The Infinite Dial

Can't any one organize a movement to protest
such a huge loss of Smooth Jazz in DC?

"The primal need to relax in this country..." What a sublime observation! If someone did their homework (research) and designed a format around that core concept, I'd love to hear it. As much as I love Sade, I'd bet it wouldn't sound like any smooth jazz or NAC station we've grown accustomed to. The next great formats need to be designed around concepts like this, not straight demos or simply what you can sell.

Your way off on this one. The marketing is the problem? I don't think so. Well for one thing
Jazz fans hate Smooth Jazz stations, it's like
calling Taco Bell genuine authentic Mexican
cuisine. Is the reverse true, that suburbanites
are afraid of the word jazz, don't think so.

Here's the real problem the music has never
changed. It's burned especially the crossover
R&B and pop, reminds me of a morning gig I had
back in 1990 at a NAC station. It's the station must likely to play at the dentists office or on perhaps a shuttle bus. There is the inevitable Marvin Gaye hit, Kenny G, Sade, perhaps Walter Beasley, Kirk Whalum, etc.

The real opportunity in certain markets is to mix new standards, latin jazz, jazz classics, and the best NAC. Drop the old warhorses that have played for 20 years and add some real character to the product. Won't happen likely because as long as the research geeks are in charge, they have trouble studying something that nobody has ever done.

I don't necessarily disagree with any of that, Z--I didn't say marketing was the problem, just that it was _a_ problem. It sounds like you are a bit closer to the product than I am--who is doing it right, in your opinion?

A spot on assessment of a format that's down but not out. I've been working with this music since the early 80's as a programmer and host of specialty shows and the real problem lies in the fact that the passion and soul of this presentation was simply squeezed out by research geeks who had their own agenda and then made everyone else who thought differently the problem. To many of the GM's drank the kool-aid, bought into this flawed perception which lit the fire that has helped to burn the house down. It's a format that has certainly paid the price in this consolidated world we move in. There are two types of listeners to the format and everybody comes for the tempo and texture. The secondary audience doesn't know one sax player from the other and they don't care because it just sounds and feels good. The second and most primary listener digs the tempo and texture but wants to hear new music, format artists and very limited spins of "Songbird". There is some great stuff on the web or on the bird and the good stations will not go away but we've got to get back to the content and passion that produced the magic in the first part. It was intelligent radio for people who had a brain and the money to back up their convictions. Not a format to cater to P2's. Not this low common denominator mess we are left with. I'm hoping and trying to make something happen that will come out on the other side of this down turn. Hopefully in much better shape and with a new direction. It's still viable but won't exist in it's bastardized direction that is featured today. It can exist on many different levels and directions and it's up to the content people to start putting that back together again.

I disagree re: KTWV. Yes, their imaging & jocks (aside from Brian McKnight which I just don't get why he's on there at all) are top notch, but take a look at their playlist. It is extremely heavy with R&B oldies and I'd estimate 65% of the instrumentals are now covers. They are sorely lacking in the Smooth Jazz variety they had maybe just five years ago. I expect you'll start to see them take a hit in the near future as well...more and more we will discover that this garbage stations are calling Smooth Jazz has a quick burnout factor.

Wow! Well said! What I find rather troubling is that operators are willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Mr. Webster is right too many GM's and group heads have been drinking the kool aid. Over the past few years Smooth Jazz has lost it's "unique selling proposition" by playing too many burned out AC/Soft AC/Urban AC vocals...sure they test well because everybody knows 'em. But do they really make Smooth Jazz the unique format it was in the late 1980's/early 1990's before a large consulting firm pushed AC/Urban AC vocals on client stations.

Another part of the equation that's missing is what I call the passion factor. Passion is what helped propel the format in it's early days. Look at the country format today...in most markets people are passionate over the music. I guarantee you won't find that level of passion with a run-of-the-mill AC format.

Smart operators know the value of molding their Smooth Jazz format to fit the "vibe" of the market. Look at the Wave in LA, WNUA Chicago and Love94 in Miami and KIFM in San Diego. Each station is custom crafted to fit the nuances of the market. Other Smooth Jazz stations I've had the opportunity to hear in my travels simply sound like jukeboxes totally lacking passion and charisma...two necessary ingridients needed to make any radio station successful. it's no wonder why some stations left the format.

The format has the ability to be successful if operators would wake up and smell the coffee and give it the necessary tools needed to win.

