he was playing.
8) Charlie Parker was known to his friends and admirers as a) Reptile
b) Fish, or Phish c) Bird d) Magic e) Chuck
9) The most frequently used word in rock and pop lyrics is a) love
b) oooh c) baby d) Jesus e) monkey
10) The greatest rock poet is a) Bob Dylan b) Morrissey c) Chuck
Berry d) Richard Berry e) Eric Carmen
11) "I Fall to Pieces" was originally recorded by a) k.d. lang and
the reclines b) e.e. cummings c) Patsy Cline d) Syd Barrett
e) Syd Vicious
12) The tenor sax player in the Count Basie Band was a) Neil Young
b) Paul Young c) Jesse Colin Young d) Lester Young e) Coleman
Hawkins
13) The father of bluegrass is a) James Monroe b) Millard Fillmore
West c) James "Dolly" Madison d) Bela Fleck e) Bill Monroe
14) The "Moonlight Sonata" was composed by a) Claire de Lune b)
Pink Floyd c) Ludwig Wittgenstein d) Ludwig van Beethoven e)
Camper von Beethoven
15) Kate Bush's and Mariah Carey's combined vocal range, in octaves,
is a) 14 b) 18) c) 22 d) 38 e) 56
16) Which of the following is a musical instrument? a) Riboflavin
b) Niacin c) Theremin d) Anacin e) Motrin
17) Which female name appears more frequently than any other in
pop and rock songs? a) Mary b) Cathy c) Svetlana d) Carol
e) Leah
18) Which male name appears more frequently than any other in
pop and rock songs? a) Joe b) Elvis c) Billy d) Johnny
e) Myron
19) The lead singer for Fairport Convention was a) Sandy Dennis
b) Sandy Patti c) Sandy Denny d) Denny McClain e) Shirley McClaine
20) The best rock lyrics ever written appear in a) American Pie
b) It's the End of the World as We Know It c) Smells Like Teen
Spirit d) Louie Louie e) Be-Bop-a-Lula
And now for the essay question:
1) Based on lyrical analysis, explain the world view, values, and
clothing preferences of the Cocteau Twins.
Send your answers c/o
M.I.T.
P.O. Box OU812
Cambridge, MA 02120
and find out if you *really* deserve netnews posting privileges.
>-- Clay
Andy Whitman
AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio
att!cblpo!ajw or
a...@cblpo.att.com
M. COOPER / B. McQUAID
-"
-" > ... Popular music will reach the ears
-" > of all listeners regardless of their preferences. Music that
-" > becomes popular will probably have already been played on a truly
-" > alternative radio station beforehand; this is often the case.
-"
-" Well, there's an awful lot of hit material that I rarely hear. Some of it
-" I like, some of it I don't. Given that DJ's at my favorite college station
-" may also like some of this music, I have no problem with them mixing it in
-" with the less commercially successful records that they play. As a listener
-" I prefer to hear it mixed amongst the other things the station plays, rather
-" than having to play home DJ by dialing up and down the radio band.
-"
You rarely hear it, but nevertheless, you hear it.
-" > Music warmly welcomed by the everyman is usually of a lesser quali-
-" > ty. This is the type of stuff that commercial stations thrive
-" > upon.
-"
-" Yeah, so? This evades the point. If there is something that a DJ on a
-" non-commercial station likes, thinks listeners will like, and thinks will
-" mix nicely with whatever s/he is playing, why should its exposure on other
-" outlets preclude its playing? I didn't advocate playing music of lesser
-" quality, I simply suggested that not playing something only because it is/
-" was being programmed on commercial outlets shorts your listeners.
-"
No, it doesn't evade the point, it elaborates on it. Com-
mercial stations' roster of music is traditionally junk that isn't
worth hearing, so anti-commercial DJ's avoid broadcasting such
junk by limiting the turntables exclusively to music that one
would probably not hear on commercial airwaves. And what is this
nonsense about the importance of great numbers of listeners? How
is a more voluminous audience indicative of a good radio station?
-" > Therfore, if a DJ decides to play that which some commercial
-" > jockey would probably shun, then it's either better or worse
-" > music.
-"
-" I don't understand this at all. If a DJ decides to play something that a
-" commercial DJ shuns it's because the commercial DJ's consulting service did
-" not list it in his or her logs. It has nothing at all to do with the
-" "quality" of the music. I can't imagine why records shunned by commercial
-" radio would necessarily be better or worse or just-the-same.
-"
Let me explain it to you, my son; apparently, you didn't
catch it when I first stated this in capital letters.
*************************************************************
* *
* A. Commercial radio stations play virtual shite. *
* Notice my use of the word "virtual" before you *
* retort. *
* *
* B. To avoid playing shite, a DJ can logically ex- *
* clude a commercial list from his/her playlist. *
* *
*************************************************************
You seem to adopt this bullshit mentality that defiant
DJ's are being elitist by ignoring conventional playlists.
This is not about being superficially anti-trendy. These DJ's
realize that that which is trendy is usually a waste of time.
It has EVERYTHING to do with the quality of the music: the
jockeys accept the well-grounded theory that music on a com-
mercial playlist is banal. Analogically, I can read that a
movie is directed by Stanley Kubrick and that another is di-
rected by William Shatner, and I will have a damned good idea
which will be the better film before I see them. Shatner's
movie may, by some fluke, turn out to be the better picture,
but is it likely? No. No. No.
-" > Why not take a chance on something different? History's
-" > shown me that the best music is always less popular than the more
-" > ubiquitous music.
-"
-" Again, you seem to have problem with quantifiers. I haven't suggested
-" that the top-40 is a goldmine of high quality, innovative and interesting
-" music. I have suggested, however, that it is not a complete black hole
-" of such qualities. For programmers to refuse to program something solely
-" based on its label affiliation or current Billboard status evades, for me,
-" the purpose of the DJ being there: to play an interesting, entertaining
-" and (perhaps) educational program of music and other material.
-"
Then you're being extremely unrealistic, to hope that you
can hear everything that's good on one radio station. I, on the
other hand, choose to accept the situation as it is and stick with
my non-conventional radio (when I can get it). You have to know
that there is veracity to the belief that top-40 radio is a prime
indicator of what not to play due to the fact that top-40 radio
is a breeding ground for crap. There is no elitism or arrogance
involved in this idea; it is factual. Music which becomes popu-
lar does so because it satisfies the lowest common denominator of
the populace's musical intelligence. Get it through your skull.
-" > ... These no-
-" > commoner's-music DJ's realize that popularity suggests mediocrity.
-"
-" The question originally begged, however, was not whether the DJ's refused
-" to play music that had made the top-40 because they didn't like the music,
-" or that they didn't like the notion that it had made the top-40. If the
-" former, if the DJ simply didn't like the tracks, then I wouldn't suggest
-" they play them any more than any other tracks they disliked. If, however,
-" they refuse to play them solely because they are popular elsewhere, then,
-" as I said at the start, I think they sell the listeners short.
-"
Yes, they do sell them short in this regard, but to a negli-
gible extent, because the ratio of good to bad music is infinitely
higher than the same ratio on a top-40 station. I sense the nobili-
ty of your wish that all DJ's should play music that they like
whether it's popular or not, but the spirit of alternative radio is
to promote that which is NOT popular since popular music has outlets
up the ass; it's in more places than it needs to be.
-" > If I can hear lots of original, intelligent, and challenging
-" > music along with a little shite, then why would I choose to go
-" > with lots of uninspired and hackneyed music and a little above
-" > average?
-"
-" Again you have turned the discussion inside out. No one has suggested you
-" program or listen to anything other than that which you think is the best
-" available material. The question was whether being in the top-40 soured
-" your opinion on music simply because it was popular.
-" --
-" "Phish is good." --James Treworgy, March 18, 1992
No, the question was whether antiestablishmentarian DJ's
are being foolishly elitist in their decision to shun top-40 play-
lists, which I don't believe they are.
EIV...@cms.cc.wayne.edu
a...@cbnews.cb.att.com (andrew.j.whitman) writes:
>
>In article <1992Mar26.1...@Csli.Stanford.EDU> gl...@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Cayton Glad) wonders:
[...]
>7) Who was in the kitchen with Dinah? a) Burt Reynolds b) Burton
>Cummings c) Richard Burton d) e.e. cummings e) It's a trick
>question. The song never says, nor do we know what banjo tune
>(s)he was playing.
"Someone" was in the kitchen with Dinah. So the answer is "someone"
{so, you claim this is your banjo, yet you deny that you were in the kitchen
with Dinah?}
[...]
>12) The tenor sax player in the Count Basie Band was a) Neil Young
>b) Paul Young c) Jesse Colin Young d) Lester Young e) Coleman
>Hawkins
I thought that last one was going to be Coleman Young (mayor of Detroit).
Anyway you left out my favorite question: What is the real title of the the
Who song "Baba O'Reily"? Hint: it's not "Teenage Wasteland"
--Eric
Eli Messinger
> mercial stations' roster of music is traditionally junk that isn't
> worth hearing, so anti-commercial DJ's avoid broadcasting such
> junk by limiting the turntables exclusively to music that one
> would probably not hear on commercial airwaves.
You still don't seem to get the point, do you? If you don't like the music
that is played on commercial stations, don't play it. I have no problem with
that, and have not said anything that should imply I do. If you like
something but don't play it simply *because* it's been played on commercial
radio, then I think you are robbing your listeners of the experience of
enjoying that music in a context other than as filler between commercials.
> And what is this
> nonsense about the importance of great numbers of listeners? How
> is a more voluminous audience indicative of a good radio station?
Perhaps you should answer this for us, since, as far as I can tell, you are
the only one who's brought it up.
> ***********************************************************
> * *
> * A. Commercial radio stations play virtual shite. *
> * Notice my use of the word "virtual" before you *
> * retort. *
> * *
> * B. To avoid playing shite, a DJ can logically ex- *
> * clude a commercial list from his/her playlist. *
> * *
> ***********************************************************
I'm afraid I still don't understand... you still seem to be missing the point.
If you hear something you like, and you find it's being played on commercial
stations, would you then refuse to play it?
> You seem to adopt this bullshit mentality that defiant
> DJ's are being elitist by ignoring conventional playlists.
Again, you seem to have turned things inside out. I haven't advocated that
non-commercial DJ's pay any particular attention to conventional playlists.
Quite the opposite. I've suggested that DJ's pay attention to music and
records, and play those they like. On the contrary, it seems to me that you
are advocating that DJ's be hyper-aware of conventional playlists so that they
can be careful to avoid playing anything found there.
I haven't suggested trolling commercial playlists for interesting things to
play, I've suggested that it's stoopid to not play something you think is
musically worthy simply because it has the extra-musical property of being
on top-40.
> ... Shatner's
> movie may, by some fluke, turn out to be the better picture,
> but is it likely? No. No. No.
And if it is, you wouldn't go see it because your prejudgement of Shatner's
abilities told you it shouldn't be better?
> ... You have to know
> that there is veracity to the belief that top-40 radio is a prime
> indicator of what not to play due to the fact that top-40 radio
> is a breeding ground for crap. There is no elitism or arrogance
> involved in this idea; it is factual.
What's clear is that you don't trust your own ears. That you rely on the
judgement of others, notably commercial radio consultants, to tell you what
you will play and won't. That's your prerogative. I would rather program
the music that I think makes an interesting program. If by chance some of
it happens to have been "tainted" by top-40 play, it is of no matter to me.
> ... I sense the nobili-
> ty of your wish that all DJ's should play music that they like
> whether it's popular or not, but the spirit of alternative radio is
> to promote that which is NOT popular since popular music has outlets
> up the ass; it's in more places than it needs to be.
