Dave Van Dyke Interview - The Sands Report

Richard Sands got the “radio bug” at 5 years-old, listening to his transistor radio.  After a long stint programming the iconic Live 105 in San Francisco, Richard ventured out to create “The Sands Report,” the #1 Alternative radio news weekly. It's a forum where he reports on the comings and goings of the format, while always offering up his insightful take on Alternative – and radio in general.

Richard recently interviewed Bridge Ratings CEO & Founder, Dave Van Dyke, about traditional radio’s dilemma. This interview was published in the March 15, 2023 issue of The Sands Report.

Richard: Last month you had a blog post about “Radio’s Dilemma.” What is that dilemma, Dave?

DVD: It should be a god-send, but radio has too much music to consider and expose for their listeners. When one considers all the music that has come before, there is an ever-expanding pool of possible songs. From a catalogue perspective, music discovery has increased in recent years as the internet has reminded original consumers of classic tunes to resample and discover and revive lost gems as younger generations discover that they love much of the older music as well as the new. Lots of classics. Plus, new music! Current music presents its own quagmire for radio programmers as listeners consume current and recurrent music differently than previous generations. For example, in addition to new album releases, many of today’s major artists may drop multiple new tracks from forthcoming albums in a given week. Part of radio’s dilemma is figuring out how to properly expose all this music.

RS: Streaming has made it a whole new ballgame, hasn’t it?

DVD: Exactly. Consumers have access to just about all the music ever recorded and have created self-selected libraries of favorites, interesting discoveries and classic finds. With artists dumping so much music into the marketplace, it’s a field day for music lovers, but presents a nightmare scenario for programmers. The industry generally continues to use the old-school 1980s playbook, reflecting airplay exposure based on the way labels used to release music.

RS: With so much new music constantly coming at us, how can radio sift through and figure out what is the best new music to play?

DVD: This is where it gets tricky. Radio has proven—in general—that it does very well “playing the hits” and that is what continues to bring listeners back to the dial. However, we’re at least ten years beyond when radio should’ve pivoted to systems that represent the way people actually consume music. Digital music consumption has changed the landscape and radio’s systems have not kept up. It takes courage in today’s radio business environment to do things so differently that it gives a perceived change to the listener. Considering how many wonderful tools are available to them to help sift through the avalanche of new music monthly, those tools really haven’t changed programming all that much.

RS: What is research showing?

DVD: We’ve found on-demand streaming and other forms of traditional music research provide very different listener reactions to music. One analysis revealed that traditional music testing of hooks gives false positives about the lasting benefit of a song’s true appeal. On-demand streaming analysis shows actual consumption appeal over time. We’ve seen many examples of songs radio clings to in high rotations when actual consumption of that song is fading. Part of this problem stems from programmers programming by consensus, i.e. utilizing airplay charts to make music decisions. Some songs maintain significant passion on our streaming charts for weeks or months, most, though, fade. It’s knowing which songs to jettison and how quickly.

RS: And your conclusion is...?

DVD: Move songs through the system faster. Our StreamStats streaming data allows programmers to see quickly whether a song has potential. If it doesn’t expand its reach in our research with their audience, it is advisable to drop it.

We’ve found that many songs that are major hits that do fade in consumption rank, do so not because of “burn” or building negatives, but because of a more benign reason: other newer songs are replacing the time spent with weekly music consumption.

RS: What’s the best way for radio to meet the demand for new music?

DVD: It’s going to require completely different clocks or sequence structure. We have seen stations we consult turn songs over much quicker—not necessarily rotating them faster, but rather retaining them on the list for shorter spans and as research guides you, hold on to a handful of exceptional high consumption/high passion titles and either discard or place songs that have stickiness into different categories. Programmers can measure “stickiness” with on-demand streaming data or other research tools.

RS: Thanks for your time, Dave. Last question: Is there an opportunity here to work with labels? The labels should be our partners in the ever expanding world of music.

DVD: Though we are often on opposite sides of the desk, both parties benefit from a strong relationship. Unfortunately, more often than not, the label has different goals than the programmer, but there are times when promoting the artist, the label is interested in is a benefit to the programmer/station. Our best broadcasters are already partnering with labels...It is possible to do on-air features of songs a label is working allowing a station for example to get listeners involved for their responses to new songs that show promise through streaming data.