I probably see this music from a different angle because I spent my career with it doing brunch shows on CHR and AC stations where I also had a regular airshift so my presentation was never the elitist "jazz" approach. It was "I love this music I play for you on weekdays and I have some other cool stuff that I play on Sunday mornings, come hang out" It worked well, to say the least, my show was in the top 3 10 years. Plus I did get to play for the people driving their kids to scouts and soccer rather than trying to be upscale and snobby and shut them out. (I live in a "real people" city, Jacksonville FL, that is more Beer and Football than Wine and Cheese.

I feel like the primal need these days is not to relax, it is to escape. Our "real world" has become so devoid of personalization, connection, and imagination that if you give people something that engages their imagination and talk to them like a person sharing something rather than someone who is in love with the sound of their own voice in the headphones they will totally bond with you. Instrumental music that still has a pop music structure and memorable hooks gives people the space to fill with their imaginations. Unfortunately the format got away from strong melodies (Think "You Make Me Smile") and now plays unobtrusive moodscapes that sound like intros with no song attached. (too many examples to list but start with Hardcastle and Soul Ballet) Plus most NAC music does not carry the burden of memories. We rely on nostalgia without realizing that the memory a song evokes can be bad as often as good. Songs that are written by mature songwriters and sung by people who can sing give adults something we can connect with and relate to. Right now the CD that covers that territory best is not one of ours though, it is "The Calling" by Mary Chapin Carpenter. Our best singers and songwriters have been shut out of the format as it searches for cute young things and tried to get a toe back in by covering old, tired songs.

Adults respond to music that was by and for grownups. The reason I fell in love with NAC music back in the 80s and continued to hang with it is that it was a type of music that targeted adults but was not bound to nostalgia. It was for and of the present. Now that is not the case. Ironic that what was basically an instrumental oldies station has been replaced with an oldies station. Guess they want the originals more than the covers

is there any station similar to smooth jazz in DC?
I really miss this music!

I've read some interesting comments here.If one misses the music than why don't you go and buy it? You can't depend on the radio to turn you onto the best music of any genre that's out there,only the most commercial,in their eyes.i think we should really turn people off to jazz by leaving that name from everything.This way the music that was invented in America and is cherished all over the world will disapear.
The stations cared about one thing-Advertisers.If any of these people say they cared about the music I'd tell them there full of it.When was the last time they listened to a whole CD by an artist.They listen for a few seconds and move on.
It's acorporate decision and that's the way things float in the U.S these days

the best format in the world is the smooth jazz format. tom webster's comments are true. the format can be exciting if the big corporations allow it to be. and, yes, profitable too.

Let's look at how Emmis Broadcasting treated its two 25-54 FM radio stations in NYC.

One is Urban AC WRKS Kiss-FM, consistant top 5 both 12+ and 25-54. Big morning show with Jeff Foxx in the market for 20 years, a female co-host, a professional comedian and multi-award winning newsman Bob Slade. Afternoons are handled by "Love, Lust and Lies" with Michael Baisdan, who gained national coverage when he organized protests to defend a group of students in Louisiana.

Emmis' other 25-54 FM station was Smooth Jazz WQCD, CD101.9. Dayparts covered by a sole DJ in a room by him or herself, playing jazz CDs, Urban AC vocals and chatting a little between sets. Overnights voice-tracked. That's it. One of the lowest promotion budgets and payrolls among NYC FM stations.

Then they wonder why CD101.9 fell out of the top 10 25-54 and out of the top 10 12+? How can they put so much into Urban AC and so little into Smooth Jazz?

Meanwhile WNUA Chicago teams up jazz musician Ramsey Lewis with a female co-host for mornings. KTWV teams jazz musician Dave Koz with a former CD 101.9 DJ, Pat Prescott. Those are morning shows. WQCD had a nice pleasant DJ in a small control room hosting mornings. His news and traffic people were 10 miles away in New Jersey at Shadow Traffic. He had no other support.

If you want to do any format chasing 25-54 adults, you better have a morning show. You better have some names on your DJ staff that local radio listeners know and love. You better have some excitement and promotion.

That's true of any 25-54 format... AC, Country, Urban AC, Spanish AC, Smooth Jazz, whatever. You can't treat your Smooth Jazz station as the poor stepsister, then wonder where the 25-54 listenrs went.

One of the problems with the format is that it has been too safe. Too much Koz, Elliott, Sade etc no infusion of new instrumental based talent like Soulive, Andre Ward, Mike Phillips. Its as if the powers that be don't go to events like The Capital Jazz festival, The Long Beach Jazz festival, The Bermuda Jazz Festival, BB Jazz Events and the City of Lights to see what the audience really looks like.

