JAZZ: ON THE AIR

© 1997 Mike Metheny


Jazz formats in the clubs may come and go, but the airwaves of Kansas City have long been a constant for those jazz buffs who need only get to the nearest radio to hear their favorite music. There's "Jazz In The Night" on KANU and Dick Wright's "Jazz Scene," now in its 37th year; KCUR's "Just Jazz" (15 years and counting), "Swing Club," and the old reliable "Take Five" (previously known as "The Jazz Place"); there's generous jazz programming on both KKFI and Warrensburg's KCMW (where you can hear "The Only Real Jazz In Town"); and, for those with more contemporary tastes, there's Jeff Charney's "Sunday Jazz Brunch" on KPRS and "smooth jazz" on KCIY.

But, just how healthy is jazz radio in 1997? And, for that matter, what is "jazz" in what has become an increasingly homogenized and money-oriented marketplace? Those in the know have much to say about America's indigenous musical art form, how it's presented on the air, and where it's going as a century of jazz comes to a close.

Taking Stock
Each broadcaster we spoke with for this article was given a chance to log in with their take on the current state of jazz radio in the Kansas City area. With some exceptions, most were optimistic -- either cautiously or fervently so. Bob McWilliams of KANU in Lawrence is a little of each.

"I think we're very fortunate in the Kansas City region to have KCUR, KKFI, KCMW and KANU. All provide a substantial amount of straight-ahead, acoustic jazz programming. There are a number of metropolitan areas around the country where there's little or no such programming, so in that regard, I think we're pretty lucky. In general, however, these are difficult times because of the severe financial constraints that community and public radio stations are under. Virtually all jazz programming is on non-commercial radio stations, and the current financial difficulties of that market are casting kind of a pall over it all."

Brent Foster at KCMW also has some ambivalent feelings.

"The current state of jazz radio in the Midwest is in flux. Things are constantly changing. There are so many different jazz genres right now that everybody's just trying to stay on top of the ratings and on top of the commercialization of the music itself, but without doing damage to it (jazz)."

Ambivalence and cautious optimism aside, there are also those with more extreme opinions, both con and pro.

"Things right now are pretty low," says Dwight Foster of KKFI. "Especially when certain stations promote jazz but it's not really jazz. You know, 'blue' jazz, 'cool' jazz, 'smooth' jazz -- whatever it is they call it -- at one-0-something (on the dial)... That's not jazz!"

(More on "smooth jazz" later.)

Ginney Coleman of KCUR is equally pessimistic.

"The current state of jazz radio is very bad right now. There are a lot of good news programs, but as far as music is concerned -- and that's my main interest -- there's isn't enough jazz at all. You can hear rock, and you can hear country & western on almost any station at any time, but you have to listen at a certain time to hear jazz."

There are also the unabashed cheerleaders for local jazz programming, including Robert Moore of KCUR and Dr. Mike Pettengell of KKFI.

"I think things are on the upswing right now," says Moore. "There seem to be more shows popping up that feature traditional and authentic jazz. That's the good news."

And "Dr. Mike:" "I don't know of many other cities where you can listen to over seven hours a day of jazz on the radio Monday through Friday. If you search the dial you can find at least that much good, all-around classic jazz, and with most of the DJs exploring the whole history of the music. So yes, I think the current state of jazz radio is good."

As all of the broadcasters agreed, though, radio in any form has to contend with the bottom line. And local jazz programming is not exempt from the harsh realities of good ratings and hard cash.

"It depends on whether you're talking about the public radio stations or the smooth jazz station," says Jeff Charney of KPRS when asked about the current state of jazz radio in the KC area. "Generally speaking, jazz radio seems to be making money. And if it's making money, the owners of the radio stations will be happy and they'll keep the formats the way they are. If it (jazz) stops making money, though, formats will be changed."

A Symbiotic Relationship
If ever there were two frequently struggling arts-oriented entities in a typical metropolitan area, they would have to be local jazz radio and its counterpart, the local jazz community itself. The musicians usually lead a precarious existence, jazz clubs can come and go in a heartbeat, and jazz radio formats can shift from jazz on a Friday to news-talk or country on a Monday. How does jazz radio contribute to the health, stability and well-being of any city's jazz community? According to Bob McWilliams, three ways.