Perhaps that's your view of the spirit of alternative/non-commercial radio,
it's not mine. Mine is that the station as a whole should provide an
alternative. The Big Picture, and not necessarily every single scrap of
what makes it up, is of more interest to me. If I can hear Chuck Berry
singing "Johnny B. Goode" is some other context than between a commercial
and a Queen track... if I can hear someone who has some sensibility of
where Chuck Berry fits in the great scheme of musical history, can understand
the connections between his music and other music of his of this era, someone
who can revitalize a tired Oldies Icon and turn him back into a living,
breathing musician, I'm very happy to do so.
> No, the question was whether antiestablishmentarian DJ's
> are being foolishly elitist in their decision to shun top-40 play-
> lists, which I don't believe they are.
No, the question was whether supposed antiestablishmentarian DJ's are being
foolishly elitist in their decision not to program a piece of music or an
artist simply because the track or artist is coincidentally heard on top-40
radio stations. I believe they are.
--
"Phish is good." --James Treworgy, March 18, 1992
Paul Silver
stations should or should not plays stuff that gets popular and
gets play on commercial stations.
Before I begin, let me give you my qualifications. I am co-music
director and a DJ at WZRD Chicago (88.3 FM). WZRD is a free-form
alternative radio station, lisenced to Northeastern Illinois
University.
Look, folks, it really doesn't have anything to do with the quality
of the music. Well, it does in many cases, but it's not the deciding
factor.
Sure, lousy music won't get played by our DJs (who are free to select
their own music, we do not have a rotation or a set playlist). But
because we are chartered as an ALTERNATIVE outlet, we have chosen to
play stuff that does not get played by the commercial stations. The
whole point of being an alternative is to expose people to new things,
things they would never encounter elsewhere. Why should we give them
the same stuff they can get anywhere else? You stop being an
alternative when you do that.
The big question is the definition of "alternative", but I will
leave that for another thread. Yes, I know that the charter says
not to argue about whether something is alternative or not, but
I want to delve into something deeper than whether band X is
alternative or not. But enough now.
--
"Life is inhuman when you are too old to be young." -Bill Nelson
--------------------------------------------------------------------
/ Paul Silver / Dischord Records /
/ pa...@tellabs.com / putting the D.C. in harDCore /
--------------------------------------------------------------------
All opinions expressed are strictly my own, unless I stole them.
David A. Pearlman
>
>>What's "musical intelligence"? Is there a test?
>
>Indeed there is. It's 50% multiple choice and 50% essay. Here it is:
Hey, Andy, I'm glad you posted part of the test. But this is the "radio
edit" version. The full length version, originally available only on the
import CD rom single, but now a part of the standard test release, includes ten
additional questions. To help out, I've posted them below...
dap
21) To choose their list of the seven best groups of all time, Spin
magazine: a) tossed darts; b) drew straws; c) used Tarot cards;
d) polled a handful of under-30 critics; e) used the results of a recent
exit poll.
22) Applying the methods of linear algebra to the music making process, we
find the optimal number of members for a group is: a) 4; b) 7.5; c) 22;
d) 44; e) a floating variable equal to the number of people touring as
"Yes"
23) Ministry founder Alain Jourgensen is rarely seen in public because he is
a) dead; b) strung out on heroin; c) recording under the alias Michael Bolton;
d) running for president under the alias "undecided"; e) touring with "Yes"
24) Which of the following is a pseudonym used by George Harrison:
a) Harry Georgeson; b) Quiet guy with only a few good songs; c) Ol' Blue Eyes;
d) The Godfather of Soul; e) Mother
25) Pick the actual musical pairing: a) Sonny Bono and Bono; b) Patti Smith
and Patty Smyth; c) Dave Stewart and David Stewart; d) Arrow and Aerosmith;
e) NRBQ and Captain Lou Albino
26) Complete this now famous critical proclaimation: I have seen rock &
roll future and its name is ____________: a) MC5; b) Blow Monkees;
c) Eddie; d) Cafferty; e) Springsteen
27) Which of the following has never appeared on the cover of Rolling
Stone: a) Mao Tse Tung; b) Charles Manson; c) REM; d) Phish; e) Dr. Hook
28) Which of the following words is not used in Nirvana's hit "Smells
Like Teen Spirit": a) libido; b) mosquito; c) Aristotelian; d) hello;
c) stupid
29) Which of the following is NOT an advantage of CD's over vinyl records:
a) CD's do not wear out; b) you do not have to turn a CD over;
c) CD's offer virtually perfect reproduction; d) CD's take up less space
than vinyl records; e) the much greater profit margin for a CD supports research
into cancer prevention and the preservation of wildlife preserves.
30) Which of the following hit songs started life as a commercial jingle:
a) Sex (I'm A); b) Instant Karma; c) Star; d) We've Only Just Begun;
e) Me So Horny
>
>And now for the essay questions:
>
>1) Based on lyrical analysis, explain the world view, values, and
>clothing preferences of the Cocteau Twins.
2) Analyze American Pie in terms of its long-term ramifications on the
judicial process in America. Pay particular attention to the influence of
this song on Supreme Court confirmation hearings during the past decade.
As before...
>
>Send your answers c/o
>
>M.I.T.
>P.O. Box OU812
>Cambridge, MA 02120
>
>and find out if you *really* deserve netnews posting privileges.
>
>>-- Clay
>
>Andy Whitman
>AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio
>att!cblpo!ajw or
>a...@cblpo.att.com
dap
--
===============================================================================
David A. Pearlman
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. email: d...@vpharm.com
John J Anthony
Has anyone heard if Erasure is touring this Summer? If so, could you post the dates they`ll be in the Chicagoland area. Thanks.
M. COOPER / B. McQUAID
-" > mercial stations' roster of music is traditionally junk that isn't
-" > worth hearing, so anti-commercial DJ's avoid broadcasting such
-" > junk by limiting the turntables exclusively to music that one
-" > would probably not hear on commercial airwaves.
-"
-" You still don't seem to get the point, do you? If you don't like the music
-" that is played on commercial stations, don't play it. I have no problem with
-" that, and have not said anything that should imply I do. If you like
-" something but don't play it simply *because* it's been played on commercial
-" radio, then I think you are robbing your listeners of the experience of
-" enjoying that music in a context other than as filler between commercials.
-"
And for the last time, the reason that these antiestablish-
mentarian DJ's don't play top-40 songs is because it is outside of
their interest to air music which doesn't require their exposure.
Listen, why doesn't a Country music DJ play a Hard Rock song that he
likes? BECAUSE... THE... RADIO... STATION... IS... NOT... A...
ROCK... STATION. I can't put it any simpler for you, man. The al-
ternative format is to introduce that which is unpopular. Sure, a
DJ can like a well-known song, but popular songs are outside the
format of college radio because COLLEGE RADIO TRADITIONALLY PLAYS
UNKNOWNS IN ORDER TO INTRODUCE NEW MUSIC TO LISTENERS. Your
problem, sir, is that your argument is limited to musical genre; it
does not allow for progressive or promotional theory in radio
broadcasting. I mean, why waste time airing pop songs that could
be spent airing less popular but innovative music? How often do
you hear Classical radio stations pushing _The Blue Danube_ or
_The Nutcracker Suite_? Popular music is always readily available.
Alternative stations exist largely on the basis of a belief that
pop music gets far too much exposure with relation to obscure music.
Therefore, they stick to airing less common music, WHETHER THEY
LIKE SOME POP SONGS OR NOT. They have outlined this rule for
themselves and they are standing by it. Just because some good
rock makes it into the top-40 doesn't mean that the alt. stations
are wrong not to continue playing it as well, because the alt. sta-
tions know that, at that point, the music will be heard by the
majority of listeners. So, on to more uncommon music.
The bottom line is this: popularity is not a valid proper-
ty of good music, so unconventional DJ's ignore it, and instead
pay attention to innovation and creativity, which happen to be
very unpopular traits among the average music listener. As a
consequence, some people, like yourself, come down on these sta-
tions for "robbing listeners of the opportunity to hear good,
popular music," all the while seeming to forget that pop music
can be heard virtually anywhere at anytime for free. Where's
the logic in giving someone what he wants that he can get in
multitudes of other places, instead of giving him something rare?
I'll tell you what happens when radio stations start
applying your idea to their broadcasts: you get stations like
KROQ and 91X here in Southern California that concentrate more
and more on good songs that are popular and, because there are
enough good pop songs to fill up a day of broadcasting, regard-
less of the date the songs were written, you wind up with a
station that airs very few good UNpopular songs. Pop songs
don't appeal to people of higher musical intelligence as much as
do good obscure songs because, like I've said before, pop music
satisfies merely the average listener, whereas good obscure mu-
sic is more intellectually and emotional stimulating.
-" > ***********************************************************
-" > * *
-" > * A. Commercial radio stations play virtual shite. *
-" > * Notice my use of the word "virtual" before you *
-" > * retort. *
-" > * *
-" > * B. To avoid playing shite, a DJ can logically ex- *
-" > * clude a commercial list from his/her playlist. *
-" > * *
-" > ***********************************************************
-"
-" I'm afraid I still don't understand... you still seem to be missing the point.
-" If you hear something you like, and you find it's being played on commercial
-" stations, would you then refuse to play it?
-"
If your policy is to promote good music that is unpopular,
then YES, you would.
-" > You seem to adopt this bullshit mentality that defiant
-" > DJ's are being elitist by ignoring conventional playlists.
-"
-" Again, you seem to have turned things inside out. I haven't advocated that
-" non-commercial DJ's pay any particular attention to conventional playlists.
No, but I have, and you're saying that I'm wrong.
-" Quite the opposite. I've suggested that DJ's pay attention to music and
-" records, and play those they like. On the contrary, it seems to me that you
-" are advocating that DJ's be hyper-aware of conventional playlists so that they
-" can be careful to avoid playing anything found there.
-"
There ya go. I'm all for their spending no time on pop
material, since pop material is played out across the world for
everyone and his dog to hear. Pop music is not as good as well
done, less famous music at either's inception. If it's popular
you'll hear it. If it isn't, you probably won't, unless you
take some initiative. But to take this initiative, someone's
gotta play the obscure stuff so you can hear it. No pop, please;
I can get that whenever I choose.
-" I haven't suggested trolling commercial playlists for interesting things to
-" play, I've suggested that it's stoopid to not play something you think is
-" musically worthy simply because it has the extra-musical property of being
-" on top-40.
-"
Like I said, you disallow for station format. Your pie
in the sky approach is unrealistic.
-" > ... Shatner's
-" > movie may, by some fluke, turn out to be the better picture,
-" > but is it likely? No. No. No.
-"
-" And if it is, you wouldn't go see it because your prejudgement of Shatner's
-" abilities told you it shouldn't be better?
-"
Well, I wouldn't know until I saw it, now would I? I don't
value a critic's appraisal enough. By my own experience, the
Shatner flick would expectantly be the lesser one.
-" > ... You have to know
-" > that there is veracity to the belief that top-40 radio is a prime
-" > indicator of what not to play due to the fact that top-40 radio
-" > is a breeding ground for crap. There is no elitism or arrogance
-" > involved in this idea; it is factual.
-"
-" What's clear is that you don't trust your own ears. That you rely on the
-" judgement of others, notably commercial radio consultants, to tell you what
-" you will play and won't. That's your prerogative. I would rather program
-" the music that I think makes an interesting program. If by chance some of
-" it happens to have been "tainted" by top-40 play, it is of no matter to me.
-"
What "judgment"? I simply support their format, their be-
liefs. I agree with their argument that top-40 appeals to qualita-
tive definciencies in musical taste, because I realized this on my
own beforehand, and not because I'm fickle or trendy or elitist.
-" > ... I sense the nobili-
-" > ty of your wish that all DJ's should play music that they like
-" > whether it's popular or not, but the spirit of alternative radio is
-" > to promote that which is NOT popular since popular music has outlets
-" > up the ass; it's in more places than it needs to be.