The audience does not want to be on a sedative all day long. It may be mature but it is certainly not dead. Funk it up a bit with that smooth

Clear Channel Stopped all Urban ACs from playing instrumentals which helped then troubled Smooth Jazz stations get respectable numbers in the mid to late 90's.

When you say jazz and you play Smokie Robinson, youre NOT saying what you are. Youre a contradiction.

Also smooth jazz wont play Roy Ayers, Lonnie Liston Smith and other jazzed based 70's and 80's tracks that appeal to alot of people.

Smooth Jazz deserves it problems, I'm surprised it took so long to come.

RIP smooth jazz you wont be missed

the smooth jazz format is the coolest format in the world. it's possibilities are endless. it's all about the music, and there's lots to choose from, too. smooth jazz forever.

as a dj who loves and plays smooth jazz, it is a shame that this station is gone. At least there is 104.3 in Baltimore that is still on the air. I also agree with one person who mentioned that a station calling itself "Smooth Jazz" playing Smokey Robinson is contradictory. I like Smokey Robinson's music and all but i would never put it on smooth jazz mix cd. Why not call it easy listening music and be done....Reading this blog also confirmed why i was listening to 97.1 WASH FM playing smooth jazz on a sunday morning. Just my 2 cents

I certainly understand everyone's comments but there is one thing you have to consider, programming. Alternate programming such as internet radio has to be given a chance.

Stations cannot sit back and let program directors dictate what is played; this is why many stations sound the same, playing the same songs every nineteen minute (Huh, imaging that)

If you allow true music lovers to have input into what is played on the stations you would get more variety, the music would be programmed because it's good music not because the artist are known.

I currently program my own show on IM4RADIODC.COM called THE DIGITAL COFFEE CAFE (Saturday's 8-10am est.). On this show I program a blend of contemporary jazz and R&B. What I choose to play is based on over 25 years of music collecting, music loving and being a DJ working for little or nothing because I love the music.
This is the key!!

It's about good music and the people who love it. It's not about what my program playlist says or automated programming without the personality.

Play the music and the natives will come!

Thanks
Eric
D.J. Enormix
THE DIGITAL COFFEE CAFE
SAT. 8-10 AM EST
WWW.IM4RADIODC.COM

I have been listening to 105.9 for YEARS. When the station started adding in Sade and Smokey Robinson I thought they were simply trying to appeal to a wider audience. Okay by me, because I love Sade, Smokey and all the other "non-traditional" offerings WJZW was airing. As for the commentator who said no one was going out and buying Dave Koz and others and this is why Smooth Jazz is dying, needs to get a look at my IPOD. All I know, is that I am BITTERLY DISAPPOINTED that 105.9 is gone and if those idiots in control of that station think I will tune in to that crappy new format? Guess again...

WHUR has a nice blend of Smooth Jazz & Inspirational music... at least on Sundays.

Well, it's too bad that some of the "smooth jazz" stations are departing the airwaves...but at least there are some still around and they are on Internet Radio. As a matter of fact, I'm listening the "The Wave-94.7" from Los Angeles right now. And where am I lstening...in my house on my home stereo that's just pounding away with its five hundred watts...while Peter White does a great cover of "The Closer I Get To You" that timeless song from a distant past. Those who have written that the "smooth jazz" format has been researched to its demise...are right. The researchers don't like music. So many in that business don't care for music. Just whatever produces the most instant financial return. If any format wants to keep on, keepin' on, it has to be a real experience, not just numbers. And hang in there.

Oh...by the way, I live in a little village in Northern New Mexico, where we have one local FM station with the nearest "other" stations are at least 80 miles away. However, my computer is across its DSL line and is at my fingertips!

Uncle Ralphie
Chama, New Mexico

Well, a lot of you have said some very pertinent and obvious things about the existence of smooth jazz in it's present form, or a form in which you would prefer it exist. The biggest drag to me, as somewhat of a jazz elitist (as one of you put it) is that back in the 70's and 80's (as well as the early 90's) the smooth jazz sound was totally different. Yes there were some vocals, but they were artist like Phil Perry, Patty Austin, Slim Man, Sade, Basia, and so on. Vocalist singing songs with very similar flavor to the contemporary jazz that was programmed along side it. So as I see it the biggest problem was the confluence of the contemporary instrumental jazz, and recurrent smooth pop and R&B hits.

