not looking good for Planet Rock on 105.2 in the west midlands lost another 100,000 listeners taking it to 206,000. Can't see it lasting much longer on 105.2, could a switch to Absolute or even Kiss be better?
I think Planet Rock is far more niche than Kerrang! was. Kerrang! was very mainstream during daytimes, whereas PR play less well known songs. I've often wondered whether Bauer should've put Absolute Radio on 105.2 instead, but the FM licence has a 30hours of specialist output requirement, and Absolute appear to be moving away from these types of programmes recently. There was an outcry when PR replaced Kerrang!, I can't imagine a Kiss rebrand ever happening!!
Signal 107 is another Midlands station that is suffering badly - down to just 24k listeners, in a TSA of over 1m. The rebrand and merging of The Wolf with the ex-MNA stations really hasn't worked. They now have less than half of the listeners The Wolf had despite the TSA being 2.5 times bigger. I remember at the time of the relaunch, many posters on here predicted that Signal 107 would provide serious competition to Beacon/Free, particularly in Shropshire. I would imagine that Orion have bigger things to worry about, i.e. Global, than Signal 107!
10% Increase from the last Quarter on Breakfast show listeners. Well done RB.
Of course, the last time RB managed a RAJAR turn-around like that was at Star North East -- and he was "let go" shortly afterwards, Here's hoping Jack FM Berkshire are a bit more patient/sensible.
LOL. A more discerning ear, eh? What a load of snobbish cobblers. The backlash you speak of was probably the very loud grumblings of a few stuffy gout-ridden high court judges and Morse wannabes in the leafy suburbs of Surrey. The BBC should cater for the majority of their paying customers and not pander to a very small minority who probably happen to complain more articulately to the broadsheets.
I won't even entertain the notion that opera and jazz require more complex encoding - orchestral music I may concede on for the more elaborate pieces but jazz? Jazz can often be one of the least complex musical forms out there when compared to many others.
ANY music loses key fidelity at under 192kbp/s in my experience and ALL music has its intricacies that are lost when compressed to the extremes that our archaic DAB infrastructure has forces us to use. If the BBC only broadcast some programmes in 720p and up because they required a finer detail but were only watched by a select few there would be equal outrage by the wronged majority.
I suspect that the truth is that the majority of music lovers don't use radio as their medium of choice any more given the better options available but Radio 3's older audience probably don't embrace those as readily.
If Radio 3 was consumed by the masses, I'd have no argument. It isn't, so I have - resources are scarce and should be deployed more sensibly.
In an ideal world, I'd love for every station to have decent audio quality and DAB+ used properly can move someway toward that (while realistically expecting Eureka 147 will never provide affordable multiple audiophile services). Maybe Radio 3 could push the start of a switchover to DAB+, but this would be indicative of what the audience would like Radio 3 to broadcast at (probably at the same bitrate as now but in AAC+). In 1978, Radio 3's audience took up FM and its better audio quality far more readily than listeners to the other networks, maybe the same could work with DAB+, but Radio 3's remit is practically the core definition of PSB. It won't go unless the BBC goes.
Does DAB+ at a lower bit rate sound better than DAB at 192kbps? Or is there a point at which there is no advantage to using DAB+?
Good question. I'm sure someone out there has done listening tests between DAB+ and DAB quality and you could do your own experiments in audio quality, but making note the overheads on a DAB+ broadcast which you don't have with a regular AAC+ file (a 64Kbps DAB bitrate has a 8Kbps PAD as used in Australia for DAB+ broadcasts and effective audio bitrate of 49.6Kbps).
DAB+ audio bit rate = s * 0.9 - p where s = sub channel bit rate (e.g. 64kbps) and p = Programme Associated Data (8kbps is used in Australia)
Signal 107 is another Midlands station that is suffering badly - down to just 24k listeners, in a TSA of over 1m. The rebrand and merging of The Wolf with the ex-MNA stations really hasn't worked. They now have less than half of the listeners The Wolf had despite the TSA being 2.5 times bigger. I remember at the time of the relaunch, many posters on here predicted that Signal 107 would provide serious competition to Beacon/Free, particularly in Shropshire. I would imagine that Orion have bigger things to worry about, i.e. Global, than Signal 107!
I wonder if in the Stoke on Trent area you could get Heart or Capital if their rajars would be so high then .
Signal 107 is another Midlands station that is suffering badly - down to just 24k listeners, in a TSA of over 1m. The rebrand and merging of The Wolf with the ex-MNA stations really hasn't worked. They now have less than half of the listeners The Wolf had despite the TSA being 2.5 times bigger. I remember at the time of the relaunch, many posters on here predicted that Signal 107 would provide serious competition to Beacon/Free, particularly in Shropshire. I would imagine that Orion have bigger things to worry about, i.e. Global, than Signal 107!