-"
-" Perhaps that's your view of the spirit of alternative/non-commercial radio,
-" it's not mine. Mine is that the station as a whole should provide an
-" alternative.
Huh? What is the definition of "alternative"? In this con-
text, it's "that which is uncommon." Alternative Rock is not a
musical genre; it is a musical theory. That's why people have prob-
lems defining it: they, like you, disregard the notion of theory
and harp on the genre aspects.
-" The Big Picture, and not necessarily every single scrap of
-" what makes it up, is of more interest to me. If I can hear Chuck Berry
-" singing "Johnny B. Goode" is some other context than between a commercial
-" and a Queen track... if I can hear someone who has some sensibility of
-" where Chuck Berry fits in the great scheme of musical history, can understand
-" the connections between his music and other music of his of this era, someone
-" who can revitalize a tired Oldies Icon and turn him back into a living,
-" breathing musician, I'm very happy to do so.
-"
Sounds like a personal problem.
-" > No, the question was whether antiestablishmentarian DJ's
-" > are being foolishly elitist in their decision to shun top-40 play-
-" > lists, which I don't believe they are.
-"
-" No, the question was whether supposed antiestablishmentarian DJ's are being
-" foolishly elitist in their decision not to program a piece of music or an
-" artist simply because the track or artist is coincidentally heard on top-40
-" radio stations. I believe they are.
-" --
-" "Phish is good." --James Treworgy, March 18, 1992
In other words, you concur with my synopsis of the content
of this debate.
Clayton Glad
>Sure, lousy music won't get played by our DJs (who are free to select
>their own music, we do not have a rotation or a set playlist). But
>because we are chartered as an ALTERNATIVE outlet, we have chosen to
>play stuff that does not get played by the commercial stations.
Who's "we"? The Music Director and other station management? If so
it's rather a stretch to say that you have a free-format. Each individual
DJ? That just means that you're selecting from a pool of people who
share your tastes. Either way *somebody's* dictating what can and can't
be played on your station -- something you share with every commercial
station.
>The whole point of being an alternative is to expose people to new things,
>things they would never encounter elsewhere. Why should we give them
>the same stuff they can get anywhere else? You stop being an
>alternative when you do that.
What's "an alternative" is heavily context-dependent. I live in a radio
market which has NO top-40 station and six to ten college radio stations.
On my FM dial, at least, it's *far* easier for me to hear "F\^ait
Accompli" than, say, the latest Michael Bolton song. I grew up in New
York City, which did not have a country music station until the mid-70s.
I think I may not even have *heard* country music until I was a teenager.
In a place like that a station playing Garth Brooks over and over again
is alternative.
The commercial stations in my area never play non-Western music, they
never play any jazz other than Kenny G-style pablum, they never play
experimental "classical" music, they never even play any of the vast
amount of unusual and adventurous rock of the 1960s and 70s.
And neither do the "alternative" stations in my area. Those stations
play music culled from a pool of industry-defined "college rock". As
far as I can tell, they are genre stations, much in the way that country
music stations or jazz stations are.
There are some happy exceptions, of course (as there are on commercial
stations). Maybe your station is one. I urge you in that case to
publish your station's chart so we can see just how it's possible for
a station to provide a true alternative by freeing itself from the
pod-like conformity that has enveloped college radio.
-- Clay
Eli Messinger
> Listen, why doesn't a Country music DJ play a Hard Rock song that he
> likes?
Why? because commercial radio has tremendous financial pressures on it
to play music that will attract a very thin, particular demographic slice
of the radio listening audience. Why? Because to support itself the
station must sell advertising time to advertisers who have long ago
found that they are more successful by dividing and conquering the
listening audience in narrow demographic segments.
Gee, those sound like good principles for programming stations that are
supposedly free of such commercial pressures, don't they?
> ... Sure, a
> DJ can like a well-known song, but popular songs are outside the
> format of college radio because COLLEGE RADIO TRADITIONALLY PLAYS
> UNKNOWNS IN ORDER TO INTRODUCE NEW MUSIC TO LISTENERS.
Your "tradition" again? Which goes back, what, three years? Four? Sorry,
Milo, but some of us have been around *creating* the traditions of non-comm
and college radio for a lot longer than you. The "tradition" of reactively
avoiding music simply because it's gained commercial exposure is a recent
phenominon in the history of college radio. Your very notion that there is
a historical "format of college radio" belies your shallow understanding of
the history of college radio to begin with. As another has posted, you've
sold out to the CMJ-Hip-New-Release-From-England-Top-40 mindset.
> Your
> problem, sir, is that your argument is limited to musical genre; it
> does not allow for progressive or promotional theory in radio
> broadcasting. I mean, why waste time airing pop songs that could
> be spent airing less popular but innovative music?
Whuh? My argument, sir, has nothing to do with musical genres at all. My
argument suggests that you should play things that you think are interesting.
If you don't think pop music is interesting, don't play it. If you don't
think C/W is interesting, don't play it. If you think Lush or bands with bad
teeth from England are interesting, don't play them. My comment is that
I believe judging the quality of a piece of music based on its top-40 position
is simply a polite way of admitting that you don't have (in radio parlance)
Ears.
> Alternative stations exist largely on the basis of a belief that
> pop music gets far too much exposure with relation to obscure music.
Again, this notion of why alternative stations exist is based on what? Your
last quarter as a DJ at your local college station? I don't think there's
any one reason alternative stations exist, nor any one notion of what is
an "alternative" and what's it an alternative to. Your suggestion that
alternative stations even exist to program *music* in the first place suggests
yet another limitation of your view of Radio.
> The bottom line is this: popularity is not a valid proper-
> ty of good music, so unconventional DJ's ignore it, and instead
> pay attention to innovation and creativity, which happen to be
> very unpopular traits among the average music listener.
You keep saying this over and over, but you're arguing from three sides of
a multisided fence. These "unconventional" (and *that* is probably the most
laughable notion you've put forward yet) DJ's do anything but ignore music
that's on the top-40. That's my point. They don't just pay attention to
it, they do so rabidly enough so they can make sure not to play it and
"taint" their programs. You keep suggesting that I advocate college DJ's
listen to top-40 radio, probing for things to play. I've said nothing of
the sort. No matter how many times you reword it, you won't find it in
what I've written.
As with other posters in this thread, you take the narrow view of variety,
insisting that anything that isn't made up of 100% new elements can't be
new. I guess you don't believe that collages made from found material aren't
new works of art, either. You apparently only judge a station to be
"alternative" if every scrap of sound it puts out is something that can't be
heard on commercial, top-40 stations. Let's just leave it as you and I
disagree about this.
> I'll tell you what happens when radio stations start
> applying your idea to their broadcasts: you get stations like
> KROQ and 91X here in Southern California that concentrate more
> and more on good songs that are popular and, because there are
> enough good pop songs to fill up a day of broadcasting, regard-
> less of the date the songs were written, you wind up with a
> station that airs very few good UNpopular songs.
Oh, yes, that's good. Compare what happens when DJ's on non-commercial
stations are given the freedom to mix in commercially successful songs with
their regular mix of lesser known bands, with what has "happened" to two
commercial outlets. Yes, that's a fair and honest comparison. (I especially
like the implicit notion that either KROQ or 91X were *ever* alternatives
to begin with!)
> Pop songs
> don't appeal to people of higher musical intelligence as much as
> do good obscure songs because, like I've said before, pop music
> satisfies merely the average listener, whereas good obscure mu-
> sic is more intellectually and emotional stimulating.
Right! What it really comes down to is that there are some of us out here
who simply don't have the musical intelligence that you do. We don't have
the history, the background, the experience of years of listening and
programming that you do. That's why we are so ill-equipped to understand
your revoluationay idea.
> Like I said, you disallow for station format. Your pie
> in the sky approach is unrealistic.
Wow, "station format", now *THAT'S* alternative. Can you tell me about the
hourly clock you use too? How about the way those Army PSA's sound, aren't
they cool? And they make a lot of money for the station too! You've sold
out your "alternative" principles before you've even gotten to market. You
are a world class cynic if you think training DJ's to listen to *music* is
"pie in the sky."
> ... Shatner's
> movie may, by some fluke, turn out to be the better picture,
> but is it likely? No. No. No.
# And if it is, you wouldn't go see it because your prejudgement of Shatner's
# abilities told you it shouldn't be better?
> Well, I wouldn't know until I saw it, now would I? I don't
> value a critic's appraisal enough. By my own experience, the
> Shatner flick would expectantly be the lesser one.
Ahh, so in the world of film you would hold off judgement on something until
you'd experienced it yourself. In the world of music, however, you are more
than happy to let the PD's and Consultants of the radio world be your ears.
Interesting.
> Huh? What is the definition of "alternative"? In this con-
> text, it's "that which is uncommon." Alternative Rock is not a
> musical genre; it is a musical theory. That's why people have prob-
> lems defining it: they, like you, disregard the notion of theory
> and harp on the genre aspects.
Again, I don't know where you come up with the notion that I've said anything
at all about genres. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else. The
notion of what is an "alternative" radio station is certainly at the crux of
this discussion. For you, apparently, alternative must be defined narrowly
in terms of every morsel of sound that is played. For me, alternative is a
much larger picture, that encompasses not only the actual material, but its
manner of presentation, its mix, and its relationship to other elements of the
station and airsound.
> In other words, you concur with my synopsis of the content.
> of this debate.
Every word of it. You are the one true way. We are all aware of that. I
only argue with you to give you some room to vent your incredible ideals.
--
"Phish is good." --James Treworgy, March 18, 1992
Eli Messinger
> teeth from England are interesting, don't play them.
This, of course, should have said "If you think.... aren't interesting..."
M. COOPER / B. McQUAID
-" Everyone is arguing on and on about why DJs at alternative radio
-" stations should or should not plays stuff that gets popular and
-" gets play on commercial stations.
-"
-" Before I begin, let me give you my qualifications. I am co-music
-" director and a DJ at WZRD Chicago (88.3 FM). WZRD is a free-form
-" alternative radio station, lisenced to Northeastern Illinois
-" University.
-"
-" Look, folks, it really doesn't have anything to do with the quality
-" of the music. Well, it does in many cases, but it's not the deciding
-" factor.
-"
-" Sure, lousy music won't get played by our DJs (who are free to select
-" their own music, we do not have a rotation or a set playlist). But
-" because we are chartered as an ALTERNATIVE outlet, we have chosen to
-" play stuff that does not get played by the commercial stations. The
-" whole point of being an alternative is to expose people to new things,
-" things they would never encounter elsewhere. Why should we give them
-" the same stuff they can get anywhere else? You stop being an
-" alternative when you do that.
-"
-" The big question is the definition of "alternative", but I will
-" leave that for another thread. Yes, I know that the charter says
-" not to argue about whether something is alternative or not, but
-" I want to delve into something deeper than whether band X is
-" alternative or not. But enough now.
-" --
-" / Paul Silver / Dischord Records /
THANK YOU. Maybe now that he's heard it from a DJ, this
Phil character (or whatever his name is) will begin to comprehend.
M. COOPER / B. McQUAID
-" >their own music, we do not have a rotation or a set playlist). But
-" >because we are chartered as an ALTERNATIVE outlet, we have chosen to
-" >play stuff that does not get played by the commercial stations.
-" Who's "we"? The Music Director and other station management? If so
-" it's rather a stretch to say that you have a free-format. Each individual
-" DJ? That just means that you're selecting from a pool of people who
-" share your tastes. Either way *somebody's* dictating what can and can't
-" be played on your station -- something you share with every commercial
-" station.
-"
Umm, bullshit. Radio format is not some property of commer-
cial radio that somehow infected every otehr type of radio station.