Understandably you couldn't play Brian McKnight's "One Last Cry", and then have Pat Metheny , Ramsey Lewis, or the Crusaders follow it up with a song whose musical substance is so far and away from it's predecessor that the two could hardly be considered part of the same format. Thus the emergence of the smoother instrumentals. The type of songs anyone and their grandchildren could play. Which inexorably led to the influx of so called"instrumental artist" in the genre. All this to say that the music became so bland, so watered down, so benign that it garnered the honor of becoming Americas next Musak. You can't go anywhere without hearing this insipid regurgitation. Songs so eerily similar that it sounds like one long song. Of course no one can tell who is playing.....who wants to?

Back in the day contemporary jazz had uniqueness, style, character, and in most cases immense talent. Not only could these ARTIST write, produce, arrange, and perform wonderful songs, they were, in most cases, skilled improvisors able to put their stamp on whatever they recorded. The formulaic programming of Smooth Jazz has all but killed that personality. While they will openly tell you that they never tell artist what to play or how to produce their songs these radio people, consultants, or whatever you want to call them have frequently as for changes in songs (edits) or else the song would not be played. Such changes as - take out the guitar solo it is too notey, Can you get rid of that one bar in the sax solo that sounds like a funny note. The sound of the piano is not like Brian Culbertson's. Absurd! This type of rueful programming is, to me, what has led to the eventual demise, passion, and respect of contemporary jazz.

Imagine if Grover Washington, Joe Sample, Herbie Hancock, Bob James, George Duke, Earl Klugh, Al Jarreau, and so many others had succumb to these same sort of gestapo programming techniques. We wouldn't have the world class library of music that these and other wonderful musicians of that time have left us.

You want passion, give the music back to the musicians that actually have passion. Right now the listeners have been programmed to not be able to tell the difference, but if you put all of the artist side by side and have them play it could easily be figured out. Players and fakers. Not judging from an elitist stance, but from a substantive position. If you want to make your listeners passionate about the music give them passionate music. Not fakers who can write cute songs and play a couple of notes. The world is full of frauds, and smooth jazz has its' fair share.

Use the music of the legends as a pattern. Not so much sameness. I wonder if the people might actually enjoying hearing something and maybe have an idea of who it is just by listening. Say like they did with Anita Baker, James Taylor, James Ingram, Billy Joel, and many other vocalist. True jazz instrumentalist have a sound intrinsic to themselves. The audience shouldn't be programmed and dumbed downed to, but should be embraced and developed so that their minds can grow with the music they so love. Somewhat educating as well as entertaining them.This is the only way music of any genre can make any substantive growth in time. Otherwise, same ole stuff!

Oh, and it would also help to have radio personalities that actually know something about the music, as oppose to being as vacuous about jazz as some of the artist they program, or the listeners they play it for.

I still wonder why people are so afraid of the word "Jazz". Maybe that is the marketing battle that should be waged. Hmmmmm.

I disagree with the the idea of relabeling the Smooth Jazz format just to appease Madison ave. What I see as a potential problem is having a format with an attractive qualitative profile and a different enough sound getting lumped into the "AC ghetto". Stations need to attract and hire and retain Account Executives who get-it and can communicate that clearly to the agency buyer.

What needs to happen is for programmers to look inward and custom craft their station to fit the market. For starters take a look at the kind of vocals that are being played.

I agree with Mr. Websters comments about the idea of sharply turning away from AC vocals. The over use of AC vocal material is hurting the format instead of helping the format grow. Radio does need to do a better job of attracting college educated listeners. Dumbing down Smooth Jazz to the lowest common denominator by playing Celine Dion records is making college educated people run for the nearest bathroom with their hands over their mouths.

When I lived in San Diego in the mid to late 80s, KIFM was my favorite station. Tom Watson came on board as PD and started playing vocals. Ratings improved; then, apparently in a clash of those ever popular 'philosophies' he was gone, and so were the vocals. And I think his rating bubble burst too. (Though they've sure done well since.)
KIFM had at least some personalities who made it all sound cool and hip and communicated their love of it to the audience (I am particularly thinking about Art Good.)

Many years later I found myself 'programming' a B/A-consulted Smooth Jazz station. I felt that I had better be on the company mark since they 'knew better' as 'format architects' and all I had was an opinion. The station was pretty good for what it was, which was a station with very limited marketing resources, a weak sales effort, too much voice tracking by people who really showed no passion for or deep knowledge of the music - not their fault - we didn't have a budget for those. We did have competent announcers with good voices. And no real morning show, just a fake one.

I never bought the name "Smooth Jazz." It just makes no sense, despite the sense we tried to make of it. Jazzers don't like the music; "Jazz" is something foreign to many other people - it has no built-in attraction. You can't brand it to people who don't listen (with no budget.)

