Changes in Imaging!

[jefflaurence]

Wow..tough room this week! Lost three stations in three markets..Well that happens sometimes, and I guess we all get whacked every so often..BUT I got three last month..so it balances out most of the time. I am grateful for all my radio imaging clients, but for me, it underscores the essence of the free lance business.

One of the stations was flipping to Urban after 5 years..good run there. The other two are "phasing out" the outsourced voice person..cutting back on promotion, and in general attempting to emulate satellite radio as much as possible..with fewer spots, fewer sweepers, fewer voice presence overall from anyone other than the air talent..who are also cutting back a lot..in general making for a rather uncompelling listening experience. They have givin in to the "you can't compete with the iPod..so why try?" theory of broadcasting.

Now there are programmers who are asking for "more conversational" delivery. At first i wasn't sure..It wasn't like it always has been..But know what? Nothing is. I tried it and now I like it. I ask that the imaging directors and production people who know what they are looking for do a few phone patch sessions with me..and we get the work done with a new type of appeal. It relates more, and it enhances flow rather than smack the listener in the face between every song. Some stations even send me copy points and allow me to "coversationalize" station promos myself. Refreshing, and creatively invigorating! I'm creative again! It's fun!

I would stand by this comment: Rather than completely phase out a signature voice, retool, and allow us to do it the new way..you'll probably be pleasently suprised!

Special thanks to my newest imaging partners in my new markets..Kris, Dwaine, Andy, Will, Kevin, Chuck..you know who you are..and thanks for the great direction!

 

[marketweis]

The other two are "phasing out" the outsourced voice person..cutting back on promotion, and in general attempting to emulate satellite radio as much as possible..with fewer spots, fewer sweepers, fewer voice presence overall from anyone other than the air talent..who are also cutting back a lot..in general making for a rather uncompelling listening experience.

And you know the sad thing about that? Listen to a lot of the radio today...the voice guy (or gal) is sometimes the most entertaining person on the air! Take them out of the equation and the station really has no pizazz. Of course, I'm generalizing here. I know of stations that have a very good stable of talent capable of giving the station its 'personality.' But I hear far too much radio where the talent level is mediocre at best. A lot of good folks have left the industry for various reasons.

Take a look at the best performing stations in most markets, and all those stations have that certain 'sound' about them that just makes them fun to listen to or gives them whatever unique quality they have. Or look at markets that have more than one player with the same format. I guarantee you that the stations with the most listeners - in most cases - won't be the one that's chosen to simply 'play more music' than their competitor. There's always a certain sound that the better performing station has, which most listeners couldn't even explain. They just know that their favorite station is "fun to listen to." That's accomplished by different things, with one of them being all the cool, creative, awesome sounding imaging.....provided by.........VOICE GUYS! (or Gals)

Of course, there are some exceptions, like Smooth Jazz and AAA stations where the focus isn't really on engaging and creative imaging.

 

[menotti1]

now that is very interesting, Jeff.i know the VO talent at magic in New Orleans does a very conversational delivery style.would you mind posting an A_B comparison??old style vs new style.thanks

 

[jefflaurence]

Sure I'll post a few this coming week..The neat thing about this is that it DOES make the outside voice person an actual personality. We are doing this in Nashville, Phoenix, Cincinnati, and even on TV in St. Louis. I do the voice over credits etc for KPLR-TV there, and they allow the voice guy to almost be a "voice of the veiwer"..or someone sitting on the sofa with others watching the show..It's well written, but they allow me a little lattitude in the span of the 10 sec or so that I have as the credits are rolling..

Instead of:

"Tonite on CW 11, catch WWE Friday Night Smackdown. It's Pro Wrestling at it's best with all your favorites on St Louis's original home for televised wrestling, CW-11."

We "tweak it"

Hey, you KNOW a folding chair across the chops marks the start of the WEEKEND! Cue up a tall one, and join the stars of WWE Friday Night Smakdown for a St. Louis Tee Vee Tradition tonight at 8 on CW-11!

or whatever else comes to mind..It's fun, and it's unpredictable..AS is the new "conversational" sound of radio imaging. It's more prone to suprises as opposed to the standard liner imaging that we've done for so many years. Yes it's imaging, but it's more being a real part of the station..it draws the listener in more (IMHO) but it takes a little acting. Something I need to get more comfortable doing.

 

[oldiesstation]

isn't this the style Howard Cogan,the voice of JACK FM uses??it's very conversational.Style also reminds me when TV newscast became "Chatty" as opposed to the old talk from the toes delivery..i can see where it makes a good fit for imaging.