Every station has a format, period; no one plays everything all of
the time. No one broadcasts completely without intent; alternative
intentions just happen to be less miserly.
-" >The whole point of being an alternative is to expose people to new things,
-" >things they would never encounter elsewhere. Why should we give them
-" >the same stuff they can get anywhere else? You stop being an
-" >alternative when you do that.
-"
-" What's "an alternative" is heavily context-dependent. I live in a radio
-" market which has NO top-40 station and six to ten college radio stations.
-" On my FM dial, at least, it's *far* easier for me to hear "F\^ait
-" Accompli" than, say, the latest Michael Bolton song. I grew up in New
-" York City, which did not have a country music station until the mid-70s.
-" I think I may not even have *heard* country music until I was a teenager.
-" In a place like that a station playing Garth Brooks over and over again
-" is alternative.
-"
You've done absolutely nothing but agree with the man in
making this statement.
-" The commercial stations in my area never play non-Western music, they
-" never play any jazz other than Kenny G-style pablum, they never play
-" experimental "classical" music, they never even play any of the vast
-" amount of unusual and adventurous rock of the 1960s and 70s.
-"
-" And neither do the "alternative" stations in my area. Those stations
-" play music culled from a pool of industry-defined "college rock". As
-" far as I can tell, they are genre stations, much in the way that country
-" music stations or jazz stations are.
-"
Then they aren't alternative stations, are they? They
pose as such in order to attract a trendy mindset of listeners;
stations like this a popping up all across the land. I've al-
ready mentioned 91X and KROQ here in Southern California, as have
others on this net channel.
-" There are some happy exceptions, of course (as there are on commercial
-" stations). Maybe your station is one. I urge you in that case to
-" publish your station's chart so we can see just how it's possible for
-" a station to provide a true alternative by freeing itself from the
-" pod-like conformity that has enveloped college radio.
-"
-" -- Clay
Be careful what you wish for; you may just receive it.
Eli Messinger
Clay 'Baked Artichoke' Glad...
> ... I urge you in that case to
> publish your station's chart so we can see just how it's possible for
> a station to provide a true alternative by freeing itself from the
> pod-like conformity that has enveloped college radio.
M. COOPER / B. McQUAID...
> Be careful what you wish for; you may just receive it.
Ooh, jeez, Clay, would you *watch it*.
I'd also be interested in seeing the playlist of such a really alternative
college radio station. Could you do us the favor of marking those discs
that aren't on the CMJ top-50?
Eli Messinger
> THANK YOU. Maybe now that he's heard it from a DJ, this
> Phil character (or whatever his name is) will begin to comprehend.
Phil? (Clay, have you been posting under that Phil alias again?)
Or maybe KFJC's ace surf guru, Phil Dirt, has been posting here?
Are you assuming that those of us arguing with you are not DJ's? Or
simply that hearing your argument from the mouth of another DJ should
be enough to convince us?
As noted in another post, many of us are involved with local college
stations. Some of us (I, at least) a lot longer than I expect you have.
Some of us are even old enough, and have been involved in radio long
enough to remember truly alternative, underground, commercial broadcasting.
Imagine that. Oh wait, you probably can't, can you?
George Scott
>>
>> Some additions to the list for Cleveland:
>>
>
>> My being a former student there notwithstanding, I'd
>> have to call WRUW the best of the bunch. WRUW takes
>> the concept of Alternative extremely seriously. It
>> has an unwritten policy: "If it's played commercially,
>> don't play it here. In fact, if anyone's ever heard it
>> before, try to avoid playing it." Considering their
>> record library exceeds 80,000 discs, this is a viable
>> policy.
Well, that's actually about 80,000 records, and around 5-6000 discs. Of
course this is due to the fact we've been around 25 years, and have a strict
policy of NEVER throwing anything out, no matter how bad or stupid.
I'd be curious in hearing the sizes of record collections of other stations.
I was told that we had the largest in Ohio and it was rumored that we had
the largest east of the Mississippi (though I find that one hard to believe).
This probably belongs in rec.radio.noncomm, so if you want to respond post
there instead, since I can never keep up with this group.
>I find this to be an incredibly stupid policy. Basically, this is
>an elitist attitude that excludes the vast majority of the population
>from listening. I have no problem with a station trying to emphasise
>new music, but you have to provide some points of reference or
>guideposts for most listeners. This doesn't mean you have to play the
>B-52s or the Police. But there is a huge gray area between playing just
>the 'commercial' stuff, and this policy of no 'commercial' stuff, and it
>worries me when I see people trying to say that it's just black and white.
Well, this policy is news to me. While the station does definitely avoid
songs which you can hear played every 30 minutes on local commercial stations,
we definitely play songs that are currently or have had airtime on commercial
radio. I just did a five hour show last week that was all music from the
early 80s, and I can guarentee 99% of what I played you would have heard
on commercial radio 10 years ago.
If we had an unwritten policy it would probably be more like: "Play as
many styles of music as possible, and no matter what the style always play
some NEW music." Or more simpley "Just play NEW music."
I think the best thing about our station is that we play more than just
what is considered "alternative". Which in my book is the stupidest term
every used to describe music. I remember asking a guy waht kind of music
he liked, and he said "Alternative". I just sat there and wondered, alternative
to what? But anyway that's off the subject. We offer the following formats,
most of which more than once during the week: atonal, classical, blues,
celtic, children's, comedy, country/bluegrass, experimental (noisy atonal-like
stuff, but different), folk, industrial, international, jazz, metal, new age,
oldies, polka, punk, rap/soul/funk, reggae, rock, showtunes/soundtracks,
spoken word, womyn's musik, and dance (disco to techno).
I think you would be very hard pressed to find any station (commercial or
college or public) that has this kind of diversity. Now I'll be the first
to admit that sometimes I tune in the station and can't stand to listen, but
I'm sure there are people out there who enjoy what is being programmed.
In fact the celtic show brings in the most money per hour in our annual
telethon, so it either has the most listeners or the richest.
Not to mention lots of live shows, we feature a live band every week, and
we also have two free concerts featuring many local bands. We also have
lots of interviews and other little tidbits like that. In fact one of
our programmers just interviewed one of the members of Negativland, the
interview should be aired sometime in a few weeks. If it's really interesting
maybe I'll post it.
My show varies every week, I play the "alternative" stuff, techno, "retro"
shows (music from a few years back), international, and many other things.
>I don't see how if an artist like Nirvana (or B.A.D, or...) is played
>on a commercial station, they suddenly become 'un-alternative'. The
>MUSIC should be the determining factor, not 'how popular' they are.
"Smells like teen spirit" was just played on WRUW a couple of days ago.
So even songs and albums that hit #1 get played. :) Not to mention
Ned's Atomic Dustbin, Fatima Mansions, Ministry, etc, which all get
airtime on 120 minutes, get played on WRUW as well.
If anyone would like a copy of our program guide, send me mail, and I'll
get one out to you.
O.K. I think I plugged the station enough. Don't you? Who said non-commercial
stations didn't have commercials?
George
--
George Scott (sc...@b64542.student.cwru.edu) _
(gm...@po.cwru.edu) (_) | |
WRUW-FM / |.| CLEVELAND
Celebrating 25 years of Radio-Activity!
M. COOPER / B. McQUAID
-"
-" > Listen, why doesn't a Country music DJ play a Hard Rock song that he
-" > likes?
-"
-" Why? because commercial radio has tremendous financial pressures on it
-" to play music that will attract a very thin, particular demographic slice
-" of the radio listening audience. Why? Because to support itself the
-" station must sell advertising time to advertisers who have long ago
-" found that they are more successful by dividing and conquering the
-" listening audience in narrow demographic segments.
-"
Yes, it's like I said. Thank you. They cannot play those
songs because they are contrary to the established format of the sta-
tion. For whatever reasons, they cannot play those songs because
they are contrary to the established format of the station. At least
alternative stations are less likely to let their clients dictate
their playlists.
-" Gee, those sound like good principles for programming stations that are
-" supposedly free of such commercial pressures, don't they?
-"
-" > ... Sure, a
-" > DJ can like a well-known song, but popular songs are outside the
-" > format of college radio because COLLEGE RADIO TRADITIONALLY PLAYS
-" > UNKNOWNS IN ORDER TO INTRODUCE NEW MUSIC TO LISTENERS.
-"
-" Your "tradition" again? Which goes back, what, three years? Four? Sorry,
-" Milo, but some of us have been around *creating* the traditions of non-comm
-" and college radio for a lot longer than you. The "tradition" of reactively
-" avoiding music simply because it's gained commercial exposure is a recent
-" phenominon in the history of college radio. Your very notion that there is
-" a historical "format of college radio" belies your shallow understanding of
-" the history of college radio to begin with.
Ah, someone else who equates "traditional" with "time-hon-
ored." I'm very pleased to burst your bubble by telling that you
are in error to connotate "traditional" with the passage of a great
amount of time. Traditions can be either old or new, as long as
they're recognized as recurring. Don't try to support your point
by targeting my credibility with some assumed, insubstantially de-
rived upon air of superiority. I'm not stupid and I certainly don't
fall for unsupported "facts." History is not relevant here and I
don't use the word "traditionally" in a historic sense.
-" As another has posted, you've
-" sold out to the CMJ-Hip-New-Release-From-England-Top-40 mindset.
-"
What other poster? I certainly would have rememberd this
occurence, because I would have replied to it at least as avidly
as I have your tripe. I find that pop music in general isn't as
good as more obscure music, so I tune in to stations that play
scarce material and listen to pop radio every once in a great
while. Works for me. If you've a problem with that, then per-
haps you just can't accept that someone could possibly believe
that all the pop songs you enjoy are low on his list of musical
bests. I'm not saying you do, but I've found that people who
advocate pop songs to the extent at which you do harbor some
level of insecurity against those of us who've acquired a taste
for more innovative, more personal, more progressive songwriting.
Some people just can't accept that heightened musical awareness
even EXISTS, let alone that it excludes a preference for the
more easily digestible. Pop music is NOT as good as obscure mu-
sic. Pop music is NOT as good as obscure music.
Unless you possess average musical intelligence.
Oh, and for all you people who deny that musical intelli-
gence is real, here's a definition of the term:
MUSICAL INTELLIGENCE: the realization that music is an
art form, and as such, that music is best when it conveys emo-
tion, and that is does so expressively, with realtion to the
character of the artist.
This is, of course, an opinionated statement that I'd
love to debate.
-" > Your
-" > problem, sir, is that your argument is limited to musical genre; it
-" > does not allow for progressive or promotional theory in radio
-" > broadcasting. I mean, why waste time airing pop songs that could
-" > be spent airing less popular but innovative music?
-"
-" Whuh? My argument, sir, has nothing to do with musical genres at all. My
-" argument suggests that you should play things that you think are interesting.
So you don't allow for genres either?? Oh, so a DJ should
just play whatever the hell he wants WHEN he wants, be it Classical
or Jazz or Rock or Country or Rap or Dance? Yeah, I see that hap-
pening. NOT. It'd never fly because hardly anyone in the world,
with the exception of those with academic interests in the art,
likes every kind of music.
-" If you don't think pop music is interesting, don't play it. If you don't
-" think C/W is interesting, don't play it. If you think Lush or bands with bad
-" teeth from England are interesting, don't play them. My comment is that
-" I believe judging the quality of a piece of music based on its top-40 position
-" is simply a polite way of admitting that you don't have (in radio parlance)
-" Ears.
-"
Well, I've already explained to you the obvious logic behind
ALTERNATIVE radio avoiding COMMERCIAL radio, and I'm not going to do
so again, because apparently you can't remember it.
-" > Alternative stations exist largely on the basis of a belief that
-" > pop music gets far too much exposure with relation to obscure music.