Agreed, i'm surprised no one has stepped in yet, as far as i'm aware the line up is exactly the same as when it launched surely the PD should have made some changes well before now. Very odd to see a station increase its TSA by a very large amount and half the listeners it had before.
As said though its in a competitive market place and and sure Signal 1 would suffer badly if there was a Heart or Capital in there TSA.
Leaving aside the archaic inverted snobbery in this thread (yes, I did mean to say "archaic": it may stress its support for modern culture but actually, in its denial that the triumph of the deregulated market over paternalistic certainties in the politics and culture of Britain has happened at all, its pretence that a long-dead structure still survives, it is the most old-fashioned position in the world), could it be that Capital Xtra is down in London partially because a lot of the new people, like Avicii and Hardwell, are in a style which is famously less popular in London (and always charts higher in Scotland)? Along with, yes, older listeners realising it's not for them anymore, same thing with a small and predominately non-white inner-city audience as happened nationally with Moyles fans.
Signal 107 is another Midlands station that is suffering badly - down to just 24k listeners, in a TSA of over 1m. The rebrand and merging of The Wolf with the ex-MNA stations really hasn't worked. They now have less than half of the listeners The Wolf had despite the TSA being 2.5 times bigger. I remember at the time of the relaunch, many posters on here predicted that Signal 107 would provide serious competition to Beacon/Free, particularly in Shropshire. I would imagine that Orion have bigger things to worry about, i.e. Global, than Signal 107!
The trouble with Signal 107 is that despite being a good station it has little or no presence in the areas it broadcasts to. I would be surprised if anyone in Telford knows that it is there. Plus the signal from that 107.4 transmitter is pathetic, it always has been even when that ghastly Telford FM was on the air.
Free Radio may have a stupid, cringeworthy name but it is a good station and there are posters, signs and stickers all over Telford advertising the station
The trouble with Signal 107 is that despite being a good station it has little or no presence in the areas it broadcasts to. I would be surprised if anyone in Telford knows that it is there. Plus the signal from that 107.4 transmitter is pathetic, it always has been even when that ghastly Telford FM was on the air.
Free Radio may have a stupid, cringeworthy name but it is a good station and there are posters, signs and stickers all over Telford advertising the station
Free certainly do seem to go to town with their marketing. I don't know if other stations do anything similar, but recently I've noticed that if any big artists have been performing in the midlands, Free have been there giving out branded novelty items. To give examples when Bruno Mars was in Birmingham recently, they were handing out "Bruno Mars bars" with the Free logo on the wrapper, I think they were handing out "Free Radio Dolly Mixtures" when Dolly Parton was in the area too! It's a bit cheesy, but at least they're getting out and about in the area and raising awareness of the brand.
I still think they're not quite there with the music policy though, still too much 80s on the FM stations.
LOL. A more discerning ear, eh? What a load of snobbish cobblers. The backlash you speak of was probably the very loud grumblings of a few stuffy gout-ridden high court judges and Morse wannabes in the leafy suburbs of Surrey. The BBC should cater for the majority of their paying customers and not pander to a very small minority who probably happen to complain more articulately to the broadsheets.
I won't even entertain the notion that opera and jazz require more complex encoding - orchestral music I may concede on for the more elaborate pieces but jazz? Jazz can often be one of the least complex musical forms out there when compared to many others.
ANY music loses key fidelity at under 192kbp/s in my experience and ALL music has its intricacies that are lost when compressed to the extremes that our archaic DAB infrastructure has forces us to use. If the BBC only broadcast some programmes in 720p and up because they required a finer detail but were only watched by a select few there would be equal outrage by the wronged majority.
I suspect that the truth is that the majority of music lovers don't use radio as their medium of choice any more given the better options available but Radio 3's older audience probably don't embrace those as readily.
If Radio 3 was consumed by the masses, I'd have no argument. It isn't, so I have - resources are scarce and should be deployed more sensibly.
I'm not someone who naturally embraces change, but compared to the Radio 3 audience, I'm a positive revolutionary. Most of them haven't got over it not being called the Third Programme any more. The new controller of Radio 3 has an impossible task because any change at all is decried as 'dumbing down'. You could have the morning output in Latin and the afternoons in Greek and it'd be an affront to Lord Reith.