"Number one, it provides a general consciousness of jazz as an art form, which is especially important in so many cities where funding for music education has been cut to the point where the presence of jazz is so much less in people's lives. Second, and in a more specific vein, it helps raise awareness and provide promotion for local artists in terms of playing their music and having them on as guests to promote their gigs. And third, it makes it possible for clubs and local jazz organizations such as the Folly Theater to bring in touring jazz artists because they know there will be a place where the music of those people will be played on the air."

For Jeff Charney, it's a two-way street.

"(Jazz radio) keeps listeners involved when we talk about and promote the things that are happening in town. That's provided the people on the other side of the events get involved by working with the radio stations hand-in-hand to promote the events."

Dr. Mike sees the historical benefit of jazz on the air.

"When you're dealing with a place like Kansas City, the whole history of the city itself is tied up in jazz. And many of the people who now live here may not know that. So, just by listening to the radio you can get a good sense of the history of the city."

Timely words as the historic 18th & Vine District gears up for a second coming sometime this summer.

What role does local jazz programming play in promoting local jazz artists in general and their recordings in particular? Do such shows have a responsibility to do so?

"No. I don't believe they do," says Jeff Charney. "I mean, what if (the album) is a piece of shit! It goes back to what I said before: radio stations are businesses. And they're in business to make money, to go for mass audience appeal. If a song just ain't there, then it shouldn't get played just because someone's a local artist. It just doesn't work that way anymore."

Another spin from Robert Moore.

"Definitely. I definitely think they do (have a responsibility). But I don't think they should bend over backward to promote someone just because he or she is a local artist. More importantly, it should be good jazz, it should swing, and it should be appropriate to whatever the format of the show is. There's a fine line between promoting just for the sake of promoting, and promoting good jazz."

When it comes to program format, Dr. Mike agrees.

"It all depends on what kind of show it is. My show pretty much concentrates on jazz from the '50s and '60s, so I don't play that much contemporary stuff, local or otherwise. But then, yes, I think there is some responsibility to play the music of local artists, if for no other reason than to expose the listeners to what's going on in their own community."

For Ginney Coleman, however, the question of such promotion is a no-brainer.

"Why, yes! That's why Ruth (Rhoden) and I do that on our show -- play CDs by local musicians and talk about where everybody's playing. I do think it's one of our responsibilities on the show: to help the jazz musicians, and to get people out to hear them."

If there's a "bottom line" in this regard, then, it seems that some kind of symbiotic relationship is necessary between jazz radio and jazz community to ensure the survival of each. Says Brent Foster:

"I think it's absolutely crucial that the radio stations work hand-in-hand with local artists to cross-promote each other and to maintain the connection both are striving to achieve."

The Ongoing Struggle
Anyone who feels a passion for jazz will tell you it's hard to understand why that passion is not shared by the masses. Why does jazz appeal to such a small audience? Opinions abound.

"Jazz is a magical, mystical thing," says Dwight Foster. "It's a mystery to most people -- sometimes even to professionals! Most people find it hard to understand."

And according to Foster, a lack of early exposure is part of the problem.

"Rhythm & blues and rock are pretty much knocked into your head subconsciously from way back -- you turn on the radio, it's there; you turn on your TV, it's there. I don't think anybody was born with 'Bird playing in their ear. For most people, there wasn't jazz in grade school or even in high school. But when people who now like jazz first discovered it, they went, 'wow! I sure would like to learn more about that!'"

"Jazz is too complex for most people to enjoy," says Jeff Charney. "They can't handle it; they can't follow it. People get bored, they have short attention spans. The way the world is, everything has to be short, sweet, to the point and quick. Today, you get in, you make sure people get the hook, and you get out."

Robert Moore echoes the complexity theme, but from a different angle.

"One reason jazz attracts such a small audience is because of its sophistication. Personally, I like jazz because, not only is it sophisticated, it's also aesthetically pleasing. It appeals to me like no other music ever has. But I also think that it attracts a small audience because a majority of people are not turned on to it in the proper way at an early age. They hear 1967 Coltrane and go, 'oh my god, what is this?!' I was lucky; my dad gave me big band records to listen to and I went from there. I understood the progression."

