Category: Music

Posted on
by

The recent controversy over Star 98.7’s decision to drop their morning talk show (since reversed) and try out a new format brings up one of those great mysteries of the ages: Why do so many radio stations play the same small list of songs over and over?

I understand the desire to play popular songs frequently, since it should improve ratings. I know record labels still pay radio stations to make sure their songs get played, even though it’s technically illegal. (They use intermediaries these days, but I don’t think anyone’s fooled.) But it seems to me that there must be a limit to the effectiveness of playing the same song over and over.

Heck, even Star, masters of the binge-and-purge playlist, got pissed off at Ryan Seacrest once when he played the same song 5 or 6 times in a row. This was probably 3 or 4 years ago, and I caught a few minutes of him saying that he didn’t understand what management was so upset about. “They’re always telling us to support the music,” he said.

Is that what it takes? Playing the same songs 10 times a day is OK, as long as no one song gets played 10 times in a row? Even though it takes up time that could be used to play more songs that might, radical as this might sound, get listeners interested in a new artist or album? That they might actually go out and buy?

In the late 1990s there were several LA-area radio stations that would play deep cuts off an album—songs that hadn’t been released as singles—or the album versions of songs that had. All gone. A few years ago, there was a station that had a policy of no repeats between 9am and 5pm. Gone.

Is it just the push toward the lowest common denominator, spurred on by the rise of giant radio conglomerates? (Clear Channel owns a huge chunk of LA radio.) Maybe. There’s a lot more room on satellite radio, and whenever I’ve been in a store or restaurant that plays satellite radio, I start hearing those album cuts and songs other than the Top 40 of a genre.

Of course, the way cable TV has gone—with former niche networks branching out for that lowest common denominator, giving rise to the lament of 500 channels and nothing on—this may be only a temporary renaissance. The same cycle of homogenization seems to hit all media, turning vitality into banality over and over.

Posted on
by

Since Star 98.7 has suddenly decided to play actual music in the mornings last week, I’ve listened to it a couple of times on the way to work. They do still seem to like playing the same 10 songs over and over again, so there’s only so much I can take before switching over to another station, but something strange jumped out at me about their new slogan.

“Today’s Music Alternative”

I’m sure they intend it to mean an alternative source for music, but it sounds like an alternative to music. And considering they’ve dropped their talk shows and DJs in favor of more time for music, I don’t think that’s the message they’re trying to convey.

Posted on
by

Over the weekend, Something Positive’s Monette met her girlfriend’s half-brother, who wants to write showtunes when he grows up. Friday’s Real Life featured Tony taking Greg to task over singing a song from Monty Python’s Spamalot. Where did the showtunes=gay (or at least effeminate) stereotype come from? While we’re at it, where did the art=gay stereotype come from?

I mean, most of the people who actually write musicals are probably straight. Not all of them, of course, and some of the exceptions (Cole Porter, for instance) are rather prominent. And I would guess that a majority of the actors and audience are probably straight, also.

I have no doubt that the percentage of gays in the arts is higher than in the general population. I studied drama in college—all I had to do was look around to see that. But that’s a far cry from “most.” I mean, to pull some numbers out of thin air, let’s say it’s 20%, or even 30%, instead of the commonly-cited 10%—that would be like saying an industry with 30% women is primarily female. Continue reading →

Posted on
by

Just got an email from Disney on Broadway (I assume I must have given them my email address when I bought Lion King tickets several years ago) offering me advance tickets to their new Broadway show, Tarzan.

WTF?

Admittedly, I thought The Lion King was an odd choice for a stage musical, and it turned out to be quite good. But Tarzan? I mean, it’s a weird enough choice for a musical in the first place, but Disney’s cartoon wasn’t even really a musical—it was a movie with a Phil Collins soundtrack.

I wish I could remember exactly what Aimee Mann said last week when she introduced “Save Me.” It was something like “Yes, this is the song that lost the Oscar to Phil Collins and his cartoon monkeys monkey love song.” (Katie remembered it.) Apparently she says this regularly.

Bleah. I’d rather they put together a new tour of Beauty and the Beast. With any luck it’ll still be playing when we finally get around to visiting New York. (I honestly didn’t know it was still playing now until I went to look at the Tarzan info.)