We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
Survey Reveals What Public Does and Doesn't like in FM
An ^ge"'^Y
Looks
A^
by PRESTON H. PUMPHREY, of Maxon, fnc, New York City
THE things we of Maxon, Inc. discovered about FM in a special study we made a few months ago are the kind of things that only an advertising agency would be likely to investigate. The big qtiestion we asked ourselves was: "What clo the five or six hundred thousand owners of FM sets think of FM?"
The first thing we asked them was: "What prompted you to buy your FM set?" 37.8% said, "Superior Tonal Quality." This was the dominant answer in each of the four cities. On a national basis, static suppression came second with 19%. National figures can be misleading. In New York, 32.6% gave static suppression as a reason for buying FM; in Philadelphia it was 9%; in Milwaukee 7.1%;
and in Detroit 5.6%.
In Philadelphia, "Superior Programming" on FM Stations turned up as an important reason for the purchase of FM, with 36.2%, and in Milwaukee this was given as the reason by 16.3%.
There was another odd and interesting reaction to this question. We were surj)rised to get answers which added up to: "I bought FM because I wanted the newest in radio." In New York, this response was given by 4.6% of the owners, and in Phihid(;lphia by 7.5%,. However, the Mid-west pidure is (jiiite dilferent; Milwaukee L^(i.l";,, Dclioit 31.7%.
liii iicxi (|ii(sii()ii \vc asked was: "Has FM Lived iij) lo ^()l^ Fx])e(l:H ions?" Only 23% said ihai l\\ liadiTi mci ilicii expectations. We asked liuse disap])()iiu ed sel owners, "If nol, why not?" In New Yo» k and PhiladcJpina. ihc icasons loi
disappointment were about 54% with FM reproduction and 46% with FM programs; in Milwaukee and Detroit, the situation was reversed with 51.7^'o dissatisfied with program, and the smaller percentage dissatisfied with the (|uality of FM reproduction.
The second question comparing FM with AM was: "If Jack Benny, Charh'e McCarthy or your favorite star should be on FM as well as AM, which band woidd you ttme in?" Of those answerin^^ the question 79.5^^ said FM; 8% AM; and 4% said either one.
You may wonder about those 8% who said that they prefer AM for their favorite program. We did. They total 75 people oiu of the 936 homes interviewed. Sixteen of them said that the spoken word is clearer on AM. Stich an answer provides a warning for FM operators, a warning that announcers and other speakers should not crowd the mike and accentuate the sibilance of their speech.
The amount of listening on the FM receiver varies greatly in different cities, and it varies roughly in pro{)ortion to the number of FM stations in the city.
We also asked the listeners what programs now received on FM they liked best. Their vote was overwhelmingly for nuisi(al programs; the answer probably being due to the fact that the programs on KM are overwhelmingly nuisical. Mu(h of the dissat islaction Avas also expressed in (onnection with these same progianis; dissatisfaction due to imper!(•( I and worn records whose defects were more easily recognizable on FM transnn'ssion than they might have been on a slandatd broadcasting station.
234
RADIO SHOWMANSHIP