"You hate to sound like you're smarter than anyone else," laughs Ginney Coleman, "but when it comes to music, I think jazz people are! They don't go out and support all the country & western things at Kemper (arena). Those concerts play to a full house... and then you have a great jazz artist playing to only a handful of people! Most people really just don't understand what jazz musicians are doing. Country & western and rock are a lot easier to follow; and I think that's why they have such big audiences. Jazz is a more esoteric art form. And it appeals to a smaller number of people."

"The average jazz listener is a different person from the average music listener," adds Brent Foster. "The average jazz listener is typically more educated, and more enthusiastic and energetic about the music. It's almost like a religion to the jazz connoisseur. You just don't find that level of 'faith' in any other kind of music."

(In a note of irony, Foster also says that KCMW is actually considering expanding their jazz programming. "It's been a struggle for us to keep from having more jazz! We're actually interested in adding more.")

If jazz attracts such a small following, then certainly it must be a struggle for stations to keep, let alone justify their jazz formats.

"It is a little bit of a struggle, yes," says Dr. Mike. "Even with public and community radio, there's a real emphasis on how much money a show brings in. So, if the listeners are willing to give money, or if a show on a commercial station brings in enough advertising money, then there's not going to be a problem. But the old way of thinking is that most jazz listeners just like to sit back and listen, that they don't always like to dig into their pockets and give. I think that's changing a little bit."

(More on pledge drives a little later, too.)

"KANU has recently gone to a satellite overnight service," says Bob McWilliams. "We just could not afford to pay live bodies to be on overnight. It's not nearly as preferable as having live, local service, but at least it's jazz and from pretty much the same people who were behind the KJAZ service out of San Francisco (that has ceased operation)."

Robert Moore at KCUR has also witnessed some programming changes. With jazz as a recent casualty.

"At the NPR stations, with funding from the NEA going down and all, we have to take more of the national shows during the primetime slots just to keep our money coming in. So, right now, our hands are tied. It's one of the reasons my show ends at midnight, and the BBC starts across the board."

One of the more high-profile casualties of formats in flux is KCUR's "Just Jazz" hosted by Ginney Coleman and Ruth Rhoden. Just as the show was celebrating its 15th anniversary last February in its Saturday, noon to 2:00 p.m. spot, KCUR moved the show to Sundays, 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. How hard is it for a radio station to maintain steady jazz programming? Just ask Ginney and Ruth.

"Very hard, apparently!" says Coleman. "As you can see by what happened to 'Just Jazz!' They just don't seem to think that jazz is as important as other programming. Now, I know 'Prairie Home Companion' is a great show for a lot of people, but to take a program as popular as ours was and, after having the same spot for 15 years, move it to make room for another show... It just seems to me that jazz is always going to take a second spot to whatever is more popular."

Ruth Rhoden is equally dismayed by the change.

"I hate to criticize what KCUR's done. They are the people who run the station, and it's their option to move us. But what makes me feel bad is that we were the only local show (on KCUR) that showed up on last year's Arbitron ratings! To me, that was proof of an accomplishment. Proof that we'd connected with a lot of people."

What's done is done, though. And it's now up to at least one expendable jazz program to swallow a bitter pill and move on.

"There's not much more that can be said about it," says Coleman. "The people at KCUR decided that it was the best thing for the station, and that maybe we could even perk up Sunday afternoons. But I don't see it that way. Saturday is a jazz day! And Sunday is a day of family and sports. I'm a sports fan myself! I hate to give up that time! I really feel we're going to lose a lot of our listeners, and I think it might even hurt the programming at KCUR. I just think it was a bad move."

"Won't You Please Give?"
If you remember Sam Kinnison screeching out those words in his notorious "World Hunger" routine, you'll also recall the late comic's not-so-subtle implication: that those who ask you to dig into your pocket for a particular cause are also pulling your guilt strings to achieve their objective. In the world of public radio, however, it's not as much about "begging" listeners for a hand as it is simply staying on the air. Yet another facet of the "ongoing struggle."

"I hate pledge drives," says Dr. Mike. "But they are necessary. I didn't go into this business to beg for money, but... I wish there was a different way. I wish that we could work out some sort of corporate funding, or whatever, where the people with the money would just say, 'OK, here's the money, do what you want with it; and we won't try to have a say over programming.'"