-"
-" Again, this notion of why alternative stations exist is based on what? Your
-" last quarter as a DJ at your local college station? I don't think there's
-" any one reason alternative stations exist, nor any one notion of what is
-" an "alternative" and what's it an alternative to. Your suggestion that
-" alternative stations even exist to program *music* in the first place suggests
-" yet another limitation of your view of Radio.
-"
It's based on interaction with college radio DJ's, it's based
on attention to college radio itself, it's based on magazine
articles on college radio theory, it's based on the trend of much
pop music to emerge from college radio, and it's based on confirma-
tion of this belief by actual band members themselves, such as U2
and R.E.M. It's very obvious to any half-wit that this is the
case. What's more, I made no claim that this is the sole reason
for their existence, as you say I did; I said that they exist
LARGELY for this reason. _LARGELY_, junior. Always after me
Lucky Charms.
I don't know what you meant by the last sentence in the
above responsive paragraph, but it smacked of ignorance and pre-
sumption; I can't wait to see you clarify it.
-" > The bottom line is this: popularity is not a valid proper-
-" > ty of good music, so unconventional DJ's ignore it, and instead
-" > pay attention to innovation and creativity, which happen to be
-" > very unpopular traits among the average music listener.
-"
-" You keep saying this over and over, but you're arguing from three sides of
-" a multisided fence. These "unconventional" (and *that* is probably the most
-" laughable notion you've put forward yet) DJ's do anything but ignore music
-" that's on the top-40. That's my point. They don't just pay attention to
-" it, they do so rabidly enough so they can make sure not to play it and
-" "taint" their programs. You keep suggesting that I advocate college DJ's
-" listen to top-40 radio, probing for things to play. I've said nothing of
-" the sort. No matter how many times you reword it, you won't find it in
-" what I've written.
-"
I keep suggesting that you advocate an alternative DJ
playing whatever he wants whether it's popular or not, something
with which I don't agree. THAT'S what I keep suggesting. Dude,
wake up and smell the Yuban, cool? What kind of radio do you
listen to, anyway?
-" As with other posters in this thread, you take the narrow view of variety,
-" insisting that anything that isn't made up of 100% new elements can't be
-" new. I guess you don't believe that collages made from found material aren't
-" new works of art, either. You apparently only judge a station to be
-" "alternative" if every scrap of sound it puts out is something that can't be
-" heard on commercial, top-40 stations. Let's just leave it as you and I
-" disagree about this.
-"
Bullshit. And again I say bullshit. You're annoyingly
overly conclusive; by that characteristic, you've now thrown into
this debate that I somehow believe in a recipe for better music,
one whose ingredients are ever changing. Bullshit. And again I
say bullshit. You're reaching. Popularity is what were discus-
sing. If it's rehash city but unpopular, then I have no problem
with an unconventional DJ's airing it.
-" > I'll tell you what happens when radio stations start
-" > applying your idea to their broadcasts: you get stations like
-" > KROQ and 91X here in Southern California that concentrate more
-" > and more on good songs that are popular and, because there are
-" > enough good pop songs to fill up a day of broadcasting, regard-
-" > less of the date the songs were written, you wind up with a
-" > station that airs very few good UNpopular songs.
-"
-" Oh, yes, that's good. Compare what happens when DJ's on non-commercial
-" stations are given the freedom to mix in commercially successful songs with
-" their regular mix of lesser known bands, with what has "happened" to two
-" commercial outlets. Yes, that's a fair and honest comparison. (I especially
-" like the implicit notion that either KROQ or 91X were *ever* alternatives
-" to begin with!)
-"
If you'd read this channel fairly recently before this dis-
cussion, then you'd know that I'm right, because several people here
have previously made the same statement! Do you, like, live on a
remote farm or something? These kinds of stations are popping up
ALL OVER the U.S. Have you not seen the articles here on alt.music.
alternative slamming on these alt. stations gone sour? They've
been numerous.
I apologize for the farm thing, that was somewhat debas-
ive...
-" > Pop songs
-" > don't appeal to people of higher musical intelligence as much as
-" > do good obscure songs because, like I've said before, pop music
-" > satisfies merely the average listener, whereas good obscure mu-
-" > sic is more intellectually and emotional stimulating.
-"
-" Right! What it really comes down to is that there are some of us out here
-" who simply don't have the musical intelligence that you do. We don't have
-" the history, the background, the experience of years of listening and
-" programming that you do. That's why we are so ill-equipped to understand
-" your revoluationay idea.
-"
Sounds like a personal problem.
-" > Like I said, you disallow for station format. Your pie
-" > in the sky approach is unrealistic.
-"
-" Wow, "station format", now *THAT'S* alternative. Can you tell me about the
-" hourly clock you use too? How about the way those Army PSA's sound, aren't
-" they cool? And they make a lot of money for the station too! You've sold
-" out your "alternative" principles before you've even gotten to market. You
-" are a world class cynic if you think training DJ's to listen to *music* is
-" "pie in the sky."
-"
Well, every station's going to have some kind of format,
I'm sorry to tell you. Don't take it too hard. "Alternative"
doesn't mean "do whatever," jack. It means "do what you perceive
as good but not well-exposed." I'm sure you still don't get it.
-"
-" > ... Shatner's
-" > movie may, by some fluke, turn out to be the better picture,
-" > but is it likely? No. No. No.
-"
-" # And if it is, you wouldn't go see it because your prejudgement of Shatner's
-" # abilities told you it shouldn't be better?
-"
-" > Well, I wouldn't know until I saw it, now would I? I don't
-" > value a critic's appraisal enough. By my own experience, the
-" > Shatner flick would expectantly be the lesser one.
-"
-" Ahh, so in the world of film you would hold off judgement on something until
-" you'd experienced it yourself. In the world of music, however, you are more
-" than happy to let the PD's and Consultants of the radio world be your ears.
-" Interesting.
-"
You can equate the two in this fashion if you like. I
choose not to do so because I can't usually see a movie for free,
whereas I CAN flick on my tuner and hear My Bloody Valentine for
absolutely zero cash, providing the station is alternative enough
to play 'em.
I know that truly alternative radio will present to me
some great stuff in my intelligence range that I won't hear any-
where else.
-" > Huh? What is the definition of "alternative"? In this con-
-" > text, it's "that which is uncommon." Alternative Rock is not a
-" > musical genre; it is a musical theory. That's why people have prob-
-" > lems defining it: they, like you, disregard the notion of theory
-" > and harp on the genre aspects.
-"
-" Again, I don't know where you come up with the notion that I've said anything
-" at all about genres. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else. The
-" notion of what is an "alternative" radio station is certainly at the crux of
-" this discussion. For you, apparently, alternative must be defined narrowly
-" in terms of every morsel of sound that is played. For me, alternative is a
-" much larger picture, that encompasses not only the actual material, but its
-" manner of presentation, its mix, and its relationship to other elements of the
-" station and airsound.
-"
Hey, you're wrong; we all make mistakes. "Alternative"
means "existing outside conventional institutions" in a musical
sense. Sure, it normally means "a choice among two or more possi-
bilities," but the former definition can also be found in any
competent dictionary, and if you don't concur, then look the
word up for yourself. So, if you're an alt. DJ and you play some-
thing commercial, you're out of line. I don't see you ragging
on top-40 DJ's for sticking with their much narrower range of
playable music. It's not enough for you that alt. DJ's play
innovative material; they have to play good pop music, too.
Frankly, FUCK THAT. Less pop, more creativity, is my policy.
The captain has turned on the "fasten seat belt" sign; please
observe this, we about to land.
Sit down and shut up.
-" > In other words, you concur with my synopsis of the content.
-" > of this debate.
-"
-" Every word of it. You are the one true way. We are all aware of that. I
-" only argue with you to give you some room to vent your incredible ideals.
-" --
-" "Phish is good." --James Treworgy, March 18, 1992
One sure sign of compliance is feigned sarcasm.
Eli Messinger
> just play whatever the hell he wants WHEN he wants, be it Classical
> or Jazz or Rock or Country or Rap or Dance? Yeah, I see that hap-
> pening. NOT.
I see it... no, I hear it, from some of the more innovative college and
far-reaching college DJ's around the Bay Area.
> It'd never fly because hardly anyone in the world,
> with the exception of those with academic interests in the art,
> likes every kind of music.
So what? I neither suggested that DJ's like and/or program "every kind"
of music, nor that listeners will like everything they hear. I have no
problem listening to a DJ whose tastes overlap mine, but are not a
subset or exact match. I'm more than willing to listen through things
that don't particularly appeal to me, on the premise that the DJ's show,
on the whole, does.
> ... it's based on magazine
> articles on college radio theory
Please post some citations for these "articles on college radio theory."
I know several of us who'd like to read them.
> I keep suggesting that you advocate an alternative DJ
> playing whatever he wants whether it's popular or not, something
> with which I don't agree.
I think this whole argument is resolved quite simply. You have a definition
for "Alternative Radio." This definition clearly precludes "Alternative DJs"
from playing anything that's popular on commercial radio. Fine. I have no
definition for "Alternative Radio", and frankly, have no interest in one. If
it's what you define it to be, then, as a listener I'd find it really boring,
and as a programmer I'd find it less interesting to program than something
with less rules and more freedom.
> ... What kind of radio do you listen to, anyway?
I listen to a lot of different kinds of radio. I listen to several college
stations, ranging from industry-oriented "alternative" stations like KUSF,
though slightly more awkward, but interesting stations like KSJS, to ever
more interesting and free stations like KFJC and KALX. I listen to a local
high school station (KLEL) that is a bit dull musically, but very free in
its style. I listen to several community stations (KKUP, KPFA) that have
mostly block programming. I listen to some commercial oldies and CHR
stations, usually in passing. I listen to a lot of talk on AM (KGO, Larry
King, KKOB-Albuquerque, KDWN-Las Vegas). I listen to some syndicated
overnight C/W stations (The Road Gang, KTTN-Window Rock, AZ). I listen
to an NPR stations (KQED), I listen to an all-news AM station. In short,
I listen to a lot of different kinds of radio.
The more adventurous college stations feature some amazing DJ's who not
only have broad and deep knowledge of music, they have adventurous spirits
that lead them to always broaden their horizons. They have Music Departments
that not only keep the files up to date on the latest obscure releases, but
actively track down new and old releases of every stripe, both popular and
not. Generally these are stations that support indie and local bands, but
do not uniformly shun that which might be successful elsewhere.
> If you'd read this channel fairly recently before this dis-
> cussion, then you'd know that I'm right, because several people here
> have previously made the same statement!
So, if I can get several people to repeat my statements, they become true?
> Do you, like, live on a
> remote farm or something? These kinds of stations are popping up
> ALL OVER the U.S. Have you not seen the articles here on alt.music.
> alternative slamming on these alt. stations gone sour? They've
> been numerous.
Actually I live in the middle of one of the largest radio markets in the
USA. I've live here for some time. I've witnesses the birth and demise
of the original wave of truly alternative commercial FM stations (can
you say the same)? I've seen the growth of the faux alternative stations
(like our current "Live 105"). My suggestion was that any notion that
these stations were once "great" and are now "dying" is really pathetic.
It shows how little you are willing to settle for on the scale of truly
alternative and adventurous commercial radio.
I also travel a lot and hear these so-called "alternative" commercial
stations in other market. Almost uniformly they have sucked from start
to finish.
> Sounds like a personal problem.
C'mon, Milo, you used this one before. At least use fresh personal
insults when you run out of any sort of reasoned argumentation.
> ... "Alternative"
> doesn't mean "do whatever," jack. It means "do what you perceive
> as good but not well-exposed." I'm sure you still don't get it.
No, I get it just fine. I get that you have some notion of a format
called "Alternative." I get that I think it's a boring format put forth
by reactionary programmers who simply don't want to listen to music, they
want to wear it like a badge of honor. If you wish to win the High Order
of the Obscure Music Promotor, that's groovy.