I've no problem with Radio 3's existence or its funding being wildly disproportionate to its listening figures. But there comes a point where it may need to absorb a bit more pressure than it has done. There are things on Radio 2 and Radio 4 Long Wave that you could make a convincing case for moving across but the resultant tidal wave of green ink would make even the hardiest controller take fright.
This week Radio 3 is broadcasting around three hours of programmes about the Anglo-Saxon era, five hours of jazz, music from the Latitude festival, 75 minutes of electronic music, an original play for radio, five hours of the music of Cole Porter, and five two-hour music and arts shows featuring folk, world music and contemporary (as opposed to classical) orchestral music.
And that's in a week when they're also broadcasting the Proms.
The majority of Radio 3's output is still classical music. The fact is Radio 3 should not be exempt from cuts when other networks are facing cuts. Also why should listeners of Radio 2 and 6 Music have to put up with low bit rates on DAB when much of their output is just as worthy of requiring the bit rates that Radio 3 gets?
In an ideal world, I'd love for every station to have decent audio quality and DAB+ used properly can move someway toward that (while realistically expecting Eureka 147 will never provide affordable multiple audiophile services). Maybe Radio 3 could push the start of a switchover to DAB+, but this would be indicative of what the audience would like Radio 3 to broadcast at (probably at the same bitrate as now but in AAC+). In 1978, Radio 3's audience took up FM and its better audio quality far more readily than listeners to the other networks, maybe the same could work with DAB+, but Radio 3's remit is practically the core definition of PSB. It won't go unless the BBC goes.
Good question. I'm sure someone out there has done listening tests between DAB+ and DAB quality and you could do your own experiments in audio quality, but making note the overheads on a DAB+ broadcast which you don't have with a regular AAC+ file (a 64Kbps DAB bitrate has a 8Kbps PAD as used in Australia for DAB+ broadcasts and effective audio bitrate of 49.6Kbps).
DAB+ audio bit rate = s * 0.9 - p where s = sub channel bit rate (e.g. 64kbps) and p = Programme Associated Data (8kbps is used in Australia)
Radio 3 listeners took up FM more quickly? Of course they did! No other music network was on FM all the time. How could Radio 1 listeners have taken up FM when it wasn't even available on FM most of the time up until as late as 1987? Pure snobbery then that Radio 3 was more worthy of FM just like it is snobbery now that Radio 3 is more worthy of higher bit rates on DAB.
The majority of Radio 3's output is still classical music. The fact is Radio 3 should not be exempt from cuts when other networks are facing cuts. Also why should listeners of Radio 2 and 6 Music have to put up with low bit rates on DAB when much of their output is just as worthy of requiring the bit rates that Radio 3 gets?
Can't understand why an enjoyment of quality and excellence is seen as snobbery.
As for bitrate, I'm not technical and haven't a clue how it works but surely as with anything of quality it consumes more, rather like a Rolls consumes more petrol than a mini.
As I've said earlier in the thread excellence is measured in terms of quality not quantiT Cost per listener is a totally irrelevant figure. Some things cost more. Get over it.
Can't understand why an enjoyment of quality and excellence is seen as snobbery.
As for bitrate, I'm not technical and haven't a clue how it works but surely as with anything of quality it consumes more, rather like a Rolls consumes more petrol than a mini.
As I've said earlier in the thread excellence is measured in terms of quality not quantiT Cost per listener is a totally irrelevant figure. Some things cost more. Get over it.
Not just snobbery but arrogance as well. Radio 2 and 6 Music provide high quality programming but they are left with crap bit rates. Radio 2 as well as Radio 1 have faced cuts so should Radio 3.
Why has Heart Yorkshire, North east and north west levelled off and have started to bounced back since march? Whiles Wales is up 2.5%
I may have read the figures wrong, but isn't it just the Heart that covers south and west Wales (which for some reason is called Heart Wales) which has seen an increase, whereas Heart North and Mid Wales' figures are down.
I also note that Capital North West and North Wales' figures are down compared to when it was Heart.
I'm happy to be corrected if I've misinterpreted these figures.
I don't get chance to hear that station much but I listened online a few months back and there were no beds, it was a very much stop-start affair with nothing being slick but then I don't know if that's representative of their routine output.
I don't know also if it is just the one PD they have, I suspect it is and to have one person effectively setting the whole direction of the station would be unheard of in a larger TSA. Global will have analysis going on left right and centre of its market, Lincs seem to stick a wet finger in the air and point 'that way'.
Regardless of all this I would be really nervous as an employee as they still have staff presenters, I would be nervous as their station management as they're the biggest losers if Global do get their claws in, and I wouldn't like to be in the company of any of the directors tonight.
