Challenges for Smooth Operators

[casual observer]

Excellent analysis from Dave Van Dyke in today's (9/26) issue about how PPM is killing the Smooth Jazz format. If you're a fan of the format, this is a must read.

http://www.radioinfo.com/2012/09/26/challenges-for-smooth-operators/

What's not mentioned anywhere is how poorly this once significant format has been programmed in recent years. A decade ago, PDs and consultants initiated a misguided attempt to broaden and spread the demographic into AC turf. That diluted the power of the format and diminished its unique qualities. The result has been the slow death we see now. And that's too bad.

 

[crainbebo]

Yep. It is a must read for me too. PPM killed KWJZ. It also killed KKSF, WQCD, WNUA, the now crappy AC KIFM, the now crappy Soft AC KTWV, KIJZ, WJJZ, and many others. KOAZ and a couple others are left-even BAs are going slowly. It's really sad.

-crainbebo

 

[Groove1670]

The seabreeze in Destin Fl. does a excellent presentation.

 

[crainbebo]

That's what I meant by the "couple others"-WSBZ, WEIB, KYSJ. I usually listen to KOAZ, because their music selection is very good (Where else are you going to hear Bob James' "Restless" going into Incognito's "Deep Waters"?)

-crainbebo

 

[davideduardo]

Excellent analysis from Dave Van Dyke in today's (9/26) issue about how PPM is killing the Smooth Jazz format. If you're a fan of the format, this is a must read.

That analysis is somewhat misguided. What has killed Smooth Jazz as a commercial radio format is more accurate measurement which showed that the long listening times in the diary were exaggerated.

Smooth Jazz was killed by reality.

The diary was based on measuring memory of listening. Smooth Jazz always had a small cume with long, long listening times. In the diary, they got good shares in the past due to the time spent listening, but the PPM showed that while people thought they had listened all day, they had really listened for 4 or 5 intervals of perhaps 20 minutes or so.

Reality bites.

What's not mentioned anywhere is how poorly this once significant format has been programmed in recent years. A decade ago, PDs and consultants initiated a misguided attempt to broaden and spread the demographic into AC turf. That diluted the power of the format and diminished its unique qualities. The result has been the slow death we see now. And that's too bad.

By the early 2000's, SJ had become a predominantly 55+ format in many markets, and efforts were made to make it more relevant to, at least, 35-54. That's because you could be #1, but if all your audience is all 55+, you will likely be 15th or 20th or worse in sales.

 

[Interstate 78]

Excellent analysis from Dave Van Dyke in today's (9/26) issue about how PPM is killing the Smooth Jazz format. If you're a fan of the format, this is a must read.

That analysis is somewhat misguided. What has killed Smooth Jazz as a commercial radio format is more accurate measurement which showed that the long listening times in the diary were exaggerated.

Smooth Jazz was killed by reality.

The diary was based on measuring memory of listening. Smooth Jazz always had a small cume with long, long listening times. In the diary, they got good shares in the past due to the time spent listening, but the PPM showed that while people thought they had listened all day, they had really listened for 4 or 5 intervals of perhaps 20 minutes or so.

Ok, assuming you are correct, then the next logical question is WHY were people only listening for 4 or 5 intervals of 20 minutes? Because the music mix was crap and they realized that if they listened longer, they'd hear the same songs over and over and over. We can't blame the loss of radio smooth jazz just on the fact that people weren't listening long enough. WHY weren't they listening long enough? Maybe if stations played more than 200 songs, they'd listen longer. I am a teacher and I've polled students many times.

Do you listen to the radio? No.
Why not? Because they don't play enough music.
Would you listen to it if they played more than the same 200 songs? Absolutely.

There you have it. Today's youth have the right answers. Like it or not. People will try to justify how consultants didn't ruin the format, but that's exactly what happened. Not that people didn't listen enough. They didn't listen because it wasn't worth listening. And I think this goes for other formats too. Not just smooth jazz.

 

[sjs1959]

Excellent analysis from Dave Van Dyke in today's (9/26) issue about how PPM is killing the Smooth Jazz format. If you're a fan of the format, this is a must read.

That analysis is somewhat misguided. What has killed Smooth Jazz as a commercial radio format is more accurate measurement which showed that the long listening times in the diary were exaggerated.

Smooth Jazz was killed by reality.

The diary was based on measuring memory of listening. Smooth Jazz always had a small cume with long, long listening times. In the diary, they got good shares in the past due to the time spent listening, but the PPM showed that while people thought they had listened all day, they had really listened for 4 or 5 intervals of perhaps 20 minutes or so.