> ... So, if you're an alt. DJ and you play some-
> thing commercial, you're out of line. I don't see you ragging
> on top-40 DJ's for sticking with their much narrower range of
> playable music...
Then you don't read widely. I have posted at length at previous times about
the problems I see in the commercial radio industry. The difference is that
commercial radio is business, and the levers that control it are out of my
reach. Non-commercial radio is not subject to the same problems. The
non-commercial frequencies are not subject to the same bidding war. The
fights between the business and programming departments are about other
issues than fitting in another commercial slot (or not programming something
that would cause listeners to punch out). The stations management does not
have the Arbitron book hanging over its head like a giant sharp sword. So,
the arguments about non-commercial radio are decidedly different.
> One sure sign of compliance is feigned sarcasm.
My sarcasm was anything but feigned.
--
"Phish is good." --James Treworgy, March 18, 1992
Ofer Inbar
>pa...@tellabs.com (Paul Silver) writes:
>>Sure, lousy music won't get played by our DJs (who are free to select
>>their own music, we do not have a rotation or a set playlist). But
>>because we are chartered as an ALTERNATIVE outlet, we have chosen to
>>play stuff that does not get played by the commercial stations.
The commercial stations have some sort of judgement as to what music
they will play. You appear to have the same - your DJs won't play so
called "lousy music." And in addition to that, you will also avoid
playing music the commercial stations play. Hmmm...
>Who's "we"? The Music Director and other station management? If so
>it's rather a stretch to say that you have a free-format. Each individual
>DJ? That just means that you're selecting from a pool of people who
>share your tastes. Either way *somebody's* dictating what can and can't
>be played on your station -- something you share with every commercial
>station.
Hear, hear!
>>The whole point of being an alternative is to expose people to new things,
>>things they would never encounter elsewhere. Why should we give them
>>the same stuff they can get anywhere else? You stop being an
>>alternative when you do that.
Exactly! So, what's your justification for avoiding "lousy music"?
You believe that if your DJs think something is lousy, all your
listeners will share that opinion? Well, probably - listeners will
learn what music you play and what you don't, and those listeners who
share your taste in music (your "format") will continue listening.
Others won't. The only difference from a commercial station is that
you presumably aren't doing it for money, but you're still doing it.
There is a real lack in this country (and probably in others) of
stations that will let the listener decide. Stations that will give
people access to as much music as possible, without letting a DJ's
personal tastes dictate what music people are exposed to.
At WBRS, we guarantee that we *will* play on the air *any* music we
receive. Yes, that includes unsigned, unknown, or even "lousy"
artists. Only outside coercion will prevent us from playing
something. (i.e. certain blatantly unconstitutional FCC
regulations...)
"We don't judge the music, we just play it."
-- Cos (Ofer Inbar) -- c...@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu
All genre ethnic diversity...
24 hours/day, 365 days/year programming...
FREE live music four times weekly...
WBRS in Waltham, FM 100 in stereo, your FM connection with the world.
-- WBRS (BRiS) -- WB...@binah.cc.brandeis.edu WB...@brandeis.bitnet
cs201329
>> has an unwritten policy: "If it's played commercially,
>> don't play it here. In fact, if anyone's ever heard it
>> before, try to avoid playing it." Considering their
>from listening. I have no problem with a station trying to emphasise
>new music, but you have to provide some points of reference or
>guideposts for most listeners. This doesn't mean you have to play the
>B-52s or the Police. But there is a huge gray area between playing just
>the 'commercial' stuff, and this policy of no 'commercial' stuff, and it
I apologize for misconstruing their position -- I was
strongly overstating what actually goes on. In theory,
that's what some of the directors wanted. In practice,
the rank + file DJs just start with what they know +
work outward slowly.
>I don't see how if an artist like Nirvana (or B.A.D, or...) is played
>on a commercial station, they suddenly become 'un-alternative'. The
>MUSIC should be the determining factor, not 'how popular' they are.
Yes, good music is still good music, but for every talented
"discovered" band, there are several equally talented bands
still lurking in the fringes. Why not play them instead?
Here's an anecdote: back when I got my first show on WRUW,
I didn't know very much music. I played a mix of techno +
punk. One day I came in, + there was a note in the log
book saying that all the New Order + Depeche Mode discs had
been hidden. Written shouting matches ensued.
What freaked me out is when Joe (the program director?) came
down on the side of the bandits, when normally he's totally
against anyone messing with the record library. Eventually
the discs were returned, but before that, we all learned a
whole lot about alternative techno bands.
Francis A. Uy
cs20...@umbc5.umbc.edu
Clayton Glad
free-format, and Milo responded:
>Radio format is not some property of commercial radio that somehow
>infected every otehr type of radio station.
It's a charming little view of the world you have in which valiant
young, middle-class, college-educated programmers must daily stave off
attacks of the unwashed and ignorant masses who would homogenize and
debase the world of music to the point of removing 120 Minutes from MTV,
but it's got little to do with this exchange. The claim I was addressing
was that the station under discussion was free-form, yet would not play
a certain, large, segement of music. I find those claims to be
contradictory for reasons obvious to anyone old enough to remember
free-form radio or interested enough to have learned about it.
But it's clear that you're neither of these, since you claim that,
>Every station has a format, period; no one plays everything all of
>the time.
Which is true only in the most trivial sense and again belies your
astonishingly narrow and brief familiarity with radio. There were at
one time radio programmers who could and did play many genres of music in
a single show, as well as reaching beyond the now-inescapable format
music and patter. Many of these DJs had shows on - *gasp* - commercial
stations.
But even your youth is no excuse in this case since many stations today
work with block programming, which provides many formats within a single
day, and there are a number of DJs who play a range of music wide enough
to make a genre classification impossible.
When I lamented that my local college stations rarely played a wide
variety of music, Milo retorted:
>Then they aren't alternative stations, are they? They
>pose as such in order to attract a trendy mindset of listeners;
>stations like this a popping up all across the land. I've al-
>ready mentioned 91X and KROQ here in Southern California, as have
>others on this net channel.
[Actually, those are the *only* stations you ever mention. I like it,
though, "91X, KROQ" has a much better rhythm than "musical intelligence".]
Just two paragraphs ago you were claiming that every station had a format,
an intent. Now when I complain that my local "alternative" stations rarely
play these diverse kinds of music you say that they're not alternative.
I think that a station could provide a good alternative to what's
ordinarily found on radio by providing creative people with the freedom
to program what they want, be it rock, classical, koto music, talk,
drama, whatever. I think they'd have a hard time doing that as soon
limits were placed on what they could do. Limits like, you can't play
this because it's on someone else's playlist, or, you ought to play this
because it's rilly cool and besides we want to continue to get service
from this distributor.
That sounds formatless, though, doesn't it?
Then when I urged the music director to post his stations chart ...
>Be careful what you wish for; you may just receive it.
Can't wait. Maybe it'll be a wildly innovative station, in which case
I'll be very happy to learn about it. Or maybe it'll be another attack
of the haircut clones. Either way it'll help elucidate the difference
between providing an alternative and playing strictly "Alternative" music,
which, after all, is deeply conventional and just as industry-driven as
top-40. It just happens to be a different convention.
-- Clay
Clayton Glad
>As another has posted, you've sold out to the
>CMJ-Hip-New-Release-From-England-Top-40 mindset.
mbu...@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (M. COOPER / B. McQUAID) writes:
>What other poster? I certainly would have rememberd this
>occurence, because I would have replied to it at least as avidly
>as I have your tripe.
That was me, Milo. I noted that all of your posts on music had been
about artists who were well-ensconced on the CMJ charts and asked if
we were justified in concluding that you were of average college-musical
intelligence. You've also said within the last week that your primary
sources of information on new music were the NME and Melody Maker and
that you also counted on 120 minutes. You never responded, avidly, or
otherwise.
>Pop music is NOT as good as obscure music. Pop music is NOT as good
>as obscure music.
Pop music is music which is popular; obscure music is music which is
unpopular or unknown. These each describe contingent properties of
pieces of music and as such can't serve to prove what's "good" or not:
obscure music sometimes comes to be popular and vice-versa.
What it comes down to is that you prefer to focus *your* attention on music
you believe most people choose not to focus *their* attention on. Fine.
But despite your hubristic blatherings on "musical intelligence" your a
priori approach to music amounts to no more than identification with some
particular demographic slice.
-- Clay
Eli Messinger
> Ah, someone else who equates "traditional" with "time-hon-
> ored." I'm very pleased to burst your bubble by telling that you
> are in error to connotate "traditional" with the passage of a great
> amount of time. Traditions can be either old or new, as long as
> they're recognized as recurring.
Perhaps all of my dictionaries are mistaken, but just about every
definition I find of "tradition", and my simpleton's understanding of
the word, suggests that traditions are those statments, beliefs,
customs, etc. handed down from generation to generation. From your
response, I would guess this isn't what you meant. Pardon me for
misunderstanding your use of the word "tradition."
> Don't try to support your point
> by targeting my credibility with some assumed, insubstantially de-
> rived upon air of superiority. I'm not stupid and I certainly don't
> fall for unsupported "facts." History is not relevant here and I
> don't use the word "traditionally" in a historic sense.
They you don't use "traditionally" in any sense that I've seen it used
before. Again, I must not read widely enough. I apologize.
As to your credibility -- you've done nothing to establish any, at
least as far as your knowledge of either radio or the record industry
goes. You've repeatedly mentioned two mediocre examples of the
commercial co-opt of "Alternative" radio (91X, San Diego's, uh, finest,
and KROQ, a station living in a time bubble). What truly Alternative
stations do you listen to? Have you actually ever worked at a radio
station, or do you simply like to theorize from the other side of the
speakers?
My "superiority" is derived from many more years of actually producing
alternative (note small 'a', I don't mean to imply I've ever programmed
"Alternative" radio in the strict "Alternative Radio Format" you've
defined for us) radio than I expect you've had a chance to listen to in
your radio listening lifetime. It is derived from many more years of
reading, writing and discussing the subject than I expect you've had a
chance to do. It comes from being old enough to remember when FM was
young, and underground free-form stations were a reality. It comes
from having been lucky enough to spend time with some of the pioneers
of the FM airwaves. In short, it is derived from a lot more first-hand
experience than you've either had, or admitted to having.
--
"Phish is good." --James Treworgy, March 18, 1992
Clayton Glad
>Oh, so a DJ should just play whatever the hell he wants WHEN he wants,
>be it Classical or Jazz or Rock or Country or Rap or Dance?
>Yeah, I see that happening. NOT.
A DJ should play just whatever she pleases whenever she pleases. That
you find this so implausible just shows how little innovative and creative
radio you've heard.
>It'd never fly because hardly anyone in the world,
>with the exception of those with academic interests in the art,
>likes every kind of music.
It has flown and continues to fly. You don't have to like every kind of
music to hear things of value in and enjoy many kinds of music. On the
other hand, you do have to listen with your ears rather than the assistance
of some A&R or promotions department, a magazine, or your own set of
preconceptions in order to have those kinds of experiences.
> It's based on interaction with college radio DJ's, it's based
>on attention to college radio itself, it's based on magazine
>articles on college radio theory [...]
Finally, something about which I'd like to hear more from you. Please
elaborate on these articles and provide references.
>If it's rehash city but unpopular, then I have no problem
>with an unconventional DJ's airing it.
So nothing that makes the CMJ top-40 ought to be played on an "alternative"
station, right?
>[...] I CAN flick on my tuner and hear My Bloody Valentine for
>absolutely zero cash, providing the station is alternative enough
>to play 'em.
>"Alternative" means "existing outside conventional institutions" in a
>musical sense. So, if you're an alt. DJ and you play some-
>thing commercial, you're out of line.
