B
BACKnUSSR
Guest
Gee...this is tedious....
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."
The stations I cited were doing exactly the same thing formatically that KTWV would adopt....with the exception of using the words "smooth jazz". They were specifically designed to appeal to the mainstream. Obviously you hadn't heard these stations firsthand. Otherwise, you'd have better command of what you're talking about.
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.
Who brought up WCUY other than you??? Nobody called it an early version of "smooth jazz".
The fact remains WJZZ in Detroit was though.
You must understand that THEN and NOW....the only thing "smooth jazz" and "jazz" stations have in common is the word.
Charlie Parker and Kenny G are two things that shall never meet musically.
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.
Great David. Only that's NOT what WRVR was doing.....they were playing George Benson, Grover Washington Jr., Chuck Mangione and Herb Alpert......certainly all early CORE acts in Smooth Jazz. Where do you come up with these completely irrelevant explanations?
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.
Another fine example that makes little sense. Alternative never clicked in NYC....so should KROQ/LA throw in the towel?
KSCA, in its own case: 1) didn't reach the proper geograhical are for its audience
2) wasn't a particularly well programmed station
3) did a horrible job in marketing itself
Also....no one here ever said that the AAA format as a whole is either influencial or significant...it's not....nor has it ever been ....simply that it has replaced what was true 70's era AOR. And that the "more influencial non-commercials" (to whatever degree they are) tend to be AAA, including, yes, KCRW, which still reports to trades and is classified as a Adult Album Alternative station....(they just dont play "the single"). There is no formal "eclectic" format. They are pretty much an adult rock-based station.
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.[/color]
I agree that AAA is not. I dislike the format. It does, however, exist.
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.
Healthy discussions are great...but it seems nearly every thread begins to become a tired old battle with you at the bottom of the melee. Personally, I find it disrespectful to twist statements rather than debate them at face value.
I'm not sure of your credentials either, nor do I care much. That's not a concern, but rather, its about arrogance, so I'll put the same question to you that NBC's David Gregory put to President Bush earlier this year....."can you cite an example of when you were wrong?"
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."
The stations I cited were doing exactly the same thing formatically that KTWV would adopt....with the exception of using the words "smooth jazz". They were specifically designed to appeal to the mainstream. Obviously you hadn't heard these stations firsthand. Otherwise, you'd have better command of what you're talking about.
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.
Who brought up WCUY other than you??? Nobody called it an early version of "smooth jazz".
The fact remains WJZZ in Detroit was though.
You must understand that THEN and NOW....the only thing "smooth jazz" and "jazz" stations have in common is the word.
Charlie Parker and Kenny G are two things that shall never meet musically.
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.
Great David. Only that's NOT what WRVR was doing.....they were playing George Benson, Grover Washington Jr., Chuck Mangione and Herb Alpert......certainly all early CORE acts in Smooth Jazz. Where do you come up with these completely irrelevant explanations?
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.
Another fine example that makes little sense. Alternative never clicked in NYC....so should KROQ/LA throw in the towel?
KSCA, in its own case: 1) didn't reach the proper geograhical are for its audience
2) wasn't a particularly well programmed station
3) did a horrible job in marketing itself
Also....no one here ever said that the AAA format as a whole is either influencial or significant...it's not....nor has it ever been ....simply that it has replaced what was true 70's era AOR. And that the "more influencial non-commercials" (to whatever degree they are) tend to be AAA, including, yes, KCRW, which still reports to trades and is classified as a Adult Album Alternative station....(they just dont play "the single"). There is no formal "eclectic" format. They are pretty much an adult rock-based station.
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.[/color]
I agree that AAA is not. I dislike the format. It does, however, exist.
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.
Healthy discussions are great...but it seems nearly every thread begins to become a tired old battle with you at the bottom of the melee. Personally, I find it disrespectful to twist statements rather than debate them at face value.
I'm not sure of your credentials either, nor do I care much. That's not a concern, but rather, its about arrogance, so I'll put the same question to you that NBC's David Gregory put to President Bush earlier this year....."can you cite an example of when you were wrong?"