PPM is killing the smooth jazz format

[recto101]

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

PPM is killing the smooth jazz format

By Mike Kinosian
RadioInfo
Managing Editor/West Coast Bureau Chief

LOS ANGELES– Time is relative.

To some, 20 years represents an eternity, while others can easily recall and relate to what happened two decades ago as if it were yesterday.

There is diminished likelihood for debate though that a lot can eventuate in 20 radio years.

Mull over the following as proof: Approximately 20 years ago, one format in the same Arbitron ratings book claimed a #1 station (12+) in Riverside (KDUO); West Palm Beach (WEAT AM/FM); Albany (WROW AM/FM); Fresno (KOJY); Grand Rapids (WOOD-FM); and Sarasota (Tampa’s WDUV, with over a 20-share).

[Truncated for Fair Use concerns]

 

[LKellerIII]

KKSF did really well here for a few years, too. Personally, though, while I found a lot of individual "Smooth Jazz" songs and artists to be compelling, listening for more than 15 minutes got really boring. I remember that some critic dubbed the format "yuppie wallpaper."

Then about a decade in, programmers decided to take the format more 'mainstream' and added in about 50 percent "old school' songs (70s Motown, etc.) - at least they did at KKSF. That made the station just another Classic R&B station like Kiss-FM or KBLX...and about half-way to KOIT, albeit with more instrumentals. I had already tired of hearing the same old Classic Soul songs after two decades of various radio stations burning them to a crisp. I found that even LESS compelling.

Personally, I was not sad to see Smooth Jazz go away. And if you still like the format, it's on the internet.

 

[recto101]

KKSF did really well here for a few years, too. Personally, though, while I found a lot of individual "Smooth Jazz" songs and artists to be compelling, listening for more than 15 minutes got really boring. I remember that some critic dubbed the format "yuppie wallpaper."

Then about a decade in, programmers decided to take the format more 'mainstream' and added in about 50 percent "old school' songs (70s Motown, etc.) - at least they did at KKSF. That made the station just another Classic R&B station like Kiss-FM or KBLX...and about half-way to KOIT, albeit with more instrumentals. I had already tired of hearing the same old Classic Soul songs after two decades of various radio stations burning them to a crisp. I found that even LESS compelling.

Personally, I was not sad to see Smooth Jazz go away. And if you still like the format, it's on the internet.

I remember KKSF-FM had too Many instrumental cover's of R&B songs. I always wondered what was the Difference Between Smooth Jazz and Quiet Storm when KKSF-FM competed against KBLX-FM in the 1990's.

 

[michael hagerty]

The format had a bit more variety to it when it launched at KTWV in Los Angeles in 1987. Album tracks from Steely Dan, Rickie Lee Jones, Van Morrison, Joni Mitchell, Dire Straits, Joe Jackson and other rock artists with jazz sensibilities were mixed in.

Over time, though, that got lost. While I understand the argument that PPM is not Smooth Jazz friendly, we should keep in mind that the format never found a way of bringing in new young adults. And the thirtysomething's of the late 80s are pushing 60 now. It really is the modern equivalent of the old beautiful music format...an aging (hell, a lot of Beautiful listeners adopted Smooth Jazz as their least objectionable alternative when the Beautiful stations died off) audience with no next generation attracted to the format.

Very few formats last 25 years without a thorough re-invention. Time's up on Smooth Jazz unless someone like Jhani Kaye can reinvent it without turning it into a different format entirely.

 

[TheBigA]

Very few formats last 25 years without a thorough re-invention. Time's up on Smooth Jazz unless someone like Jhani Kaye can reinvent it without turning it into a different format entirely.

I agree. When you talk about music radio, it lives and dies on the music. Let's face it: Smooth Jazz as a form of music hasn't really evolved. It really grew out of the pop instrumentals of the 70s, with Chuck Mangione and Earl Klughe. A lot of great music that fell somewhere between jazz and pop. Creed Taylor made a living from all this. So did Herb Alpert. But it was a radio format more than a musical genre. The radio folks kept looking for things to add texture without losing the sound. But as you say, after 25 years, the format ran its course. The adult audience that once loved it back in the 80s is now outside the demo. So it's not specifically PPM, but rather the lack of musical development that stopped attracting new and younger listeners. That's what happens with a manufactured format rather than one that comes about naturally and organically.