There's a positive side to pledging, though. Once again, Dr. Mike.

"On the other hand, pledge drives are a very democratic way of doing things. You don't have to give a lot when you pledge; and if you like the music you're listening to, you should definitely call in and pledge. It adds to your say about what music is played."

"Pledge drives don't bother me at all," says Bob McWilliams. "I think it's important to tell people up front that, without strong financial support, public radio can't put jazz on the air. Or anything else, for that matter. It's absolutely vital that we have pledge drives. The budget cuts have been so steep over the last 10 to 15 years as far as government funding of the arts in general and radio in particular, that private contributions are vital. They pay a large chunk of the budget. Without them, public radio wouldn't exist, and jazz on public radio certainly wouldn't exist. Jazz programming is not free!"

Even Sam Kinnison would have had a hard time disagreeing with that.

What Is "Jazz?"
In the past two issues of JAM, contributor Paul Hofmann has taken a stab at answering that question. But despite the gallant efforts of articulate thinkers (and musicians) like Paul, the answer remains illusive. Our interview subjects were also given a chance to add their thoughts to this always-lively discussion as it pertains to radio airplay. Most were quick to say what jazz is... and what it isn't.

"To me," says Bob McWilliams, "jazz encompasses a lot of styles. But its essence is grounded in swing, the blues and improvisation. The farther away from those three things you get, the less likely something is to be jazz."

"Jazz is something different to everyone," says Brent Foster. "But I think it's a style of music that's like a circle or continuum covering a variety of elements, all of which are interconnected. Improvisation, swing, contemporary jazz... they all have the common goal of producing a 'jazz sound.'"

Contemporary jazz.

...Smooth jazz.

Just mention the latter and a hot button is pushed.

"From what I've heard of the so-called 'smooth jazz,'" continues McWilliams, "the jazz elements are nearly non-existent. Some record companies and some marketing-types have decided that if something has a saxophone in it, it's jazz. Which I find curious... Like, if it has a banjo in it, it must be bluegrass! Which, of course, is silly. But I must also say that I think there's some good music on smooth jazz stations. As a matter of fact, in terms of content alone, it's higher quality music than what's on many other radio formats. Still, I'm concerned that anybody would think it's jazz. There just isn't very much jazz in what is called 'smooth jazz.'"

"The term 'smooth jazz' is a hot button with only a very small core of people," says Jeff Charney. "It's just a label, that's all it is. Just like 'jazz' itself is, you know? 'Jazz' encompasses many things, and someone decided to call what they were doing 'smooth jazz' so you'd at least have an idea of what you're getting into. When you hear the term 'smooth jazz,' you know you're not going to get Charlie Parker or John Coltrane. You're going to get the product they're offering."

But what about those purists out there who feel the word "jazz" is being used in almost a blasphemous way? Again, Jeff Charney:

"I'd tell those purists to lighten up! To get a life! To wake up to the 1990s! Also, I know that some of those old "purists" -- and even some of the young cats -- don't like a lot of the stuff I play, or what 106.5 (KCIY) plays. But a lot of people do; they pay money to hear it, they like it. And for people to constantly fight it... it's just getting old."

Dr. Mike has an open mind about "smooth jazz." But with an asterisk or two.

"I like all kinds of music. And 'smooth jazz' has it's place. For me, its place is that someone might listen to it, enjoy it, and then think, 'well, let's look at what came before; let's see how smooth jazz got to be what it is.' And maybe that might lead them back to what I would call more 'legitimate' musics. But personally, I do have to say that when I'm in a store looking through the jazz section and I see a Kenny G album, I really wish, at that moment, that I had a big black magic marker so I could just mark out his whole face! Again, I understand that some people like that kind of music. And that's their thing. But for me, it's background music; it's music to drink wine by, or eat a dinner by, or have sex by! It really doesn't stimulate any kind of intellectual thinking."

Robert Moore ends one side of the discussion with this thought.

"To me, smooth jazz is a Chet Baker record. Or even certain Art Pepper solos, or Dexter Gordon solos. That's smooth jazz. What 'The City' (KCIY) is passing off as 'smooth jazz' is nothing but New Age mixed with adult contemporary vocals. And that has nothing to do with jazz. 'Jazz' has simply become a hip term to help sell any kind of music."

