Hi all. I’m wrapping up a long day of travel (hmmm, let’s see, it’s been 19 hours so far) but wanted to report from the Classical Music session at the Public Radio Program Director’s Meeting which is going on this week at the Renaissance Hollywood Hotel.
Frank Dominguez of WDAV, Robin Gehl from WGUC, and Peter Dominowski from Market Trends Research talked about the Midday Classical Music Testing Project of 2007, sponsored by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. They reported some results from stations that had changed their programming as a result of the study.
The first question they asked stations was “what are you playing more of since the research?”. (And I have no idea how to punctuate that last sentence!) The answers included: more of the well known pieces and favorites, more short pieces (hence more variety), reduced wind music and harpsichord, no pounding music or non-melodic music, excerpts from longer works, less “sleepy” music, and no folk-related or crossover music. One station did away with all vocal music in that daypart.
The reactions of listeners to the changes (measured empirically from phone calls and emails) was mostly positive. The only negatives were excerpting movements and overplaying of chestnuts.
Based on the chatter after the session, for some this conversation has been going on for years and they find it overly analytical. Others find it helpful to filter their programming decisions through this new set of parameters to keep listenership high.
To me the most interesting part of the session was when Peter played multiple samples of forward-promotion from a number of stations. He had listened to 40 one-hour segments and he put together a montage of what virtually every announcer does: a “laundry list” of what’s coming up. Hearing them one after the other like that, you realize it’s just a waste of air. It doesn’t make anyone want to listen.
Peter then opened up a lively discussion about how to make promos interesting. The people in the room responded as though they were starving. They loved having a chance to brainstorm creative ideas. I sure wish these conferences would leave time for more of that kind of collaborative creative thinking. We get so wrapped up in our surveys and studies and tweaking of the playlists and figuring out how to control the announcers, that we sometimes forget to inspire each other and incubate the wit and creativity that make great radio.
Subscribe Via Email
Enter your email address to subscribe to Scanning the Dial and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Thank you for subscribing.
Something went wrong.
Good point, Marty. Of all the public radio conferences I’ve been to, many of them really seemed short on creative thinking and sharing of programming. People often remarked how odd it was that at the program directors’ conference you heard so little actual programming.
The conference where people seemed the most inspired by what they saw and heard was the Third Coast International Audio Festival, which is devoted to audio documentary and experimental work from all over the world. I found it fascinating to hear so much creative radio, and everyone there always seemed to get a big charge from it. It’s a radio conference that actually seems to be about radio.
Marty, thanks so much for reporting from this conference!
I’ve been to one AMPPR Music Personnel Conference, but not to any PRPD conferences. I try to keep up by reading about them and listening to any audio that is shared; I don’t think our station has anyone at this PRPD.
I read the classical music testing project in detail, and followed discussions about it on the AMPPR list. I respect and am curious about ways to understand how to better serve listeners, but I find some aspects of this research and its application frustrating.
There are *so many* aspects to a piece, it seems difficult/impossible to narrow down what people are responding to and then to apply it to the selection of other pieces.
I program on a pretty unscientific system but it’s been working so far for me: 1) don’t get too crazy, but 2) don’t be boring.
I just keep challenging myself when I look at my playlists–”was that too easy/standard?” “would listeners have already heard every single piece on that list?” “am I playing too many unusual things, so listeners feel like they’re out at sea?” “is it varied enough?” “am I changing directions too quickly?”
I like where the process of challenging myself, while also inviting listeners to comment (and considering what they have to say) is taking me so far. I’m pretty new at all this, so I may change my mind over time. I’m also worried about “hard” rules, such as “we never play X”—I prefer “we play Y less often” or “think about why you’re playing Z.”
Last year, when I first programmed my own shift, I was so excited to play one of my favorite pieces–the Elgar Cello Concerto. I played it during the noon hour, and then received emails saying it was too depressing for lunchtime. Now, I’d still play that piece (of course!) but probably not over the noon hour…I guess that’s dayparting, but it’s also not very quantifiable.
I also got several emails when I first started about all the “whiny string music” I played–I am a violist, so I have to watch being drawn to the music I’m more familiar with. So, I was surprised at the reduction of wind music on some playlists–wind quintet music always gets positive response here (though I know “the plural of anecdote is not data”)
Hmm, my reply has turned awfully long, but this stuff is on my mind quite often. The one AMPPR conference I sent myself to really introduced me to a lot of things. I look forward to listening to and taking part in more of these discussions through conferences, blogs, and discussion lists.
-Mona
Announcer/Producer
West Virginia Public Radio
Classically Speaking: http://www.wvpubcast.org/blogs.aspx
(These are all my thoughts and opinions and don’t necessarily reflect those of my employer)
I have read through just about every link that Marty presented. I want to say thank you for such a complete and cohesive report on what is going on at this assemblage