Nobody human knows why, but somewhere along the way, the programmers of commercial music radio stations decided they were scared of the music they played.
It’s all a bit odd, considering that the music is supposed to be the hook that catches the people in order to play them the shouty commercials. However, at some point somebody said, “Let’s be frightened of the songs we play!” and since then every radio station (except for the far more adventurous BBC and the pirate stations) has been frightened of the songs they play, sheep that they are.
The fear of the songs leads them to speed them up and shorten them. The pitch doesn’t alter, but the songs run faster than they should. That’s awfully confusing for listeners who then buy the real song and hear something very different to what they heard on the radio.
Then, as the radio station programmers are so scared of the songs, they let them play all in a lump together without allowing the DJs or presenters to dare say a word. The idea of saying something as a song is starting or finishing is a big no-no.
The songs are scary and so nobody dares go near them.
This is all a bit odd, considering that the public perception of the main product of the radio station is the songs it plays.
Even more odd is that they stop playing the songs for up to 10 minutes at a time so they can waffle, play adverts, read the news and weather, play more adverts, and do anything but play songs. I can only guess they are so scared of the songs that they try to keep them from playing for as long as possible. Once they start playing in their usual uninterrupted lump, I can only assume that the presenter has rushed out of the door and is being hosed down with disinfectant in order to cleanse him of any infection he might have contracted by being near the songs.
Sigh. It wasn’t always like this.
Indeed, once upon a time an offshore radio station called Laser 558 coined the phrase, “You’re never more than a minute away from music”.
Although it wasn’t always so in reality, the listener’s perception was that everything, including all the inane chatter, the news, the adverts, the trailers, only ever took an absolute maximum of a minute before the next song would duly start to play. That being the case there was never a reason to tune away.
These days, with radio stations playing the songs all in one congealed lump and then having huge lumps of ‘non-songs’ (the talking and the ads), listeners are very often a very long time away from the next song. That’s why they immediately press the button to hop to another station, and never hear all the adverts being played at them. Poor advertisers!
Now, of course, if they subliminally knew (by constantly being told) that they were never more than a minute away from a song, they probably wouldn’t bother to hop away. They’d be loyal to the radio station, and they’d actually hear the adverts too. Win-win all round.
As I mentioned, the pirate stations in the major cities don’t fear the songs. BBC Radio 1 doesn’t fear the songs. So, why does commercial music radio fear the songs? Why doesn’t it allow the presenters to ride the songs, stop all the lumps, space things out nicer and keep everything constantly moving with the listener never more than a minute away from a song?
England's England 
The speeding up and editing of songs isn't a new thing. It was certainly happening 13 years ago when I got my first commercial radio gig. If anything, they're a bit better at it now. Sometimes they would just crudely pitch the song up on the CD player and record it in resulting in that horrible squirrelling effect. At least it's usually a time-stretch (or compress) option they're using these days. Also, editing a “boring” instrumental bit out for radio isn't a massive problem – although we've all heard entire verses removed from songs, I'm sure. Infuriating when it's a song you love.
It can add to the momentum and pace of a station, as well as allowing more songs per hour. If nothing significant is taken away, I don't really see the problem. The song is for the entertainment of all of us and the problems is causes for a small minority who may choose to purchase it are inconsequential for a radio programmer. If fact, they might actually be quite chuffed that they got the “longer” version when they paid for it! IMO processors make a much bigger difference to the way a song is heard on the radio and I certainly don't have a problem with a station designing their sound to suit their listeners' preferences.
It's the other point you make that I completely agree with. I find commercial radio completely unlistenable because of those massive chunks of non-entertainment: adverts, presenters telling me to go to a nightclub that I'm never going to go to, telling me to “get down to the massive opening of Carpets-U-Like” for the chance to win a doormat and a massive sell for a show later in the day that I might have listened to if all of this hadn't forced me to tune out.
You made a point a while ago about more inventive ways of radio advertising and I really think you're onto something there. Those blocks of advertising can be a very disappointing investment for many clients and can make commercial radio incredibly difficult to listen to for many of us.
Oh, and if Chris Evans could resist the temptation to begin talking halfway through each song, that would be nice as well.
LikeLike