Ok, assuming you are correct, then the next logical question is WHY were people only listening for 4 or 5 intervals of 20 minutes? Because the music mix was crap and they realized that if they listened longer, they'd hear the same songs over and over and over. We can't blame the loss of radio smooth jazz just on the fact that people weren't listening long enough. WHY weren't they listening long enough? Maybe if stations played more than 200 songs, they'd listen longer. I am a teacher and I've polled students many times.

Do you listen to the radio? No.
Why not? Because they don't play enough music.
Would you listen to it if they played more than the same 200 songs? Absolutely.

There you have it. Today's youth have the right answers. Like it or not. People will try to justify how consultants didn't ruin the format, but that's exactly what happened. Not that people didn't listen enough. They didn't listen because it wasn't worth listening. And I think this goes for other formats too. Not just smooth jazz.

See, 78, this is where you have it all wrong. You are concerned about the LISTENER and the MUSIC and not the ADVERTISER. Ad agencies are like Clear Channel, they see radio as a device for delivering advertising and nothing else. They are too stupid to see that this is what is driving younger listeners, the very ones they want, to their mp3 players.

As David has said, the agencies hate 55+ listeners because they are not easily manipulated by one or two commercials like the 18-34 crowd, so formats like smooth jazz, which if programmed properly, could bring in targeted dollars, but it would take more commercials.

Of course, this is the very idea that is killing terrestrial radio, but the greedheads at the agencies that control major-market radio could care less.

 

[davideduardo]

.
Ok, assuming you are correct, then the next logical question is WHY were people only listening for 4 or 5 intervals of 20 minutes? .

"They" weren't listening to any station "all day." Or "all morning".

A review of diaries at Arbitron revealed lot's of entries like "9 AM / 5 PM" or "6 AM / 9 AM" and such.

In reality, that 9 to 5 workday was interrupted by going for coffee, taking a break, going to the bathroom, going to another area in the workplace, meeting with a coworker, lunch break, turning down the radio during phone calls, turning it down when a customer came in, etc, etc.

Those 8 hours were really something dramatically different when measured passively rather than based on memory... 2 hours, an hour 45 minutes, two hours 15 minutes.

The average radio listening per person per week in every PPM market dropped from around 19 hours to around 12 hours... about 40%. Stations that were niche programmed to begin with did not see the cume boost that more mass appeal stations did, and dropped considerably when PPM was introduced.

This had nothing to do with programming. Same format, new ratings methodology.

The big loss for SJ happened when the PPM was introduced in each market. Prior to that, the issue had been the aging demos of the format, which made the audience SJ stations did have less desirable as each year went by.

 

[davideduardo]

As David has said, the agencies hate 55+ listeners because they are not easily manipulated by one or two commercials like the 18-34 crowd, so formats like smooth jazz, which if programmed properly, could bring in targeted dollars, but it would take more commercials.

Agencies don't "hate" anyone. If a client has a product where 55 and over is determined by the client to be a viable market... think Medicare Supplementary Plans, Drugs and Medicines, Depends, Medical Alert calling devices, etc., they will advertise in media that reaches that group.

But agencies march to the drumbeat of the client. If the client designed a product for younger ages, they will instruct the agency to buy specific demos. If sales are strongest in certain ages, that is where the client will specify the campaign be targeted. An agency is an intermediary, and the shots are called by the client... who has usually spent millions in marketing research to determine the best prospects for sales.

 

[JoshB]

Excellent analysis from Dave Van Dyke in today's (9/26) issue about how PPM is killing the Smooth Jazz format. If you're a fan of the format, this is a must read.

That analysis is somewhat misguided. What has killed Smooth Jazz as a commercial radio format is more accurate measurement which showed that the long listening times in the diary were exaggerated.

Smooth Jazz was killed by reality.

The diary was based on measuring memory of listening. Smooth Jazz always had a small cume with long, long listening times. In the diary, they got good shares in the past due to the time spent listening, but the PPM showed that while people thought they had listened all day, they had really listened for 4 or 5 intervals of perhaps 20 minutes or so.

Ok, assuming you are correct, then the next logical question is WHY were people only listening for 4 or 5 intervals of 20 minutes? Because the music mix was crap and they realized that if they listened longer, they'd hear the same songs over and over and over. We can't blame the loss of radio smooth jazz just on the fact that people weren't listening long enough. WHY weren't they listening long enough? Maybe if stations played more than 200 songs, they'd listen longer. I am a teacher and I've polled students many times.

Do you listen to the radio? No.
Why not? Because they don't play enough music.
Would you listen to it if they played more than the same 200 songs? Absolutely.

There you have it. Today's youth have the right answers. Like it or not. People will try to justify how consultants didn't ruin the format, but that's exactly what happened. Not that people didn't listen enough. They didn't listen because it wasn't worth listening. And I think this goes for other formats too. Not just smooth jazz.

