KMET Program Director George Harris believes his original listeners are "still rock 'n' rollers" and to win them back (how did you lose them?) he will feature "good old rock 'n' roll" and special features such as Psychedelic Psupper (Pop Eye, "KMET Joins the Ranks of the Metal Defectors," by Patrick Goldstein).
Doesn't he realize that rock 'n' rollers want to hear all the music--new wave to heavy metal (if that's where his imagination stops)--just as long as it rocks? His proposed format will succeed only in turning KMET into the Yuppie KRTH.
The format aside, the more serious argument I have with his station is the puerility of the jocks. Most people mature as they grow older; not so the people on KMET.
My advice: 1--Change the personnel or make them grow up; 2--Decide upon an "oldie but goodie" or adventurous format-- sitting on the fence is boring; 3--Go for it.
Strike up the bands for Harris. Having hailed from both the baby-boomer era and Philadelphia, I have long been appalled at the lack of truly classic rock radio in a market as gigantic and sophisticated as L.A.
Heavy metal has its place with a predominately teen-age and fickle audience, but to ignore the vast audience of older rock fans is nothing short of irresponsible.
Playa del Rey
Patrick Goldstein obviously has a problem with Gene Clark and Michael Clarke's forthcoming Byrds tribute show (Pop Eye, March 17), even though it is clearly advertised as a tribute and not a reunion. Fine.
But why Goldstein found it necessary to attack Gene's contributions to the Byrds is indefensible. Gene was in fact a creative force in the group: On the first Byrds album, Gene wrote three songs and co-wrote two more with Roger (then Jim) McGuinn; David Crosby wrote no songs, Chris Hillman wrote none.
On the second Byrds LP, Gene wrote three songs while McGuinn co-wrote one with Crosby. Neither Crosby nor Hillman ever sang a Byrds hit; Gene did--"Feel a Whole Lot Better."
Credit where credit is due, please.
Davis is Clark's manager.
I propose that Connie Johnson follow up her "What's Wrong With Bimbo Rock" article (March 10) with a story on the "true" bimbos of today--the "men" (I use the term loosely) who parade around our local video channels sporting laquered "do's," painted-on-pants with artificially stuffed crotches and more makeup than Joan Collins.
I'm referring to "artists" such as Zot, Stone Fury, Wham!, Spandau Ballet, Duran Duran, Roman Holiday, Autograph, Ratt, David Lee Roth, Prince, etc., etc.
There is currently truly good female rock (Annie Lennox, Tina Turner, Cyndi Lauper) advancing its reputation, while "Bimbo Rock" as personified by Madonna works just as quickly to set it back, along with the image of the female in our society.
My 15-year-old son's initial attraction to Madonna's obvious sex kitten posing quickly turned to permanent disdain. He passes her off as looking and acting like a "slut" . . . not the kind of girl he will stay with very long, as a discerning male.
At 15, he's matured past his preference for "toys." Isn't it about time our society did?
NITA VAN HOUSTEN