Podcast Advertising Slump? Why?

As the economy shifts away from expansion to contraction, media consumption and advertising support is uncertain. Podcasting has experienced extraordinary growth in users and financial benefit. By 2024, there could be close to 505 million global podcast listeners.

The world of podcasting has a huge listenership with comedy and true crime taking the top spots for the most popular genres.

This gives businesses a profitable opportunity to capitalize on advertising and influencer marketing.

In fact, podcast ad revenue is expected to exceed $2B in 2023.

The world of advertising is ever-evolving, and as new technologies and platforms emerge, advertisers often shift their budgets to keep up with trends. One area that has seen a decline in spending over the past few years is podcast advertising.

Podcasts have become increasingly popular in recent years. In fact, over half of the US population have listened to a podcast, and one-third of them listen to at least one podcast per month. This popularity has led to an increase in the number of podcast shows available, with a corresponding increase in the number of advertising opportunities.

However, despite the growing listener base and advertising opportunities, advertisers are starting to reduce their spending on podcast advertising. Here are a few reasons why:

1. Limited audience targeting options: Compared to other advertising channels like social media or search advertising, podcasts have limited audience targeting options. Advertisers generally have to rely on the content of the podcast itself to determine whether the audience is the right fit for their product or service.

2. Lack of unified measurement standards: Unlike other advertising channels, podcast advertising lacks unified measurement standards. While several measurement metrics are available, it's difficult to compare them across different shows or platforms. This makes it tough for advertisers to determine the effectiveness of their campaigns.

3. Low conversion rates: While most podcast listeners are highly engaged, they may not be in a buying mindset while listening to a show. This can lead to lower conversion rates for the advertiser, which can impact the ROI of their campaigns.

4. High CPM prices: One of the biggest factors limiting podcast advertising is their cost per thousand (CPM) pricing model. Many podcasts charge high CPM rates, which make it challenging for smaller brands with limited budgets to compete.

In conclusion, while podcasts remain popular among listeners and advertisers, there are several factors limiting their effectiveness for advertisers. Until these issues are addressed, we may continue to see a decline in ad spend in this sector. However, with the rise of new technologies like AI, the possibilities for podcast advertising may evolve and grow in the future.

Traditional Music Testing vs. On-demand Research

Music testing and on-demand streaming are two of the most widely used methods of measuring the success of music in the radio industry, used to gain insight into listener music preferences.

Music testing has been in use for decades, and it is the process of testing a new song or album by playing it for a group of individuals who represent the target audience.

On-demand streaming music research, on the other hand, involves collecting streaming data from streaming platforms such as Spotify, Apple Music or Amazon music.

And because on-demand music streaming allows a consumer to listen to music whenever and wherever they want, the information is more relevant to actual consumption.

Each research method measures different behaviors and each offers radio programmers variances on preference.

Traditional music testing generally rates songs by consumer response to short 7-10 second “hooks” or usually the most familiar portion of a song such as its chorus. The theory is that upon hearing this familiar segment of a song, the consumer reacts in a positive or negative way and scores the song based on this subjective reaction. Our analysis has shown that the “rating” achieved from this method reflects attitude about the “hook” and does not represent how a listener consumes music in real world circumstances.

On-demand music streaming research is pure data which represents true consumption of songs.

One significant difference in reliability of the streaming data as a research tool is that on-demand music streaming data reflects songs actively chosen and consumed by the user. Traditional music testing uses pre-selected lists of songs radio programmers are interested in learning about.

Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, and as such, the results of each method may vary. This report aims to explain the reasons why traditional music testing results may differ from on-demand streaming data.

1. The sample size The sample size used in traditional music testing is usually smaller than charts composed of the number of people who stream music on-demand. Music testing may involve testing a new song on a group of people who represent the target audience or utilize a small sample of listeners who are directed to an on-line music test website where songs are rated and typically involve 100 or more songs. In contrast, on-demand streaming data includes millions of listeners who may have different tastes and preferences. As such, the sample size of traditional music testing may not accurately represent an overall targeted population's preferences.

