K-Earth 101 Having Thousand-Song Weekend (With No Repeats!)

[TheLaffer]

Anyone who could keep KOST at the top in a huge money demo for as many years as he did is obviously one of the bezt PDs in America.

My retarted cousin Bobby could keep KOST in top 5 as the only true AC.

In LA? Get real. There are KBIG and KYSR, which are other ACs in the same cluster. There is KMVN, an Hispanic targeted AC run by Emmis. And there is KLVE, which takes a huge share of the market. And there is plenty of overlap with other formats, like KTWV.

Jhani did an amazing job of keeping KOST #1 (except for KLVE) in the format for many, many years, despite frontal and flanking challenges from Bonneville and other operators.

Jhani is the consumate programmer, combining music, mood, talent, and imaging into a superbly listenable format. Very few have ever done it so well.

Few have ever done it so well?? HaHaHa .....David Eduardo Gleason you really need to stop showing your ignorance on here. You're becoming more fradulent than your resume. ;D

 

[OldGringo]

Few have ever done it so well?? HaHaHa .....David Eduardo Gleason you really need to stop showing your ignorance on here. You're becoming more fradulent than your resume. ;D

Instead of using every frikkin' post as an excuse to throw darts, why don't you occasionally contribute something? For example, if you do not believe that KOST under Jhani was well programmed, tell us about it. And tell us which AC's were better programmed and did better in the same years.

 

[BACKnUSSR]

Normally I put David in the same category that David Letterman put Bill O'Reilly in ("60% of what you say is just crap")
but, I do agree that Jhani Kaye did tremendous job of keeping KOST competitive for many years. He's an excellent
programmer who's brand of radio may or may not serve KRTH in the end....we'll see. And I'd say Jim Ryan in New York
is as equally talented.

 

[TheLaffer]

Few have ever done it so well?? HaHaHa .....David Eduardo Gleason you really need to stop showing your ignorance on here. You're becoming more fradulent than your resume. ;D

Instead of using every frikkin' post as an excuse to throw darts, why don't you occasionally contribute something? For example, if you do not believe that KOST under Jhani was well programmed, tell us about it. And tell us which AC's were better programmed and did better in the same years.

Tell ya what Old Gringo. When you decide to show a little less contempt for peoples opinions on here I’ll stop the FRIGGIN' Darts.

Actually Old Gringo I do agree Jhani was/is a good programmer. I'm just playing the same game you're playing Taco Man. Anytime someone comes on here to put forth an opinion you disagree just to disagree EVERY FRIGGIN' TIME. You have been wrong factually many times and have said some of the stupidest things I think a human being can say. It's just YOUR opinion Burrito Man. Just YOUR opinion. Get over yourself.

It’s time for you to submit next weeks jock schedule isn’t it? Careful vato, Don’t drip any Jalapeno juice on the schedule

 

[OldGringo]

Burrito Man.

You see, it is hard to be civil if someone is using epithets in every post

It’s time for you to submit next weeks jock schedule isn’t it? Careful vato, Don’t drip any Jalapeno juice on the schedule

I don't do jock schedules.

 

[TheLaffer]

Burrito Man.

You see, it is hard to be civil if someone is using epithets in every post

It’s time for you to submit next weeks jock schedule isn’t it? Careful vato, Don’t drip any Jalapeno juice on the schedule

I don't do jock schedules.

When YOU decide to be less contempt and condesending to your peers, i'll be more civil to you. Case closed.

 

[asoundhound]

Kaye's programming style was fine for KOST. But he's not an oldies PD.

 

[OldGringo]

When YOU decide to be less contempt and condesending to your peers, i'll be more civil to you. Case closed.

Here are my two points

1. When a poster says something that contradicts data I have or have learned, I will challenge that data. I will use your fellow traveller Klif for an example, that of the supposedly unprofitable operations of CBS in the 30's. Klif, based on one source, the egomaniacal writings of a known hyporbolist, Paley himself, sustained that CBS did not make any money until after W.W. II. I cited a specific issue of Fortune, which has the 1937 financials printed, as well as two bios of Paley that confirm same, plus the annual reports to shareholders from the time Coulumbia Broadcasting went public. As a result, Klif now follows me around the fora like a stalker, calling as lies all the 100% verifiable things I have done in radio. This is hardly a case for pots calling kettles black.

2. When a post is subjective, as in the opionion of one poster vs. that of another on the programming abilities of Jhani Kaye or the quality of WFUN vs. WQAM in the late 60's or whatever, one person's opinion is as valid as another as long as such opinion is based on fact (like having heard the stations or format in quations).

Perhaps a reading of rules of debate might benefit both you and Klif. Obfuscation and the creation of urban legends don't win debate points.

 

[RadioStarOne]

I hear "Dino" Barking again! lol lol....

 

[BACKnUSSR]

You are talking about a fine programmer, but not an originator. The format was originated by Owen Leach and Frank Cody of Broadcast Architecture, and applied to KTWV in LA before any other market.