Just checked Trax and they only lost half a percent and were up share and KCFM also seem to be doing well and are up. So what is going wrong with their flagship station other than perhaps the people of Lincolnshire are fed up with the mindnumbingness of it all?
Not just snobbery but arrogance as well. Radio 2 and 6 Music provide high quality programming but they are left with crap bit rates. Radio 2 as well as Radio 1 have faced cuts so should Radio 3.
Its all very well slinging insults about, that's pretty much par for the course on here, especially when a contrary view is offered.
However, you've avoided the question as to why one is guilty of snobbery (and now apparently arrogance) for liking such as Radio 3.
Not when we're paying for it. If it were truly a public service and was free to all, I'd agree. The fact the majority are essentially suffering low bitrates when a minority are enjoying a much better service makes it imbalanced.
And why classical music? There are plenty of other things the BBC have abandoned due to cost irrespective of the public interest.
Well it would never be free. Even if there was no licence fee you'd be still paying through taxes. There's no such thing as free public service broadcasting.
Its all very well slinging insults about, that's pretty much par for the course on here, especially when a contrary view is offered.
However, you've avoided the question as to why one is guilty of snobbery (and now apparently arrogance) for liking such as Radio 3.
Where did I say that? I listen sometimes to Late junction.I did not say it is snobby to listen to Radio 3. I said it is pure snobbery to believe that Radio 3's output is far superior than any other network and should get special treatment. It should not be exempt from cuts and should not be given special treatment with bit rates on DAB.
Not when we're paying for it. If it were truly a public service and was free to all, I'd agree. The fact the majority are essentially suffering low bitrates when a minority are enjoying a much better service makes it imbalanced.
And why classical music? There are plenty of other things the BBC have abandoned due to cost irrespective of the public interest.
It depends on how you look at it. The bitrates enjoyed by listeners to Radio 3 are used on one standalone station - Radio 3 itself.
Radio 1 listeners have a supplementary/complimentary station (1extra) as do those listening to Radio 2 (its simply called 6music rather than 2extra).
There's four choices of output for Pop Music and its various offshoots rather than the one choice offered to Classical Music listeners. Perhaps if R1 + 1extra were lumped together and the same for R2 + 6music then pop Music listeners could also enjoy the same higher bitrates.
Where did I say that? I listen sometimes to Late junction.I did not say it is snobby to listen to Radio 3. I said it is pure snobbery to believe that Radio 3's output is far superior than any other network and should get special treatment. It should not be exempt from cuts and should not be given special treatment with bit rates on DAB.
To sum up:
You listen to Radio 3, and you're not snobbish
Other people listen to Radio 3, and they're not snobbish either
The programmes on Radio 3 are not aimed at snobbish people
Yet it is snobbery to allocate resources to Radio 3 to enable it to provide programmes which are not snobbish to people who are not snobbish?
You listen to Radio 3, and you're not snobbish
Other people listen to Radio 3, and they're not snobbish either
The programmes on Radio 3 are not aimed at snobbish people
Yet it is snobbery to allocate resources to Radio 3 to enable it to provide programmes which are not snobbish to people who are not snobbish?
Nah. It just isn't.
I really think you have worse problems than being snobby. Not understanding proper English for starters. If Radio 3 can't provide its programming for less why should Radio 1 or 2? Why should other services have to put up with worse sound quality. Bob Harris or 6 music's freak zone is just as in need of high quality sound as anything on Radio 3.
Comments
I think Planet Rock is far more niche than Kerrang! was. Kerrang! was very mainstream during daytimes, whereas PR play less well known songs. I've often wondered whether Bauer should've put Absolute Radio on 105.2 instead, but the FM licence has a 30hours of specialist output requirement, and Absolute appear to be moving away from these types of programmes recently. There was an outcry when PR replaced Kerrang!, I can't imagine a Kiss rebrand ever happening!!
Signal 107 is another Midlands station that is suffering badly - down to just 24k listeners, in a TSA of over 1m. The rebrand and merging of The Wolf with the ex-MNA stations really hasn't worked. They now have less than half of the listeners The Wolf had despite the TSA being 2.5 times bigger. I remember at the time of the relaunch, many posters on here predicted that Signal 107 would provide serious competition to Beacon/Free, particularly in Shropshire. I would imagine that Orion have bigger things to worry about, i.e. Global, than Signal 107!
Of course, the last time RB managed a RAJAR turn-around like that was at Star North East -- and he was "let go" shortly afterwards, Here's hoping Jack FM Berkshire are a bit more patient/sensible.
DAB+ audio bit rate = s * 0.9 - p where s = sub channel bit rate (e.g. 64kbps) and p = Programme Associated Data (8kbps is used in Australia)
I wonder if in the Stoke on Trent area you could get Heart or Capital if their rajars would be so high then .