See, 78, this is where you have it all wrong. You are concerned about the LISTENER and the MUSIC and not the ADVERTISER. Ad agencies are like Clear Channel, they see radio as a device for delivering advertising and nothing else. They are too stupid to see that this is what is driving younger listeners, the very ones they want, to their mp3 players.

As David has said, the agencies hate 55+ listeners because they are not easily manipulated by one or two commercials like the 18-34 crowd, so formats like smooth jazz, which if programmed properly, could bring in targeted dollars, but it would take more commercials.

Of course, this is the very idea that is killing terrestrial radio, but the greedheads at the agencies that control major-market radio could care less.

Exactly, I don't even know the last time I listened to FM radio. It's just that bad now. I think radio companies with their methologies and predictions are missing the overall big picture and not using common sense. Why would I as a consumer, listen to radio playing the exact same songs and then sit through endless commercials, when I can just listen to my mp3 player, use my mobile phone for Internet radio, or listen to satellite radio, with most content being commercial free?

I was going back through some old NAC/SJ airchecks that were posted on here and they had commercials as well, that I listened to. You want to know why?, because I knew there was going to be a new track that I haven't heard before, so it was worth it to sit through the commercials.

 

[Interstate 78]

.

This had nothing to do with programming. Same format, new ratings methodology.

NOT the same format. Can you honestly say the smooth jazz format was the same in, say, 1990 as it was in, say, 2007 when all the stations really started dropping like flies? The consultants came into the picture bigtime in the smooth jazz format in the mid to late 90s and early 2000s. The format went from all contemporary jazz and new age instrumentals and a handful of niche vocals to half watered-down contemporary jazz and half soft rock/R&B vocals. I went from listening to my local smooth jazz station for hours and hours at a time to listening to about 20 minutes in the course of about 10 years. Then PPM comes along around 2007 and says "people are listening for 20 minutes!" and we all assume that "this is the way it has been for years, we just never knew it." So maybe PPM is right. Maybe people "were" only listening for 20 minutes. But why? Because the music mix began to stink. Why? Thanks to the consultants.

 

[davideduardo]

This had nothing to do with programming. Same format, new ratings methodology.


NOT the same format. Can you honestly say the smooth jazz format was the same in, say, 1990 as it was in, say, 2007 when all the stations really started dropping like flies?

The change from the diary to PPM was instantaneous. One month, we had a diary based book. Next month, a PPM one. And SJ stations, quite uniformly, dropped dramatically between the last diary book in their market and the first PPM one.

As I said, same format one month to the next, but different measurement methodology... one which showed the stations in the format to be much poorer performers than before.

 

[AC Tones]

....we found that the four facilities listed below were the only smooth jazz/smooth AC representatives to crack the top 20 in their respective markets.

If you haven’t listened to Los Angeles’ “Wave” (KTWV) in a while, the following 20-song music mix from earlier this week might come as a bit of a surprise.

Fergie “Big Girls Don’t Cry”
Al B. Sure “Nite and Day”
Bruno Mars “Just The Way You Are
Eric Clapton “Tears In Heaven”
Toni Braxton “Breathe Again”
Stevie Wonder “As”
Michael McDonald “I Keep Forgettin’”
Leona Lewis “Bleeding Love”
Doc Powell “We’ll Make It Last”
Spandau Ballet “True”
Boyz II Men “Just My Imagination”
Pretenders “I’ll Stand By You”
Naturally 7 “Life Goes On”
Paul Young “Oh Girl”
Hall & Oates “Sara Smile”
Aaron Neville “Use Me”
Natasha Bedingfield “Unwritten”
Michael Jackson “Human Nature”
Vanessa Williams & Brian McKnight “Love Is”
Big Mountain “Baby I Love Your Way”

How anyone can say the above playlist can be categorized as Smooth Jazz, let alone Smooth A/C, is laughable. Save for the one or two well programmed stations in small markets aforementioned in this thread, the format has been DEAD on terrestrial radio for well over a decade. It has become an Internet format, and that's where the future is, like it or not. Why even waste time penning such an article? It merely rehashes line-by-line what veteran posters have stated on this board for several years now. BFD. This is not news. It's ancient history.

 

[crainbebo]

....we found that the four facilities listed below were the only smooth jazz/smooth AC representatives to crack the top 20 in their respective markets.

If you haven’t listened to Los Angeles’ “Wave” (KTWV) in a while, the following 20-song music mix from earlier this week might come as a bit of a surprise.