 

[JTVG]

Jeff and crew,

I'm noticing the same trends you are in the imaging department. Lots of IPod radio across the board, making voice guys much less in demand. It's always tough when a station chooses to go another direction and I probably take it to heart more than I should. Why just recently, a client chose to drop ALL imaging with my VO and just go with just a random person saying the calls between the songs. No official explaination. Not even a courtesy, "thanks but we've decided to head in a different direction." Now I know what it feels like for talent who get canned without a reason. Happens quite a bit and I've never found it to be excusable. Ahh well....

I am also excited about the more conversational direction imaging is heading! Perhaps it's wise of us to include a good bit of it in our demos, to catch the ear of potential new clients looking for natural relatability in a VO guy or gal.

And congrats on your 3 new clients! Good times...

 

[VODood]

Smart copywriting is always key. WLW and WEBN are good at this, with imaging that isn't 100miles an hour. Although sometimes that's needed to offset the low key stuff.

Conversation VO depends on the format. For oldies stations...I don't think it works. At least not all the time. Again, depends on the copy.

 

[salchris]

Thanks for the great posts, I'm finding it very hard to get my PD to write converstionally, I've really had to stand over his shoulder and try to coax a more converstional bit of writing, and quite frankly its frustrating. Perhaps I can share Jeff's take and that will persuade him to either let me do some of the writing and TRUST what I write or at least take some direction on how to create compelling imaging. Thanks for the insight

Larson
Kansas City

 

[Chuck]

whatever else comes to mind..It's fun, and it's unpredictable..AS is the new "conversational" sound of radio imaging. It's more prone to suprises as opposed to the standard liner imaging that we've done for so many years. Yes it's imaging, but it's more being a real part of the station..it draws the listener in more (IMHO) but it takes a little acting. Something I need to get more comfortable doing.

I think that is a very cool idea Jeff.

If you can make your listeners feel like they are part of an exclusive "club" made up of people who have the taste, interest or whatever to listen to a particular station, I believe you might really be on to something. A conversational style that shows some personality is a great way to do that.

It's not a new idea in radio, but I can’t say I’ve ever heard many liners that did that. My favorite example of someone whose personality defined a radio station was Ron Chapman on KVIL in Dallas. He was very conversational on the air. He had a knack for making the listener feel like they belonged to his group. You wanted to invite him into your home or car. It gave the station a great image. Ron Chapman was KVIL. I'm sure others have done as well, but I've never seen anything quite like it. Perhaps I've lived a sheltered existence.

When Ron moved from KVIL to KLUV, the entire group went with him. It was all about community, and being a part of something. Of course Chapman did this live for four hours every day and was well versed about the goings on around town. . Doing a bunch of liners isn't exactly the same thing, but I think it could really work.

I'll be interested in seeing where this goes...

 

[hungryhawk]

This whole "conversational" approach to imaging is not only an embarassment to the radio/voiceover industry but also a major compromise to the name of human accomplishment.

I first heard the heard the Jack FM guy(Howard Cogan) during a morning show interview in Texas and there is no doubt that he's got a fun novelty thing going (and yes, novelties tend to both encourage consumers and inspire imitators e.g play-doh). After all the guy has talented and funny writers that match his apathetic approach in a way that is certainly refreshing after so many years of listening to pukers BUT is there not genuine talent involved in "puking"?

Real imaging voices take real talent. Any one with a fifth grade education can read a stations call letters, and we know that no two voices are identical but it takes a very special person with a very special talent to produce very special imaging. Yes, Play Doh is fun if you want to make a coil pot or a alien play creature but if you're trying to make a mug for swilling a latte let a lone sculpt the David you're gonna need something a little heftier.

Now I imagine that when we talk about a new approach to imaging we're not really talking about the "JACK" approach so much as the "lazy" sounding read that we hear in so many TV commercials these days,(you know when some ad-shark puts "real" sounding or "not announcer like " in the italiced directives at the top of your page), well that's even WORSE.

Here we are. A group of professionals who have toiled away for years in our studios trying to nail that one word and we're getting asked to throw that word away as if we're talking to a fence post (y'all do talk to fenceposts right? HA!).

I think you get my point. For the last 70 years Radio Announcers/Broadcasters have been the KINGS of selling. Products, services, even ideas, we've NAILED it with our attention to detail and our loyalty to our medium. Why do you think there is so much backlash against "consumer culture" all of a sudden? It's because we (the radio people) have had buyers by the short hairs ever since the Fireside Chats. Landfills are filling up with cheap plastic stuff that WE have been selling! The rich have been getting richer and the poor have been getting poorer because we have the voice!

