[JPL] A provocative comment on the demise of the smoove format

[MICHAEL P STRATTON]

J.Scott 

Beautiful description of the smooth jazz format. When
I started doing my show on WLNZ the entire station was
smooth jazz. I began discussions with the station
manager and program director, to see if they had
interest in allowing me to host a show that focused on
the music of Mingus, Monk, Miles, Trane, et. al. They
didn't know who I was talking about. After a couple of
pledge drives they realized that my show, buried late
on Sunday nights, was drawing more pledges than any
other show, and the rest of the weekend combined, they
decided on a format change. But now they are slowly
but surely edging towards the AAA format, which seems
barely better than smooth jazz.

When someone asked me the difference between jazz and
smooth jazz, I said it was the difference between a
painting and wallpaper.

Mike Stratton
--- Arturo <arturo893 at qwest.net> wrote:

> This week's sponsor: THE PIERS LAWRENCE QUARTET -
> 'STOLEN MOMENTS' 
> 
> Features the exceptional musicality of guitarist,
> Piers Lawrence, bassist Jim Hankins, Sir Earl Grice
> on drums and Chuk Fowler on piano.
> 
> A return to classic sound - ''a warm slice of
> straight ahead Jazz'' ejazz online,
> 
> The quality of emotion that first brought you into
> Jazz - ''Along with the excellent soloing, this
> quartet captures the character of a late night jazz
> scene.''
> - All about Jazz LA.
> 
> Well chosen songs - ''great standards such as
> ''Pent-up House,'' ''Stolen Moments,'' ''Donna Lee''
> and the gem, ''Secret Love''
> 
> ''Soulful, melodic guitar playing and prolific
> songwriting makes this CD a masterful offering'' 
> - All About Jazz
> 
> Thanks to Jim Eigo at Jazz Promo Services &amp;amp;
> Mike Hurzon at The Tracking Station
> 
> for interviews and additional info, 
> www.JazzNetMedia.com or Tionna Smalls - 917-583-4164
> 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> 
> >From the blog of
> http://www.candidjazzandconversation.blogspot.com/
> mourning the demise of another smoove outlet, this
> time in Houston. The blog
> also reflects on the fall of smoove on the radio as
> whole. This is IMO a
> provocative statement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Having run a smooth jazz station, I know that they
> function as little more
> than white noise for the majority of listeners.
> When I switched formats to ALL jazz – 10 formats
> including all the eclectic
> varieties of jazz throughout the 20th century – I
> had people call to
> complain. However, they couldn’t voice what it was
> they wanted or missed.
> 
> I had someone call in while playing Miles Davis
> “Kind of Blue” and ask why
> we weren’t playing jazz anymore. I ask them “what do
> you call this?” They
> said, “I don’t know, but it certainly isn’t jazz”. I
> asked what artist or
> song they would like to hear – and they couldn’t
> name me one.
> I had others call while playing more funky
> contemporary jazz – Grover
> Washington, Stanley Clarke, George Duke, Marcus
> Miller -- and saying things
> like “quit playing this black music and go back to
> jazz.” When I told them
> that jazz was an African American art form – so what
> kind of jazz did they
> want to hear that wasn’t black. . .they had no
> response.
> 
> I told listeners that I would play anything that
> they wanted to hear – and
> no one that claimed to enjoy “smooth jazz” could
> name one artist or song.
> Those that did gave me names like Jean Luc Ponty or
> Jeff Beck – who never
> got air play on any smooth jazz radio. So no one was
> paying any attention –
> even those that listened all day every day.
> 
> Basically the people that listen to smooth jazz
> radio don’t like jazz – and
> very few have any idea what jazz actually is. They
> don’t know the history,
> the artists, the styles, or the possibilities that
> exist in jazz. . .all
> they know is that it’s nice white noise, and it
> isn’t too annoying. It’s not
> about the music, it’s about background noise.
> 
> I think the marketing of jazz into a package called
> “smooth” has caused
> damage to the art form, and to the careers and
> creativity of jazz artists
> that were forced to fit that particular mold.
> 
> Jazz can be smooth – but it isn’t a genre, it is a
> style of playing.
> However, it has been marketed as a genre – creating
> an audience that doesn’t
> know what it is, who is playing it, or how to define
> it. They also don’t go
> to the store to buy it, anymore than they would buy
> a CD featuring bird
> sounds.
> There are smooth versions of ragtime, blues, gospel,
> Dixieland, traditional,
> hot, swing, big band, bop, cool jazz, fusion, funk,
> etc. However, smooth is
> not a style, smooth is not a genre. If anything,
> smooth is a wet blanket
> which has been thrown on the creativity of jazz
> artists. They had to play it
> to get airplay – but no one really wants to buy it.
> 
> I just hope that jazz is allowed to reemerge in all
> it’s multifarious glory
> without the shackles of “smooth” holding it back!
> Maybe the death of smooth
> jazz radio will cause a renaissance of real jazz –
> all styles, all forms.
> Sincerely,
> 
> J. Scott Fugate
> General Manager, Program & Music Director
> Eclectic 89.1 WBCX
> 
> --
> 
> Jazz Programmers' Mailing List:
> jazzproglist at jazzweek.com
> List information:
>
http://lists.jazzweek.com/mailman/listinfo/jazzproglist
> List archive:
> http://lists.jazzweek.com/pipermail/jazzproglist/
> Sponsorship information: jplsponsor at jazzweek.com
>