Jeez. In what parallel universe is My Bloody Valentine "outside
conventional institutions," or not "commerical"?
-- Clay
Eli Messinger
> Jeez. In what parallel universe is My Bloody Valentine "outside
> conventional institutions," or not "commerical"?
This is a great question. Let's take a look, shall we? Assuming that
Milo actually resides in San Diego, then he has available to him a number
of stations from the combined San Diego/Tijuana market.
On the AM side:
600 KKLQ CHR (simulcast w/KKLQ-FM)
690 XTRA
760 KFMB Adult Contemporary/Talk
860 XEMO
910 KECR Religious (simulcast w/KECR-FM)
950 XEAM
1000 KCEO
1040 KIRS Spanish (?)
1090 XPRS
1130 KSDO Newstalk
1170 KCBQ Oldies
1210 KPRZ Religious
1240 KSON C/W (simulcast w/KSON-FM)
1270 XEAZ
1320 KGMG Easy Listening
1360 KPOP Adult Standards & Talk
1420 XEXX
1450 KSPA Adult Standards
Of course, with AM, in the evening especially, you can pick up stations
from all over the Western US. (So if Milo's really trying, for example,
he might be getting his Alternative sounds from an outlet like KBBT in
Portland.)
On the FM side:
88.3 KSDS Jazz
89.5 KPBS Newstalk
90.3 XHTZ
91.1 XTRA
92.1 KOWF C/W
92.5 XHRM
93.3 KECR Religious
94.1 KFSD Classical
94.9 KRMX Adult Contemporary
95.7 XHKY
95.9 KKOS
96.5 KYXY Adult Contemporary
97.3 KSON C/W
98.1 KIFM New Age
100.7 KFMB Adult Contemporary/CHR
101.5 KGB AOR
102.1 KGMG Adult Contemporary
102.9 KSDO Classic Rock
103.7 KJQY Soft Adult Contemporary
104.5 XLTN
105.3 KCBQ Oldies
106.5 KKLQ CHR
Sorry I don't have format info for the Mexican stations (X---). This
info is from the M Street Radio Directory for 1991, so it could be out
of date for some stations.
Although we don't know all the details of Milo's radio universe, what is
apparent is that the San Diego market seems to have only two non-commercial
broadcast outlets. One is the San Diego Community College District's
830 watt KSDS (SDS =? San Diego State), which is listed as a jazz station.
The second is San DIego State's 1750 watt KPBS, which is listed as a
newstalk station. (From the call letters, it might seem plausible that
M Street has the owners of these two stations mixed up.) I also under-
stand that UC San Diego has a cable radio station.
So, if one is to limit one's view simply to this radio market, and
discounting any Truly Alternative insurgency from one of the South of
the Border broadcasters, I imagine that a huge amount of music, including
both My Bloody Valentine and Buddy Cole (at the Swinging Hammond) are
"outside the conventional institutions."
Of course, if one looks beyond this rather undernourished radio market,
to the greater college/"Modern Rock" radio world, only Buddy Cole is left
swinging "outside conventional instututions." (Swing, Buddy, swing!)
Milo--you live in a pathetic, radio blackhole. Why not relocate to some
place that gives your some real Alternatives on the dial?
... eli
Ps. KITS, a (shudder) commercial station in San Francisco plays MBV "now
and again." I guess the local Alternative college stations are going to
have to really think long and hard about what to do with their MBV discs
(I will suggest they mail them to Milo). Oh, wait, none of the college
stations in the Bay Area are Alternative, since they've all been known to
play artists and songs that were currently on the top-40. Never mind.
Sorry, Milo, no free records.
--
"Phish is good." --James Treworgy, March 18, 1992
Eli Messinger
the San Diego market:
690 XTRA News
860 XEMO Spanish
950 XEAM Talk (Satellite)
1090 XPRS Spanish
1270 XEAZ Spanish
1420 XEXX Spanish
90.3 XHTZ Urban Contemporary
91.1 XTRA Album Progressive
92.5 XHRM CHR/Urban Contemporary
95.7 XHKY Spanish
104.5 XLTN Spanish
Even with the added information we find San Diego sadly lacking
in terms of alternatives on the radio dial. The often mentioned
"X91" is the only commercial "Alternative", and the non-commercial
end of the dial appears to be as dead as... air.
I'm left wondering: If "My Bloody Valentine" is played on KITS
in San Francisco, but nowhere on the commercial dial in San Diego,
does that mean MBV is a mediocre pop band in the Bay Area, but
a daring, unknown band in San Diego? Can I really change the
quality of their music simply by flying their records South?
Where do Boston (17 non-commercial stations! 3 in the >92 MHz part
of the FM band!), Chicago (*31* non-commercial stations! 1 of them
on AM! Ok, lots of them are on the same frequencies, so you can't
get them all at once, but still...) and New York (a relatively
paltry 14 non-comms) stand on this? Are you in or out?
Joe Finete
I don't know what started this thread, but I looked at the listings of the
stations in San Diego and a least a quarter of them are out of date. (I am
originally from San Diego, and just spent the last week there.) I won't list
the corrections because most of the people on the net probably don't care, but
I will say that the San Diego market consists mostly of Top 40, Adult
Comtempary, and Easy Listening stations. There are two classic rock stations,
one AOR station, and one Modern Rock station (91X). The college and public
radio stations only play Jazz, Classical, and News/Talk. There is another
station that has been labled "alternative" (KCR 98.9) but you're more likely
to hear house music on that station, and their signal is weak.
--
___________________________________________________________________
|Joe Finete jfi...@cats.ucsc.edu|
|'Happy, Happy...Joy, Joy!'_______________________________________|
Ofer Inbar
>I'm left wondering: If "My Bloody Valentine" is played on KITS
>in San Francisco, but nowhere on the commercial dial in San Diego,
>does that mean MBV is a mediocre pop band in the Bay Area, but
>a daring, unknown band in San Diego? Can I really change the
>quality of their music simply by flying their records South?
>
>Where do Boston (17 non-commercial stations! 3 in the >92 MHz part
>of the FM band!), Chicago (*31* non-commercial stations! 1 of them
>paltry 14 non-comms) stand on this? Are you in or out?
Speaking for one of those 3 Boston stations in the other half of
the band (Oh Scott Fybush, what are the other two? :), I can tell you
where we stand on this question.
As I have stated before, it is self-defeating for an "alternative"
station to choose what they will play based on the playlists of the
surrounding commercial stations. Avoiding what they play gives them
the power to control what you play, which is exactly what you think
you're trying to avoid, no?
Also, it is not the place of the noncommercial radio station to
judge the "quality" of an artist. I can understand a commercial
station making such judgements, for the purpose of being popular and
thus profitable. But we in noncommercial radio are not bound by
advertisers to play what is popular.
Taking the above two points together, the answer to your question is:
1) MBV is MBV no matter where they are being played. Their "quality"
is not relevant to programming decisions. They are simply another
record in the stacks, available to the DJs.
2) Whether surrounding stations play or do not play MBV is of little
relevance. We will not place any emphasis on any artist with
respect to the other artists in our collection (actually, in our
case local music is an exception to this rule), and will certainly
not change that attitude if other stations in the area play them.
Bernie Rauscher
>>Pop music is NOT as good as obscure music. Pop music is NOT as good
>>as obscure music.
And gl...@Csli.Sta responds:
>Pop music is music which is popular; obscure music is music which is
>unpopular or unknown. These each describe contingent properties of
>pieces of music and as such can't serve to prove what's "good" or not:
>obscure music sometimes comes to be popular and vice-versa.
You wouldn't want to forget that some of the very finest "alternative"
music was/is pop music. The Ramones (Gabba Gabba Hey!), X-ray Spex
(I'm a Cliche), Buzzcocks, Adverts, .... on and on ... were all pop
groups. --And they all knew it.
A current example I'd put in the same category as some of the above is
E.I.E.I.O out of Madison, WI.
Pop music (and that's what rock music is, --sorry) loses it's appeal when
taken too seriously. This applies to "obscure" bands as well as U2 and
Sting (to cite some people who take themselves too seriously).
Paul Silver
>>Sure, lousy music won't get played by our DJs (who are free to select
>>their own music, we do not have a rotation or a set playlist). But
>>because we are chartered as an ALTERNATIVE outlet, we have chosen to
>>play stuff that does not get played by the commercial stations.
and Clayton Glad wrote:
>Who's "we"? The Music Director and other station management? If so
>it's rather a stretch to say that you have a free-format. Each individual
>DJ? That just means that you're selecting from a pool of people who
>share your tastes. Either way *somebody's* dictating what can and can't
>be played on your station -- something you share with every commercial
>station.
And I reply:
The DJs select their own music. And the DJs have widely varied tastes.
DJs are not selected on the basis of their taste matching that of
the program director. It is based on their ability to operate the
equipment and understand the philosophy of the station.
Clayton wrote:
[...]
>And neither do the "alternative" stations in my area. Those stations
>play music culled from a pool of industry-defined "college rock". As
>far as I can tell, they are genre stations, much in the way that country
>music stations or jazz stations are.
>
>There are some happy exceptions, of course (as there are on commercial
>stations). Maybe your station is one. I urge you in that case to
>publish your station's chart so we can see just how it's possible for
>a station to provide a true alternative by freeing itself from the
>pod-like conformity that has enveloped college radio.
And I reply:
This is exactly what I was talking about when I said I had a real
problem with the definition of "alternative music" and that I would
write a post about that at a later date. Well, I guess I will
compose that today and post it this evening.
I don't have a copy of our current playslist with me, but to give you
and idea of the kind of stuff we play, it ranges from bands like
Anti-schism (hardcore punk) to X-Clan (rap) to Miles Davis (jazz)
to Kronos Quartet (experimental classical) to Nurse with Wound
(industrial) and so on. All of these have appeared on our charts
during the last few months.
Paul Silver
[...]
> There is a real lack in this country (and probably in others) of
>stations that will let the listener decide. Stations that will give
>people access to as much music as possible, without letting a DJ's
>personal tastes dictate what music people are exposed to.
The problem with "letting the listener decide" is that you end up
being another top 40 station when you do that. WZRD *does* play any
request if we have it in our library and it hasn't been played in the
last couple of hours. But if someone calls in asking to hear the
latest Michael Jackson or Michael Bolton songs, we tell them we
don't have it and won't play it. The majority of students who attend
Northeastern Illinois University would rather have WZRD be a classic
rock or top 40 station, and if we let them decide what we played,
there would be a large loss to Chicago radio.
> At WBRS, we guarantee that we *will* play on the air *any* music we
>receive. Yes, that includes unsigned, unknown, or even "lousy"
>artists. Only outside coercion will prevent us from playing
>something. (i.e. certain blatantly unconstitutional FCC
>regulations...)
> "We don't judge the music, we just play it."
You even play all the top 40 records you receive? The new Mariah
Carey record? Van Halen? Bon Jovi?
Clayton Glad
[a list of San Diego radio station formats, revealing that they don't
stray beyond top-40, adult contemporary, and easy listening, and CHR]
Joe Finete writes:
>[...] I looked at the listings of the stations in San Diego and a least
>a quarter of them are out of date. [...]
>I will say that the San Diego market consists mostly of Top 40, Adult
>Comtempary, and Easy Listening stations. There are two classic rock stations,
>one AOR station, and one Modern Rock station (91X).
Thanks for the, er, repetition (hey, this must make it true).
I think Eli meant to point out that the San Diego market seems to be an arid
wasteland of dreary formula radio. I guess you're confirming that, as have
other native San Diegans I've spoken with.
It's important to point out because San Diego's status as the second largest
city in California might lead out-of-staters (not to mention San Diegans) to
believe that it has much in common culturally with Los Angeles or San
Francisco, when in fact it's far closer to, say, Phoenix or Salt Lake City
in that regard.