Fergie “Big Girls Don’t Cry”
Al B. Sure “Nite and Day”
Bruno Mars “Just The Way You Are
Eric Clapton “Tears In Heaven”
Toni Braxton “Breathe Again”
Stevie Wonder “As”
Michael McDonald “I Keep Forgettin’”
Leona Lewis “Bleeding Love”
Doc Powell “We’ll Make It Last”
Spandau Ballet “True”
Boyz II Men “Just My Imagination”
Pretenders “I’ll Stand By You”
Naturally 7 “Life Goes On”
Paul Young “Oh Girl”
Hall & Oates “Sara Smile”
Aaron Neville “Use Me”
Natasha Bedingfield “Unwritten”
Michael Jackson “Human Nature”
Vanessa Williams & Brian McKnight “Love Is”
Big Mountain “Baby I Love Your Way”

How anyone can say the above playlist can be categorized as Smooth Jazz, let alone Smooth A/C, is laughable. Save for the one or two well programmed stations in small markets aforementioned in this thread, the format has been DEAD on terrestrial radio for well over a decade. It has become an Internet format, and that's where the future is, like it or not. Why even waste time penning such an article? It merely rehashes line-by-line what veteran posters have stated on this board for several years now. BFD. This is not news. It's ancient history.

One word: HORRIBLE!

I think the only ones that I can take are these:

Al B. Sure “Nite and Day”
Toni Braxton “Breathe Again”
Stevie Wonder “As”
Michael McDonald “I Keep Forgettin’”
Doc Powell “We’ll Make It Last”

and only a MAYBE...
Aaron Neville “Use Me”

Those said songs have been sprinkled on smooth jazz radio over the last 10 or so years. Stick to a 70/30 instrumental/vocal mix please! None of this Bruno Mars and Natasha Bedingfield crap, but Sade, Anita Baker, Michael McDonald, etc.

KOAZ has been playing a good song by Sheryl Crow and Kenny Loggins-"I Would Do Anything". Fits the vocal format IMO.

-crainbebo

 

[Kent T]

Some facts, Smooth Jazz eventually suffered the same issue Beautiful/Easy Listening formats did. Very little or no new, fresh music. Aging demographics, which didn't get ad agency business. Smooth Jazz stations willing to be innovative with programming hung in longer.

 

[AC Tones]

Some facts, Smooth Jazz eventually suffered the same issue Beautiful/Easy Listening formats did. Very little or no new, fresh music. Aging demographics, which didn't get ad agency business. Smooth Jazz stations willing to be innovative with programming hung in longer.

With all due respect, Kent, the fact is there is PLENTY of new fresh music out there to pull base listeners back into the fold and keep them there. It has been there but terrestrial programmers catering to the least common denominator (due to consultants who know little to nothing about this music and its base listeners, AND unrealistic expectations for ad revenue) chose to pass on it. Ergo, a lot of terrific music and artists have gone unnoticed by the so-called experts in terrestrial radio. So be it. More opportunities for small broadcasters like me who are not leveraged by overhead or pressure to generate advertising revenue. I am still convinced the money will be there one day, when and if this economy turns around and more and more listeners turn to Internet radio. But in the meantime, programmers of this format have an obligation to keep listeners current. The music is there. You just have to look for it. Have you heard the new Vincent Ingala? Nicholas Cole? Four80East? Heck, even groups that cut their teeth in NAC era are cranking out great music (see The Ripps "Built To Last" --- TERRIFIC!!). I have said it before and I'll say it again. The format has never been a HUGE moneymaker or ratings-grabber, even pre-PPM. It's been about a small, loyal, passionate listenership. Whether the listener is young or old, that will never change. We let listeners down the day station operators tried to make this format somehting it never was or will be, period.

 

[crainbebo]

Vincent Ingala is the next Richard Elliott. Terrific saxophonist. Hearing his title track "Can't Stop Now" someone would mistake it for Richard Elliott, because it is so GOOD.

-crainbebo

 

[Donald_WBWH]

@AC Tones: I agree, some of these so called "consultants" did really mess things up for the format on commercial stations. There are a lot of great unique artists that the format should be playing, certainly Nicholas Cole and Vincent Ingala have bright futures and Four80East has always been good - most commercial SJ stations didn't really play their stuff though (except for a few radio singles).

 

[davideduardo]

The format has never been a HUGE moneymaker or ratings-grabber, even pre-PPM.

Huh? Fall 2004, KTWV was 4th in 25-54, 8th overall. Or, in the year 2000, the 3rd highest billing station in the market.

Or year 2000, Chicago: WNUA tied for 6th highest biller in Chicago. San Diego: KIFM 9th in billing. Detroit: WVMV 8th in billings. Philadelphia: WJJZ 9th in billings.

I could go on, but those stations billed huge amounts in 2000, and, given that they were among the lower cost of operation stations in each market, they made major bucks.

 

[davideduardo]

Huh? Fall 2004, KTWV was 4th in 25-54, 8th overall. Or, in the year 2000, the 3rd highest billing station in the market.

Error... that was Arbitron Fall 1994. The rest of the data is for the year 2000.