Agreed, i'm surprised no one has stepped in yet, as far as i'm aware the line up is exactly the same as when it launched surely the PD should have made some changes well before now. Very odd to see a station increase its TSA by a very large amount and half the listeners it had before.
As said though its in a competitive market place and and sure Signal 1 would suffer badly if there was a Heart or Capital in there TSA.
Hes 30 in a few weeks. Hopefully they can "get rid" in a couple of years as hes "too old".
When they do I bet he full on bitches about it too!! >:(
The trouble with Signal 107 is that despite being a good station it has little or no presence in the areas it broadcasts to. I would be surprised if anyone in Telford knows that it is there. Plus the signal from that 107.4 transmitter is pathetic, it always has been even when that ghastly Telford FM was on the air.
Free Radio may have a stupid, cringeworthy name but it is a good station and there are posters, signs and stickers all over Telford advertising the station
BBC Sussex & Surrey 10% down to 9% (-1%)
Eagle FM 29% down to 26% (-3%)
Heart Susssex 29% down to 25% (-4%)
Where have those folks gone I wonder?
Susy? Redstone? To London stations?
Free certainly do seem to go to town with their marketing. I don't know if other stations do anything similar, but recently I've noticed that if any big artists have been performing in the midlands, Free have been there giving out branded novelty items. To give examples when Bruno Mars was in Birmingham recently, they were handing out "Bruno Mars bars" with the Free logo on the wrapper, I think they were handing out "Free Radio Dolly Mixtures" when Dolly Parton was in the area too! It's a bit cheesy, but at least they're getting out and about in the area and raising awareness of the brand.
I still think they're not quite there with the music policy though, still too much 80s on the FM stations.
I'm not someone who naturally embraces change, but compared to the Radio 3 audience, I'm a positive revolutionary. Most of them haven't got over it not being called the Third Programme any more. The new controller of Radio 3 has an impossible task because any change at all is decried as 'dumbing down'. You could have the morning output in Latin and the afternoons in Greek and it'd be an affront to Lord Reith.
I've no problem with Radio 3's existence or its funding being wildly disproportionate to its listening figures. But there comes a point where it may need to absorb a bit more pressure than it has done. There are things on Radio 2 and Radio 4 Long Wave that you could make a convincing case for moving across but the resultant tidal wave of green ink would make even the hardiest controller take fright.
Can't understand why an enjoyment of quality and excellence is seen as snobbery.
As for bitrate, I'm not technical and haven't a clue how it works but surely as with anything of quality it consumes more, rather like a Rolls consumes more petrol than a mini.
As I've said earlier in the thread excellence is measured in terms of quality not quantiT Cost per listener is a totally irrelevant figure. Some things cost more. Get over it.
I may have read the figures wrong, but isn't it just the Heart that covers south and west Wales (which for some reason is called Heart Wales) which has seen an increase, whereas Heart North and Mid Wales' figures are down.
I also note that Capital North West and North Wales' figures are down compared to when it was Heart.
I'm happy to be corrected if I've misinterpreted these figures.
Just checked Trax and they only lost half a percent and were up share and KCFM also seem to be doing well and are up. So what is going wrong with their flagship station other than perhaps the people of Lincolnshire are fed up with the mindnumbingness of it all?
Its all very well slinging insults about, that's pretty much par for the course on here, especially when a contrary view is offered.
However, you've avoided the question as to why one is guilty of snobbery (and now apparently arrogance) for liking such as Radio 3.
Well it would never be free. Even if there was no licence fee you'd be still paying through taxes. There's no such thing as free public service broadcasting.
It depends on how you look at it. The bitrates enjoyed by listeners to Radio 3 are used on one standalone station - Radio 3 itself.
Radio 1 listeners have a supplementary/complimentary station (1extra) as do those listening to Radio 2 (its simply called 6music rather than 2extra).
There's four choices of output for Pop Music and its various offshoots rather than the one choice offered to Classical Music listeners. Perhaps if R1 + 1extra were lumped together and the same for R2 + 6music then pop Music listeners could also enjoy the same higher bitrates.
You can't have your cake and eat it
To sum up:
You listen to Radio 3, and you're not snobbish
Other people listen to Radio 3, and they're not snobbish either
The programmes on Radio 3 are not aimed at snobbish people
Yet it is snobbery to allocate resources to Radio 3 to enable it to provide programmes which are not snobbish to people who are not snobbish?
Nah. It just isn't.
why not? They were delivering what management asked of them. Why blame the presenters?