Don't change imaging styles just because some daddy's boy now has stock in the company and can't read a line of copy to save his life. Isn't it clear that he just wants the industry to sound more like himself? Let this guy have his way and every minute of Voiceover from Orson Welles to Don Pardo stands to be the first whimper that sounds as the signal of the end of world.

 

[Emmett1057]

I disagree. Styles change. Don La Fontaine has become somewhat of a punchline (not that I'm knocking his talent at all). He will always be thought of as the ultimate VO artist. But his style is becoming less desirable by the minute.

Like it or not, the "guy next door" sells. And no, I think there's much more talent involved in sounding like a genuine human being, than there is with puking. If you visit any broadcasting school, you'll find dozens of kids "puking" because they think that's what they'e supposed to sound like. You'll be lucky if you can find ONE that can sit down and do a convincing "regular guy" read.

Certainly, there will always be a market for the "announcer" read. Products and certain stations sometimes require a different approach.

The younger crowd simply will not respond to someone "selling" something. You offer. You make it available and appealing. But you can't SELL it. Younger generations are very aware of people trying to "sell" them things...And they don't like it. Just as I leave a car dealership the minute the sales guy says, "What will it take to get you into this car today?" or, "If you like it, you'd better get it today because it won't be here tomorrow." That's BS and I'll drive around for a week until I find a sales guy that "offers" instead of "sells". Listeners react the same to ads.

This is the same reason Hollywood actors are getting so much VO work. It takes talent to be convincing and genuine...It's acting.

Whether or not you like it, it works. There's a reason you hear that same read on Coke, Pepsi, Sonic, McDonald's, Mitsubishi, etc. It works.

Emmett

 

[hungryhawk]

Well Emmett you make me cringe but thanks for giving Don La Fontaine some credit by recognizing that there are some places where his stuff works. Back in '04 I read a book called "NO LOGO" by Naomi Klien which was basically an analysis of consumer habits, and yes she makes some good points about people feeling sick of a "hard sell", but let's remember that we are talking about the buying habits of three years which is simply not enough time to measure successes let alone jugde which approach works better. Didn't Ford manufacture the Edsel for three years? Okay, so this is getting negative but I think you get my point no? The "big read" worked extremely well for a long time and I once met a farmer once who who said, "If ain't broke don't try to fix it." while he watched me attach a grass catcher to my lawnmower (with lousy results). I'm fine with things changing because I have confidence in my own versatility (my last five gigs were all of the new style) but I REALLY liked the stuff from back in the day. Listen to Z-100 New York or Wild 94.9 San Francisco and it's unlikely that you'll hear "the guy next door." Now I know that KIIS LA is using a woman for imaging (and this seems to be a very popular trend right now as well) but a puker like me needs hope. Final Answer.

 

[Chuck]

This whole "conversational" approach to imaging is not only an embarassment to the radio/voiceover industry but also a major compromise to the name of human accomplishment.

A little extreme, don’t you think?

I love listening to legendary guys like Don Pardo, Orson Wells, Don LaFontaine, Gary Owens, Charlie VenDyke and lots of others. I know for sure that Jeff’s voice on my station certainly raises the bar. For that, I’m quite grateful. The truth is all these guys are great and they will always be in demand, but don't you think there is room for other styles as well?

I've heard lots of guys who had anything but "announcer-like" voices but they were entertaining and fun to listen to. In Dallas, "The Wolf" used Barry Corbin as their signature voice. To me, Barry sounds a lot like Yosemite Sam, but he was a prefect fit for the station and the image they were trying to create. It was brilliant. But he certainly didn't sound anything like Don Pardo. I don’t think doing something like that is “an embarrassment to the radio/voiceover industry.” Far from it. I think it is great talent well used.

Since, catching and holding the listener's attention is the object of all this, it seems to me that there is very likely more than one way to do it that will be effective. I'd love to see it explored a bit more.

Being the "guy next door" takes nothing away from the abilities of some of these other talents. It's just being different. If you can be good, as well as different. What’s wrong with that?

 

[Emmett1057]

At one time, jazz music was HUGE. It was the only style of music that anyone was really interested in consuming on a large scale. It's not that way anymore, but that doesn't make jazz musicians any less talented, nor does it mean that jazz won't sell.

The VO industry will continue to change, just like music has. It's evolution. Right now, the "flavor of the month" is to consume anything real. Reality television is huge so it only makes sense that real-sounding voices will work as well. Nobody knows what's next, so the best thing anyone can do is perfect as many styles as possible.

Sometime in the next few years, somebody will come up with a new style, and it will just...work. And then the style of everything will follow that trend.