Well, David...I am neither guessing at this, nor looking for your guidance....simply stating fact. You are talking about the label "smooth jazz"...not the actual format which had also been called "new-age".
So the "label" was actually applied to KTWV upon it's switch from KMET in 1987, along with KIFM AND KKSF (which had ALREADY been in the format). KTWV was also preceeded by WQCD (the former WPIX/NY) which would later "re-launch"
under "smooth jazz" and WJZZ/Detroit. In fact, former beautiful music station WRVR/New York has dabbled in the format as early as 1977. And indeed the format grew out of beautiful music in its earliest days rising from the "cheesy, smooth jazz-like"
beautiful music covers of "Hey Jude" and "Just The Way You Are" (it was ELEVATOR music).

As for AAA, KBCO, WXRT, KINK an KFOG might all disagree with you.

Those are about the only ones left. Even LA could not sustain one, NY does not have one... excedpt for a bunch of college stations. There are not even 80 commercial AAA stations in the US, and half are not even in rated markets. And some, like WXPK in the NY market, are little class A's with limited coverage and impact. There are, by comparison, something like 400 Regional Mexican stations and 764 AC stations.

There were never many more than that. So what??? You'll also find that some of the most influencial non-commercial stations in America happen to be AAA, KCRW/LA and WFUV/New York. Your comparisons are misleading. Many "regional Mexican" and "AC" stations (I still dont understand the relevance) are also in non-rated markets and on class A's with limited coverage and impact.



This "spun" rhetoric goes on and on. When he's proven wrong, he says he doesnt listen to english-language radio.....when he's not being challenged.....he's suddenly an expert on ALL formats in ALL markets in ALL era's.
Puleeeze.....this guy is RIDICULOUS.

 

[TheLaffer]

When YOU decide to be less contempt and condesending to your peers, i'll be more civil to you. Case closed.

Here are my two points

1. When a poster says something that contradicts data I have or have learned, I will challenge that data. I will use your fellow traveller Klif for an example, that of the supposedly unprofitable operations of CBS in the 30's. Klif, based on one source, the egomaniacal writings of a known hyporbolist, Paley himself, sustained that CBS did not make any money until after W.W. II. I cited a specific issue of Fortune, which has the 1937 financials printed, as well as two bios of Paley that confirm same, plus the annual reports to shareholders from the time Coulumbia Broadcasting went public. As a result, Klif now follows me around the fora like a stalker, calling as lies all the 100% verifiable things I have done in radio. This is hardly a case for pots calling kettles black.

2. When a post is subjective, as in the opionion of one poster vs. that of another on the programming abilities of Jhani Kaye or the quality of WFUN vs. WQAM in the late 60's or whatever, one person's opinion is as valid as another as long as such opinion is based on fact (like having heard the stations or format in quations).

Perhaps a reading of rules of debate might benefit both you and Klif. Obfuscation and the creation of urban legends don't win debate points.

There you go again Mr. Taco Hypocrite attacking someone else and trying to change the subject. You and I were talking about Jhani Kaye, and your contempt and disrespect for others opinions. Now you want to bring up another poster you have a problem with. I really do think you're off your medications. Go take your Lithium and Prozac and make sure you get that weekend schedule up ASAP. The illegals are getting restless.

Oh and by the way...you really need to stop using words like OBFUSCATION. HaaaHaaaaHaaaaa

 

[OldGringo]

Well, David...I am neither guessing at this, nor looking for your guidance....simply stating fact. You are talking about the label "smooth jazz"...not the actual format which had also been called "new-age".

I think all formats are evolutionary, not revolutionary. The original concept which has a linear connection to today's Smooth Jazz format was inplemented in LA at KTWV in 1986/7 by Owen Leach and Frank Cody.

The "earlier" versions were not as much the same format as more "jazzified" versions of what was made commercial by KTWV.

So the "label" was actually applied to KTWV upon it's switch from KMET in 1987, along with KIFM AND KKSF (which had ALREADY been in the format). KTWV was also preceeded by WQCD (the former WPIX/NY) which would later "re-launch"

But all the predecessors were not "smooth jazz," although they certainly had elements of the format.... just not the mass appeal ones that made the format so viable when made mainstream. In fact, the key word is "mainstream" as opposed to "niche."

under "smooth jazz" and WJZZ/Detroit.

My first radio job was at WCUY and WJMO in Cleveland. The FM was all jazz, as was, later the Detroit station. The core audience was mostly Black, and it did not have mass appeal. Calling WCUY an early version of Smooth Jazz is like calling an early Top 40 an early version of AOR... yes, there were an element or two in common but the formats were fundamentally different.

In fact, former beautiful music station WRVR/New York has dabbled in the format as early as 1977.

Playing some "jazzy" covers of pop hits hardly qualifies this statement. Beautiful Music stations, by the late 70's, were either going with syndicators or joining groups that did custom music. Those that could do neither experimented with all kinds of instrumentals, hoping they could reduce the dependence on Fanck Pourcel and Percy Faith. Most were not successful.