 

[michael hagerty]

That's what happens with a manufactured format rather than one that comes about naturally and organically.

I've never told this story, but about 15 years ago, having been out of radio and into TV for a long while, I called a friend of mine who was very influential in the Smooth Jazz format to suggest a "secret weapon" track I'd run across while playing some old tapes.

She told me that the formula had shifted, and the inclusion of R&B oldies was for one reason only: To get sampling from Oldies and Jammin' Oldies listeners when their stations went to commercial breaks. By that point, Smooth Jazz had already become a format for 50-year old women, and, unable to attract their own 25-54s organically, they instead hoped to "borrow" listeners with music that really had no connection with their own format.

 

[davideduardo]

Let's face it: Smooth Jazz as a form of music hasn't really evolved.

At one of the conventions I heard Mike McVay say this about smooth jazz: "songs you've never heard by people you've never heard of".

And that pretty much explains the low cume aspect of the format... it's not familiar music to most people. While the addicts know all the artists and the characteristics of their sound, the format really had no strength outside a limited core and that was what the PPM exposed.

 

[landtuna]

At one of the conventions I heard Mike McVay say this about smooth jazz: "songs you've never heard by people you've never heard of".

And that pretty much explains the low cume aspect of the format... it's not familiar music to most people. While the addicts know all the artists and the characteristics of their sound, the format really had no strength outside a limited core and that was what the PPM exposed.

There was nothing more relaxing to me, despite not knowing the music nor most of the artists, than flopping down in my easy chair at the end of a long day and just mellowing out to music that just sounded nice and didn't stir up your brain.

 

[ContactLenz]

First that "headline" is about 5 years too late.

Smooth Jazz has been long gone from terrestrial radio for 4+ years and longer.

Also, some inaccuracies about the format:

Cume may have been lower then other formats..but advertisers do not buy cume, they buy rating and share, which TSL (time spent listening) is a huge criteria...think of the Atom, with TSL being a neutron/part of the atom's makeup.

TSL with smooth jazz was enormous...having programmed a few SJ stations, our TSL was always #1 or #2 in the market.


Also, the Smooth Jazz stations I worked for/helped program were always top 5 25-54...isn't that the "money" demo we always hear about? Listener's of smooth jazz had the highest incomes, highest level of education, and the most disposable income of any radio listener, only eclipsed in some cases by Classical listeners, but the Smooth Jazz audience was much more diverse...attracting a large swath of African Americans listenership.

Smooth Jazz's problems were not on-air related, BUT sales related...sales people didn't understand how to sell it, and often buyers didn't understand the format, so they were reluctant to advertise on it, even when they were shown the numbers and the audience they could reach.

As for Smooth Jazz's familiarity, that is part of the reason why stations and artists started playing covers...an instrumental version of a pop style tune. This was effective if packaged/programmed correctly...but then the format started to sound like elevator music or worse Muzak, as programmers became lazy in running the their music, not taking the time to massage the music to separate out those tunes with original songs.

Smooth Jazz is/was a format that was diverse...you could play a smooth R&B tune if it fit the essence of the station, and you could play a pop tune if it too "fit"...again think playing Earth Wind and Fire...but playing Maroon 5's "Sunday Morning"...it was a hip format, but not everyone understood it, and that too added to its demise on the radio band.

I share because the format has been mis-characterized too often by those outside and inside (Mike McVay) the industry and it is because the McVay's don't like it or understand, they poo poo it.

But make no mistake, most all the SJ stations that eventually flipped did not due so do to poor ratings. On the contrary the ratings were usually strong or even very good. They more likely flipped because the operators didn't know how to sell, were too lazy to teach how to sell it, couldn't convince advertisers to buy it, or the operator wanted what they thought was quick fix with the changing ratings measurement game.

Smooth Jazz is/was a format that needs time to nurture and grow...in today's radio landscape, that is not happening and stations are not given the chance to do that...it is make in 2-3 books, or flip and try something else. One cannot do that with Smooth jazz.

 

[TheBigA]

But make no mistake, most all the SJ stations that eventually flipped did not due so do to poor ratings. On the contrary the ratings were usually strong or even very good. They more likely flipped because the operators didn't know how to sell, were too lazy to teach how to sell it, couldn't convince advertisers to buy it, or the operator wanted what they thought was quick fix with the changing ratings measurement game.