-- Clay
Eber Lambert
Even worse: The stations my cable company picks up from LA are as bad
as the SD stations.
Some corrections:
AM 690 ... not news but Sports (great talk show) with the pitiful task
of defending the perenial local losers
91X .... 7 years past is prime. To paraphrase: IF this is alternative
music then I'm Lawrence Welk.
KIFM .... not New Age... worse... endless hours of White Bread Jazz.
el
--
soren--Ms. Jackson if you're nasty
>I think Eli meant to point out that the San Diego market seems to be an arid
>wasteland of dreary formula radio. I guess you're confirming that, as have
>other native San Diegans I've spoken with.
>It's important to point out because San Diego's status as the second largest
>city in California might lead out-of-staters (not to mention San Diegans) to
>believe that it has much in common culturally with Los Angeles or San
>Francisco, when in fact it's far closer to, say, Phoenix or Salt Lake City
>in that regard.
Did somebody mention Salt Lake City? As it happens, we got San Diego
beat, since not only are there TWO (nearly identical) "Modern Rock"
stations, but an honest-to-god non-commercial listener-supported station
(as well as two standard-issue NPR University stations).
I have no idea if either of the "Modern Rock" stations play My Bloody
Valentine or not, since I stopped listening to them a long long time
ago. Based on past history, I rather suspect they don't.
I don't doubt that SLC and SD are culturally similar. My first reaction
to SLC was "this is just like Los Angeles with all the interest and/or
danger removed", which is pretty much what one hears about San Diego.
--
"Tell me, who *hasn't* felt close to the edge and down by the river"
soren f petersen : i AM NOT : --Andy Whitman
spet...@peruvian.utah.edu : THE university OF utah :
"How could I dance with another/When I saw him standing there" --Tiffany
Clayton Glad
>I don't have a copy of our current playslist with me, but to give you
>and idea of the kind of stuff we play, it ranges from bands like
>Anti-schism (hardcore punk) to X-Clan (rap) to Miles Davis (jazz)
>to Kronos Quartet (experimental classical) to Nurse with Wound
>(industrial) and so on. All of these have appeared on our charts
>during the last few months.
But then you obviously *don't* exclude by fiat music which happens to
be played on commercial outlets. Miles may be the most broadcasted jazz
musician of the last four or five decades.
And how staggeringly stoopid and unfair to your listeners it would be if
you were to represent jazz as if Miles had never existed.
-- Clay
Paul Silver
[...]
>Your "tradition" again? Which goes back, what, three years? Four? Sorry,
>Milo, but some of us have been around *creating* the traditions of non-comm
>and college radio for a lot longer than you. The "tradition" of reactively
>avoiding music simply because it's gained commercial exposure is a recent
>phenominon in the history of college radio. Your very notion that there is
>a historical "format of college radio" belies your shallow understanding of
>the history of college radio to begin with. As another has posted, you've
>sold out to the CMJ-Hip-New-Release-From-England-Top-40 mindset.
[...]
>Again, this notion of why alternative stations exist is based on what? Your
>last quarter as a DJ at your local college station?
[...]
I find this tone to be somewhat bigotted. How do you know how long
this person has been involved in college/alternative radio? Just
because of his attitudes about why an alternative station exists?
I guess you would think the same of me, because I share his
attitude (though not necessarily his taste in radio programming).
Guess what. WZRD has had a policy of being a true alternative to
commercial stations (i.e. avoiding the playing of stuff that gets
airplay elsewhere) not just for the past 3 or 4 years as you suggest.
But since its inception, some 18 years ago. This is not a recent
occurance in college radio.
And I personally have been involved in college/community/alternative
radio for 6 out of the past 8 years, as a DJ and music director.
So please calm down and don't start making accusations that you know
nothing about.
Paul Silver
interested, hit the 'n' key now (or whatever it is you press with
your newsreading software to skip to the next post).
What is alternative? What does it mean? Webster's New Riverside
Dictionary lists this as a definition:
"Existing outside traditional or conventional
institutions or systems."
What are the traditional or conventional institutions or systems when
it comes to music? The first things that pop into my mind are
major record labels, MTV, and commercial radio stations. Yet where
do most people these days turn to for so called "alternative music"?
Major record labels, MTV, and commercial radio stations.
The major labels saw a new market develop during the late 70s and
through a good part of the 80s. But they weren't cashing in on it
very much then. So, they decided to do smething about it. They
bought up independent record labels and signed some of the bigger
independent bands. Too bad for the bands, because just like every
other band, they were "assigned" a producer, and the record came out
sounding the way the producer wanted it to sound.
Soon, bands were striving to reproduce this sound so they too could
sign to the majors. And you now have a whole generation of
"alternative bands".
Folks, what passes as alternative these days just isn't alternative.
The word alternative, when used as a modifier for the word "music",
has lost all meaning.
Alternative Music has become a marketing ploy used by the majors to get
that share of the market they missed out on over the last decade.
When you have college radio stations playing their "alternative
college music" releases from Epic and Warner Bros. and DGC, and so
on, and climbing over each other to get those perks from the majors
(back stage passes, tour jackets, etc), all you really have is minor
league versions of the commercial radio stations.
Alternative Music used to mean something significant. It was something
that was "our own". We made it, our friends made it, but the money
grubbers in the music industry didn't. Alternative music has been
coopted and the masses are buying into the scam.
Just step outside your bias for a moment, and think objectively,
how different is that new grunge band on Epic from a 1970s arena
cock-rock band, the kind we hated so much and turned away from?
How different are most so called "alternative" bands from popular
bands that we shun? There really isn't that much difference.
Now, not everything is as bleak as it may seem. There is a *real*
alternative music out there. But it's not so easy to find. You can't
find it on MTV or at your local Camelot Music or Tower Records.
Most likely you won't even find it on your local college radio station.
But it's out there. And I live for the stuff.
I hope this has made some sense. Reasoned discussion is welcome,
flames should be avoided. Thanks.
Brian May
/ Paul Silver / Dischord Records /
{most deleted}
>(industrial) and so on. All of these have appeared on our charts
>during the last few months.
Doesn't the fact that you _have_ charts detract from your statement that you're not
dictating to the listeners what they should like?
brian
--
| Brian May, DIT, CSIRO, | Open Communications Project |
|723 Swanston st, Carlton, | TEL +61 3 282 2613 -- FAX +61 3 282 2600 |
| VIC 3053, Australia. | email Bria...@mel.dit.csiro.au |
Gary L Dare
>
>Folks, what passes as alternative these days just isn't alternative.
>The word alternative, when used as a modifier for the word "music",
>has lost all meaning.
It's come to be as meaningful as "new wave" was about ten years ago
(plus or minus two years) ...
When you run the definition of "alternative rock" across people from
places like France and Holland, don't be surprised if they answer
with, "Rush" ... (I tried it again last week, it still works.) The
big difference between how "alternative" is defined versus its older
sibling "new wave" is that "alternative" is America-centric. A lot of
"alternative" music from over there caught the notice of people on
this side of the pond because they hit a European Top 20 pop chart ...
gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare The number of Canadians who --
> g...@cunixB.cc.columbia.EDU approve of Brian Mulroney: 11%*
> g...@cunixc.BITNET believe Elvis is alive: 15%
soren--Ms. Jackson if you're nasty
>They [major labels]
>bought up independent record labels and signed some of the bigger
>independent bands. Too bad for the bands, because just like every
>other band, they were "assigned" a producer, and the record came out
>sounding the way the producer wanted it to sound.
This certainly happened, although less so of late. Do you really
think that *Goo* or *Doolittle* or *Candy Apple Grey* or *Land of
Rape and Honey* or *Uncle Anaesthesia* or *Louder than Love* or *Our
Beloved Revolutionary Sweetheart* or *Too Dark Park* (or for that
matter *Nevermind*) are the vision of some corporation producer? If so,
then the vision of these producers runs astonishingly close to that of
the bands themselves.
If anything, the significant development of the last few years is
the realization on the part of the majors that letting the bands do
it their way actually makes commercial sense. One of the reasons
that the majors are making such inroads is the fact that they are
putting out undeniably good music.
>When you have college radio stations playing their "alternative
>college music" releases from Epic and Warner Bros. and DGC, and so
>on, and climbing over each other to get those perks from the majors
>(back stage passes, tour jackets, etc), all you really have is minor
>league versions of the commercial radio stations.
I agree that it is (in some deep and meaningful sense) unfair that Sonic
Youth and Nirvana have lots of industry muscle behind them, and Viv
Akauldren, Some Velvet Sidewalk and Whorl don't. I completely agree that
that K and Resonance and Slumberland have put out some great music in
the last couple years. However, so has DGC, and I REFUSE to let any
misbegotten ideology stop me from appreciating it.
>Just step outside your bias for a moment, and think objectively,
>how different is that new grunge band on Epic from a 1970s arena
>cock-rock band, the kind we hated so much and turned away from?
>How different are most so called "alternative" bands from popular
>bands that we shun? There really isn't that much difference.
In other words, it isn't "truly" alternative unless it conforms to
1981 harDCore dogma?
You step outside YOUR bias for a moment and stop dictating your
aesthetic limitations at me.
As it happens, I share a fair number of your musical prejudices.
I also try to recognize the fact that blindly following them is
often a bad thing. If a band makes a great album that gets compared
a lot to Black Sabbath, I submit that the correct response is NOT
"I hate 70s hard rock, therefore I don't like this album any more".
A better response would be "Maybe I was wrong about Black Sabbath.
With two dollars and a visit to a used record shop, and I can find
out for myself".
Eli Messinger
# Your "tradition" again? Which goes back, what, three years? Four?
Paul Silver...
> I find this tone to be somewhat bigotted. How do you know how long
> this person has been involved in college/alternative radio?
See those weird, hook shaped things at the end of the first three sentences?
(Oops, just like the one at the end of the last one.) Those are called
"question marks", they are intended to indicate a question.
# Sorry,
# Milo, but some of us have been around *creating* the traditions of non-comm
# and college radio for a lot longer than you.
That, however, was a statement, and perhaps incorrect, we have yet to see.
I am assuming, based on the limited vision of radio that we've seen in Milo's
posts, that he's probably not been listening to alternative and non-commercial
radio for the past 15 years I've been working init. THat was a guess, if
it's wrong, we can be sure that Milo will tell us.
> Just
> because of his attitudes about why an alternative station exists?
Nope, not at all. It is because his apparent understanding of the
history of college radio, and any station outside of his native market
seems to be extremely limited. It's because he seems to have no concept
that the "Alternative" stations that now populate the commercial end of
the radio dial are faint imitations of the truly alternative radio that
once lived there.
> Guess what. WZRD has had a policy of being a true alternative to
> commercial stations (i.e. avoiding the playing of stuff that gets
> airplay elsewhere) not just for the past 3 or 4 years as you suggest.
> But since its inception, some 18 years ago. This is not a recent
> occurance in college radio.
What is a very recent occurance in college radio, at least among the
half-dozen stations that I've worked at, and the hundreds who's playlists
and airchecks I've heard, is such a microscopic view of "alternative".
What is a "true alternative"? Does it mean you don't play any songs
that are heard on commercial radio? Or no artists heard there? Or no
music played on the same configuration of instruments as songs played
on top-40? Do you avoid playing songs by songwriters named Bob because
Bob Dylan has had hit singles? Are you uncomfortable because you're
using the same radio-electronic principles that commercial stations
use? (And if so, are cable stations more alternative, but getting less
so with the increased presence of cable FM)?
> So please calm down and don't start making accusations that you know
> nothing about.
I know *plenty* about the subject at hand, which is college radio. As
do many others here, perhaps Milo included -- we really can't tell yet.