Emmett

 

[VODood]

I disagree. Styles change. Don La Fontaine has become somewhat of a punchline (not that I'm knocking his talent at all). He will always be thought of as the ultimate VO artist. But his style is becoming less desirable by the minute.

I disagree. Don is still doing quite well compared to anyone on this board, lol! He's everywhere, as is Chris Corley. Corley being the "up n comer" of late. Some would say Hal Douglas' time has come and gone. I again disagree. Some like Don, some like Joe Cip, Andy Geller or Ben Patrick Johnson (House & Bones). I like all of them. None are passe' anymore.

Gieco hired Don for one of their spots b/c EVERYONE, young and old, knows THAT voice.

Of the "big voice" talents out there... Chris Corley, a former radio production guy, is most likely the most conversational. He's on rock, to CHR, to network promo and movie trailers. I believe he's on Z10/NYC along with Dave Foxx and Ann Dewig.

I had Chris on my jurassic rock in Raleigh for years. We chatted once and he told me that at that time he was in EVERY market in NC and SC, regardless of format. Impressive.

Kelly, Kelly, Kelly is on KIIS/L.A. She's also the Creative Director.

I like the "big voice", on the right format, spot, etc. All depends on the effect one wants to create.

 

[Emmett1057]

BUT, at one time, DLF was cutting up to 200 projects per day. Now it's more like 5-10. Of course, 5-10 major projects every day is still A LOT, but on a percentage scale of what it used to be, that's a pretty huge drop. I have been told (I have not confirmed this) that one of the major TV networks no longer uses Don for any of their promos.

Cipriano is different. He doesn't really have "a style". He's got about a zillion styles. DLF is stuck doing his read. He does that read better than anyone else, but it's all he can do. Cip can do all sorts of things. His demo is mind-blowing.

I'm not suggesting at all that the "big voice" will dry up and dissapear. It won't. But at one time, the big voice was the only voice getting decent work. Now, the voice itself has become less important for success. The read and inflection is what brings in the clients. A nice big voice combined with a great read sounds awesome.

And it goes without saying that some things will always require the "big voice". A dramatic movie trailer would sound pretty stupid with a conversational, straight read!

Emmett

 

[SirRoxalot]

Nothing New Here

"Big Voice", "Guy Next Door", new imaging directions, old imaging directions...

Hey, it's all about a distinctive delivery that fits the material. What's the feeling that you want to instill in the listener? Is it warm & fuzzy? Do you want their attention? Do you want an alternative to your competition?

None of this is new. Sterling Holloway certainly didn't have a "big voice", but he made a heck of a living as "everyman" on a slew of Disney narrations. Thurl Ravenscroft had the biggest of voices, but he also had acting ability that allowed him to portray characters like Tony the Tiger and The Grinch - including singing!

Learning to act is never a bad thing, and knowing what kind of material you do best allows you to play to your strengths. Most of all, listen to the message, and make sure that both you and the client understand exactly which words are the most important, and what kind of feeling you want to create. This is the same principle if you're creating a spot, or creating imaging for a radio station.

The frightening thing is that radio stations are now relying on the "voice guy" to be relatable instead of the local jocks. In some cases, the "voice guy" gets more airtime per hour than the local jock!

 

[BobSacamano]

"The frightening thing is that radio stations are now relying on the "voice guy" to be relatable instead of the local jocks. In some cases, the "voice guy" gets more airtime per hour than the local jock!"

That was certainly the case with the last station I worked at; there was a "no dead segue" rule from corporate, and we had no jingles..

Versatility is a good thing, the last few commercials I did covered everything from hard sell to characters..as far as imaging goes I'm neither fish nor fowl: I'm not the "big voice" like Chris Corley,
or the "whispery gen-x er" that you hear on CHRs..maybe I'm what they're looking for

 

[BigVoiceGuy]

I'll probably get flamed here but anyway...We have to stop listening to our industry as professionals who work in it and start perceiving it as the people who use it do. Depending on how long yo've been in this business is going to dictate how you respond to this post. I speak every year to a group of students in a marketing class at Texas Tech University; very few of them even know what radio is. Sounds crazy, but with so much more to choose from, radio has gotten stale and boring. They've heard all the bottomless promisses that come from the radio all their lives (remember, these are kids whom have never known a life without MTV, even cell phones have been around for the biggest part of their personal history). We've got to do something different to appeal.

 

[Emmett1057]

I work with a guy who REALLY wants to use a bunch of different voices, rather than having a "signature voice". And this is exactly what TV does. They match the voice to the promo and use a large variety of styles to make everything exciting. It's an odd theory for radio, but I'd love to hear it in action....I think he might be onto something!

Emmett