And indeed the format grew out of beautiful music in its earliest days rising from the "cheesy, smooth jazz-like"
beautiful music covers of "Hey Jude" and "Just The Way You Are" (it was ELEVATOR music).

Since I was part of one of the groups that did coustom music and deeply involved in Beautiful Music as a format (87 syndication subscribers at one time, I can say that nearly everyone learned to stay far away from anything jazzy, and from songs that were not covers of familiar pop tuners. The only thing that smooth Jazz and Beautiful share as a format are the facts that they are instrumental based and often used as the background music in stores. The audiences were radically different. The group I was with inlcuded EZ Communications, WBEB and many other significant programmers and syndicators.

There were never many more than that. So what???

With that number of stations, and most of them bing in "odd" markets, I can't see how anyone can claim such formats are influential or significant except to those who hold them dear. I am always amused that the Golden West group sold KSCA because the signal would never allow anything they put on it to get above a low 1 share... yet it debuted at a 6.7 under the new owner in 1997. That just about says it all for the appeal of AAA.

You'll also find that some of the most influencial non-commercial stations in America happen to be AAA, KCRW/LA and WFUV/New York. Your comparisons are misleading. Many "regional Mexican" and "AC" stations (I still dont understand the relevance) are also in non-rated markets and on class A's with limited coverage and impact.

Influential? KCRW has not been AAA for many a year, and WFUV, in a metro of 16 million reaches less than one person in 80. Of course, you may have a dseparate definition of "influential" but mine is pretty simple: lots of people listen to it.

As to the other comment, Regional Mexican is one of the top 5 formats in the US, while AAA is not, based on AQH listening level and national share. AAA is not.

This "spun" rhetoric goes on and on. When he's proven wrong, he says he doesnt listen to english-language radio.....when he's not being challenged.....he's suddenly an expert on ALL formats in ALL markets in ALL era's.
Puleeeze.....this guy is RIDICULOUS.

What I listen to for enjoyment was the subject of a post I made about assimilation not changing music tastes significantly; "enjoyment" and listening for analysis as a broadcaster are two different things.

Not liking certain formats does not mean I do not track them, listen enough to understand them, etc. In the case of Smooth Jazz, I spoke with one of the creators of the format, besides my own experience in Beautiful Music. Simply stated, my opinion of the correlationship of Beautiful and Sommoth Jazz is that there is nearly none... and you seem to feel differently. I have researched the subject, including speaking with another person "in the know" and having been deeply involved in Beautiful. I don't know your credentials, but would welcome your comments. Disagreement is supposed to be one of the healthy aspects of this kind of board.

 

[asoundhound]

So, what do you consider KCRW if not an AAA?

 

[OldGringo]

So, what do you consider KCRW if not an AAA?

If you look at the schedule, you see that music is kind of like ornaments on a Christmas tree... a decoration, not a format. When you have all kinds of NPR shows, the Bebe, and whatnot, it is hard to call this station any kind of music format. The music is so eclectic, when they play it, it kind of defies description unless "eclectic" is a format.

http://www.kcrw.com/schedule/schedule_news shows how unusual the format truly is.

 

[zumahans]

God, I hate to agree with Gabacho Viejo.

KCRW's music is AAA about 4 hours a week.

BTW, the station's music formats are available 24/7 on the web, and it's management says the day will come when it has more music listeners on the web than on the air.

Of course, Arbitron says nobody listens to music on their computers.

 

[OldGringo]

Of course, Arbitron says nobody listens to music on their computers.

No, that is not true. Arbitron does an entirely separate web rating, just as they do proprietary ratings for XM.

 

[zumahans]

Your LA radio rating shibboleth says practically no one listens to iPods, streaming radio, or XM/Sirius.

 

[TheLaffer]

Of course, Arbitron says nobody listens to music on their computers.

No, that is not true. Arbitron does an entirely separate web rating, just as they do proprietary ratings for XM.

See what i mean? This goof lives for disagreeing. He must have been left alone a lot when he was a kid to develop this kind of personality disorder. Sad really sad.

 

[OldGringo]

Your LA radio rating shibboleth says practically no one listens to iPods, streaming radio, or XM/Sirius.

Ratings measure electronic ad media; they have never measured playing piano rolls, 78's, 45's, LP's. 8-Trakcs, CDs, Cassettes, iPods or any other type of recorded music device. This is because none of these are ad media. Since advertisers don't care how much the iPod or the CD player is used, this is an irrelevant subject.

If you look on the Arbitron website, you can see the streaming ratings (which are frequently published in the trades) information. XM has Arbitron do a separate satellite survey to determine usage of different channels, but it is proprietary and not realeased to the general public like web or radio ratings are.

 

[OldGringo]

Of course, Arbitron says nobody listens to music on their computers.

No, that is not true. Arbitron does an entirely separate web rating, just as they do proprietary ratings for XM.

See what i mean? This goof lives for disagreeing. He must have been left alone a lot when he was a kid to develop this kind of personality disorder. Sad really sad.

Disagreeing? Hans stated that streaming and satellite ar enot rated, and that is simply untrue.