2. The testing environment - Traditional Music testing is usually conducted in a controlled environment, such as a testing facility or hotel meeting room, where the participants are given specific instructions and asked to rate the music based on different criteria. On the other hand, on-demand streaming data is collected in real-life situations in which listeners are free to choose the songs they want to stream. This freedom may result in listeners choosing songs that they would not have chosen in a music testing environment, leading to different results.

3. The time frame - Traditional Music testing is usually conducted weekly if online or a couple of times a year if conducted in a hotel ballroom. Another approach tests songs before a song or album is released to the public. On-demand streaming data is collected continually. As such, traditional music testing may not accurately predict how a new song or album will perform in the market. On-demand streaming data provides real-time information on how the music is consumed in the market, and as such, it is a more accurate representation of the public's preferences.

4. Demographics Traditional music testing may not accurately represent the diversity of a target audience. Music testing may involve a specific group of people who represent the target audience, but this group may not be diverse enough to represent the different age groups, genders, races, and cultures that make up the overall population. On the other hand, on-demand streaming data includes millions of listeners with diverse backgrounds, providing a more accurate representation of the population's preferences.

5. Technology - Traditional music testing can be conducted in a variety of ways from old school pencil and paper questionnaires to website interactive sessions or high tech hand-held devices that consumers use to track their impressions while listening to music. On-demand streaming is more straightforward in which a listener visits favorite streaming platform - either desktop or mobile - and streams music on their own schedules. This ease-of-use aspect removes bias associated with consumers proactively traveling to a hotel or website to provide opinions about a song’s personal appeal.

In addition to the factors that may cause traditional music testing results to differ from on-demand streaming data, some songs may perform better with traditional music testing than they do with on-demand streaming data. Here are some reasons why:

1. Familiarity bias Traditional music testing may favor songs that are familiar to the test audience. In a controlled environment, test participants may have a bias towards songs that they have heard before, leading to higher ratings for those songs. However, on-demand streaming data provides a more accurate representation of how a song performs in the real world, where listeners are free to choose songs.

2. Niche appeal Some songs may have a niche appeal that may not be reflected in traditional music testing. For example, a song may appeal to a specific subculture or group of people who may not be represented in the traditional music testing audience. In contrast, on-demand streaming data allows for a wider range of listeners, including those with niche tastes, to access and enjoy the song.

3. Timelessness Traditional music testing may favor songs that are trendy or currently popular, while on-demand streaming data allows for the discovery and continued enjoyment of songs over time. A song that may not have performed well in traditional music testing may gain popularity over time and become a hit through on-demand streaming.

4. Emotional connection Traditional music testing may not accurately capture the emotional connection that listeners have with a song. A song that may not have performed well in traditional music testing may still have a strong emotional connection with a particular group of listeners, leading to continued streaming and success on on-demand platforms.

View fullsize

Click on image to enlarge

This example of a popular song from 2022, “Numb Little Bug” by Em Beihold, reveals how this song’s appeal based on actual streaming consumption reduced over time, while airplay exposure on radio increased due to traditional music testing results.

While traditional music testing and on-demand streaming data are both useful methods of measuring a song's success, there may be instances where a song may perform better in one method over the other. Understanding the reasons why a song may perform better in traditional music testing can help music industry professionals make informed decisions about how to promote and distribute the song to a wider audience.

Conclusion:

Traditional music testing results may differ from on-demand streaming data due to several factors, including the sample size, familiarity bias, the testing environment, the time frame, and demographics. On-demand streaming research sourced to local radio station listeners reflect actual consumption, not just opinion.

Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, and as such, it is essential to have an understanding of what each method measures in order to get a comprehensive understanding of song success. By understanding the factors that contribute to the differences in results, music industry and radio professionals can make informed decisions about music appeal and song passion and whether audiences will respond positively.

For a deeper dive into Bridge Ratings’ on-demand streaming music research service, StreamStats, contact Dave Van Dyke at dvd@bridgeratings.com or 323.696.0967.

Let’s discuss your music research needs with a short conversation and how our StreamStats music streaming research can help align your playlist to your audience’s actual preferences. Read more here. A StreamStats Overview