Ratings don't matter if they can't be sold. You can be #1 in a market, but if advertisers don't want that demo, you're out of business. And yes, I agree that smooth jazz stations got huge TSL, mainly because stations were used as background music, and left on all day. The smooth jazz stations I worked with were all heritage stations. They had been in the format for over ten years. They all started to notice problems with their demos before PPM, so I don't see this strictly as a PPM or methodology problem. It's a music problem. And it was a music problem for the reason I explained earlier: Smooth jazz wasn't a genre, but a format, and the music industry saw it that way. They didn't market their artists the way they did pop or country. They didn't do interviews or talk shows, and no one was really interested in the artists the way they are in pop, urban, or country. That's why the audience didn't have much artist loyalty. The music was largely instrumental, so people couldn't sing along, or recognize song titles. The music was built around long rambling solos, and we all know what that does. That's why the successful SJ stations, like Philly and LA, began to blend their music with other formats, to bring in vocals, familiar artists, and melodies. But blending it with other formats diluted the audience base.

Programmers love to blame sales people for the failure of a format, but my view is that if a format can't be explained or taught easily, then the problem is with the format design. I worked with concert promoters and talent agents, and they had the same problem: Finding tour or festival sponsorship. Several times, we found alcohol companies interested in festival sponsorship, but laws restrict advertising of certain types of alcohol on the radio. Tobacco loved smooth jazz, but you can't advertise tobacco on the radio. Yes there's an audience for smooth jazz, just as there's an audience for country music in San Francisco. But that's not the point. Unless someone pays for it, it doesn't matter.

 

[landtuna]

That's why the audience didn't have much artist loyalty.

You raise an interesting point but I don't listen to artists. I listen to songs. I now wonder if I am unique.

 

[LKellerIII]

Actually, I recall that when KKSF debuted (way pre-Clear Channel ownership), they pushed the artists very hard, including well-publicized free Smooth Jazz concerts. I went to only one - at the Hyatt Regency Hotel on Market Street. They also pushed their annual CDs to raise money for AIDS research that sold well locally and promoted those same artists, and burnished the station's image. I believe Clear Channel kept that going in later years, though they just went through the motions.

The only SJ artists I can recall seeing live now were Tuck and Patty, who I found kind of insipid - as I found much SJ music. For me, real jazz is great because I can either relax with it, and shut off my brain, as Landtuna notes - but if I want to think about the music and get into it, real jazz provides so much more of interest.

I went to see Diana Krall recently at Louise K. Davies Symphony Hall. Though she hews more closely to standards than jazz per se (even mixing in her interpretations of old rock songs) - she and the concert were terrific.

Non-commercial stations like KCSM are the only place to hear real jazz anymore, but somehow I've learned to live without the commercials. It ain't easy, but I keep trying... ;D

 

[recto101]

Actually, I recall that when KKSF debuted (way pre-Clear Channel ownership), they pushed the artists very hard, including well-publicized free Smooth Jazz concerts. I went to only one - at the Hyatt Regency Hotel on Market Street. They also pushed their annual CDs to raise money for AIDS research that sold well locally and promoted those same artists, and burnished the station's image. I believe Clear Channel kept that going in later years, though they just went through the motions.

The only SJ artists I can recall seeing live now were Tuck and Patty, who I found kind of insipid - as I found much SJ music. For me, real jazz is great because I can either relax with it, and shut off my brain, as Landtuna notes - but if I want to think about the music and get into it, real jazz provides so much more of interest.

I went to see Diana Krall recently at Louise K. Davies Symphony Hall. Though she hews more closely to standards than jazz per se (even mixing in her interpretations of old rock songs) - she and the concert were terrific.

Non-commercial stations like KCSM are the only place to hear real jazz anymore, but somehow I've learned to live without the commercials. It ain't easy, but I keep trying... ;D

I remember that Brown Broadcasting had KKSF from its 1987 founding to 1996-1998 when various owners that formed Clear Channel had the station. I do know that John Evans of KCBS-AM was a DJ for KKSF in the late 1990's

 

[semoochie]

Clear Channel is a very old broadcast company, that made a series of purchases, to become the behemoth they are today.