"Smooth Jazz" like selling roller coaster rides to people afraid of heights.

Iodine. Rebrand that. Heck, even Iodine has an inherent benefit most would acknowledge. I agree with the post above wherein it is suggested that Proctor and Gamble doesn't sell flakes, etc., they sell results. Start with the name.

"Smooth" bothered me too. Some of the better cuts to my ear had a nice groove going. Heck, I could see a SMOOTH GROOVE station before I could see a SMOOTH JAZZ one. Even so, define smooth. If a benefit, skip to that and forget the middleman term.

Music testing, though diligent, seemed suspicious. How in hell could you expand your listenership by testing 5 second 'hooks' of similar-sounding instrumental songs? I know, I know, they say you can. To my ear it's more a matter of groove differentiation than splitting hairs by demo cell arbitrary popularity percentages. Draw the line HERE... ummm, why?

Urban vocals. To me the grout that held it all together. Without them it's a wash of same sounding tunes unless already familiar (covers.)
If a song deviated from the formula is was deemed too... something (wrong.)

I hated the phone calls: "That's not Jazz."
Followed by me with the company line.

I think the real problem with the format is that management never saw it as exciting, that sales (especially the younger sellers and buyers) would never embrace it, that as PD for the big company you had better not mess with the 'word' from the experts who will report your ass to corporate so they could protect their own rep.

And the ratings swings when you captured or didn't the non-whites... better FIX it. Bring back the consultant. Uhhh, we didn't get the diaries in the places we needed them. Fix THAT.

And the competition is likely playing the race card of audience comp.

I flash back to the giant colorful Semi - a huge truck - from satellite radio sitting at the state fair (with over 1,000,000 attendees) sampling their wares and exciting those who visited their display.

And our jock sitting in a shack behind glass, talking for 20 seconds every 3 songs or so.

You want smooth jazz to survive, you need to evangelize it from the pulpits of pop culture, of advertising results, and bring the presentation into the leagues of passion, skill, and dedication shown by the musicians who provide the groove.

The problem with this format is a sneak-peek into the not so far-out future for our industry – an industry with awful sales skills.

You can’t sell Smooth Jazz from a Tapscan or other ratings report. Even if the numbers back it up – the rep has to sell the client or agency on the format. This takes time and effort and a skill most reps have never been taught. I once worked at a cluster where the smooth jazz station was #1 persons 25-54 - and could not fill the commercial log.

Format was changed.

New format was #10, but the "order-taking" sales staff was able to sell spots - at low rates. But at least they could sell them. We just upped the spot load to make budget – and assured the station would stay mired in a low rated position - never be a true factor in the market.

Radio's drought of quality sales people will only continue with lower commissions, less training and our industry’s lack of "sex appeal" to outsiders. Too many of the people who respond to our AE’s jobs were once selling “Thrifty Nickel” type of newspaper advertising. They are used to low commission, no training and giving it away to get on the buy.

The second part of the problem is the “efficient” manner in which we now staff our sales departments. When you take a format like smooth jazz and ask the same staff that is selling classic rock to sell this format – it’s just not going to get done. By the time you get past the personal bias most will have against the format, we are faced with the fact they have no idea how to sell it.

So what is next?

A market with 3 classic rocks, 4 AC's, 2 country stations and a bunch of AM news/talkers full of the same syndication? That scenario already exists in too many places and is not far off from being the norm everywhere if we don't address the critical sales talent drought in our industry.

This problem will require an investment … of money.

Everyone knows of the head of one giant company who wants to eliminate commissioned sales people, for a more “efficient” system of order takers. As frightening of an idea that is to me, sometimes I wonder: Are we already there?

Gregg C. above hit it on the head with his comments about Emmis' treatment of WQCD/New York. They ran it cheaply...cheaper than cheap! And you get what you pay for. Now they're trying to run WRXP cheaply (you can tell by listening) and history is bound to repeat. It will be their East Coast MOViN-type disaster. At least there will be balance, with Emmis owning one rock bottom turkey on each side of the continent.

Companies that INVEST in their smooth jazz operations (CBS with KTWV, Clear Channel in the case of WNUA and WLVE) will reap rewards. It's not a format that markets itself. It's not an easy sell either, but wouldn't a marketing commitment speak volumes to advertisers as well as listeners?

Just a note, not everyone considers "Smooth Jazz" to be jazz. The basis of Jazz is improvisation, which SJ ultimately lacks, which means that "Smooth AC" is a better term to use.