 

[DavidKaye]

Non-commercial stations like KCSM are the only place to hear real jazz anymore, but somehow I've learned to live without the commercials. It ain't easy, but I keep trying... ;D

Jazz was only big during the 1930s and 40s when it was the equivalent of rock in the 60s and hip-hop today, that is, teen music. Jazz had a resurgence in the early 1960s with the "cool jazz" or "college jazz" style of the Paul Desmond/Dave Brubeck axis. But that didn't last long. Through the rest of musical history, jazz has been a fringe genre.

In the Bay Area, there was KJAZ for fulltime jazz and a few specialty jazz shows on the non-comms, exactly like it is today. So, we're not really hearing less jazz.

 

[JEREMIAH]

Remember when the PD of KKSF jumped out a window at the St. Francis(where the station was)?
Did he see the writing on the wall? No, not funny but some people take things VERY seriously.

Jerry Gordon

 

[michael hagerty]

Non-commercial stations like KCSM are the only place to hear real jazz anymore, but somehow I've learned to live without the commercials. It ain't easy, but I keep trying... ;D

Jazz was only big during the 1930s and 40s when it was the equivalent of rock in the 60s and hip-hop today, that is, teen music. Jazz had a resurgence in the early 1960s with the "cool jazz" or "college jazz" style of the Paul Desmond/Dave Brubeck axis. But that didn't last long. Through the rest of musical history, jazz has been a fringe genre.

In the Bay Area, there was KJAZ for fulltime jazz and a few specialty jazz shows on the non-comms, exactly like it is today. So, we're not really hearing less jazz.

There was a second brief hot period...1969-71...KBCA, Los Angeles went Top 10 in those years.

 

[Goldilocks94941]

When KKSF started out, under Brown Broadcasting, it was largely a mix of "new age" and "contemporary intstrumental" music, with some light/contemporary jazz mixed in. And more so after 7pm (or was it 8pm?) when the "Lights Out San Francisco" variation on the format kicked in each night. emphasizing more laid back instrumentals and longer album cuts than during the day. At the time, the Bay Area was a hub for the smaller labels and independent artists who produced this music. When Clear Channel took over, they seemed to replace the "new age" element with "light R&B" and pop music that didn't really blend with the instrumentals all that well. And the silly jingles made it just another "Quiet Storm" variation of the station one notch to the left (KBLX).

Back then, KCSM's jazz music favored brass and Latin-jazz inspired material. Commercial KJAZ, on the other hand, had a broader mix of jazz, and stayed away from the hyper Cubano stuff on KCSM. As a result, both KJAZ and KKSF were designed to accompany you as you read, drove, prepared and at dinner, etc. And the mix of stations worked well for Bay Area listeners who wanted a bit of variety that they won't find today.

People being put in charge who didn't have a real feel for the music format, or who couldn't sell a niche format, are part of the reason I believe they don't exist anymore. When it's just a job, the lack of dedication shows.

KKSF got a bit formulaic, and there was always a schmaltzy emotion-less Kenny G number or the like every quarter hour to drive away people with a bit more sophistication. But for several years, KKSF was an original that people like Broadcast Architecture tried to copy, without having the depth or spirit we listeners enjoyed from KKSF and its first-rate air staff.

 

[recto101]

Remember when the PD of KKSF jumped out a window at the St. Francis(where the station was)?
Did he see the writing on the wall? No, not funny but some people take things VERY seriously.

Jerry Gordon

Sorry to hear that the PD went the way he did? Didn't Brown Broadcasting also own KDFC 102.1 FM in the 1990's and sold 1220 AM during this time so they can keep 102.1 FM and 103.7 FM.

 

[recto101]

Non-commercial stations like KCSM are the only place to hear real jazz anymore, but somehow I've learned to live without the commercials. It ain't easy, but I keep trying... ;D

Jazz was only big during the 1930s and 40s when it was the equivalent of rock in the 60s and hip-hop today, that is, teen music. Jazz had a resurgence in the early 1960s with the "cool jazz" or "college jazz" style of the Paul Desmond/Dave Brubeck axis. But that didn't last long. Through the rest of musical history, jazz has been a fringe genre.

In the Bay Area, there was KJAZ for fulltime jazz and a few specialty jazz shows on the non-comms, exactly like it is today. So, we're not really hearing less jazz.

Full Time Jazz Stations do exist but you can only find them on various All-Music websites in some places where there are no OTA Jazz Station.