So, we've heard from the skeptics. But what about the disciples of "smooth jazz?" Those who have no problem with the pairing of the word "jazz" with slick instrumentals and pop, made-for-video vocals? KCIY program director Bret Michael was given the opportunity to respond to the charges and to answer the critics of his station's format.

"The definition of 'jazz' can be anything. But the most important thing is that it's a 'feeling.' Does what we play classify as jazz? No. But does it classify as smooth jazz? Yes. We've never come on the air and said that are a 'jazz station.' We've never come on the air and tried to be anything that we're not. We just play music that most people can enjoy."

Just what is "smooth jazz?"

"The 'smooth jazz' format has been on the air now for about 10 years. And the term 'smooth jazz' itself was actually suggested by a listener as the format evolved from being very New Age to more 'contemporary instrumental music;' which, to tell you the truth, I think is the best title for it. But we can't go on the radio and say, 'We're Contemporary Instrumental Music 106.5...' It just wouldn't resonate with people."

Is "smooth jazz" devoid of any kind of "intellectual" reaction? And only good as "background music?" To "drink wine, eat dinner and have sex by?"

"We pride ourselves in playing music that can enhance the listener's day, from the minute they wake up to the minute they go to sleep. We pride ourselves in being the soundtrack of someone's life and providing music that will take the stress out of a commute, ease them through the workday, and help them unwind after a long day. I think people need that outlet! And, as far as music to drink wine by and have sex by, I consider it a great compliment to be a part of someone's most intimate time in that way."

Smooth jazz is "nothing but New Age mixed with adult contemporary vocals." True or false?

"False. Smooth jazz is not New Age music. I worked in that format when it was New Age. This ain't it."

Any other comments for the critics of KCIY in particular and smooth jazz in general?

"I once did an interview with Stanley Turrentine, and he told me that the audience generally doesn't know what musicians are doing. What scale you're playing, what chords you're playing... But they do know whether or not they're being jived. We have never gone on the air and tried to jive anybody. We are who we are, and we have a large, loyal following who enjoy what we do.

"Some jazz musicians have gotten the message -- either directly or indirectly -- that it's wrong to consider what the audience would like to hear. That it's wrong to play to your audience. And sometimes, maybe that's OK. I mean, I'm sure glad John Coltrane didn't think, 'Well, maybe the audience won't like it if I play modal.' But on the other hand, I don't think it's necessarily wrong to play for your audience! And give them the music they want to hear.

"It's true, we are not for everybody. I don't expect an Ornette Coleman fan to want to listen to us for any length of time. But we never jive our audience, and we will always stay true to our mission."

The Crystal Ball
What's in store for jazz radio as the '90s come to an end? Will it continue to splinter into additional micro-genres? (To the continued dismay of those "old purists?") Are "straight-ahead" formats destined to remain fossilized remnants of another era, featuring a music that continues to appeal only to a tiny percentage of the music-listening/buying public? And what about the prospects for "contemporary" and/or "smooth jazz." Are those formats here to stay? Or are both just the short-lived progeny of corporate exploitation.

Jeff Charney takes a peak into the crystal ball.

"Once again, we're talking about two different kinds of jazz radio. On the traditional side, it's probably always going to remain on NPR, college-type stations, and yes, with a small audience. I just can't see it growing any more. I once heard (Blue Note Records president) Bruce Lundvall say that polka music outsells jazz! You've got to be kidding, I thought. As far as the smooth jazz stations go, I think they'll be around for a while, but I don't think they'll have any kind of major longevity. The goals of those stations is to go after a certain demographic and to provide them with background music; they're not interested in anything 'cutting edge.' All they've done is replace middle of the road radio stations, and eventually something will come along to replace that as well."

"Who knows what's going to happen," says Dr. Mike. "I do think that with more CDs being reissued, there's a possibility that this music will then make it onto the airwaves. And as more people get to know this music, the more of it they will want to hear. If that happens, then I think the future of jazz radio is very good. But just as easily, the exact opposite could happen. Radio, for the most part -- especially if you take out public and community stations -- is run to make money. So, in the end, it all depends on popular tastes; and when it comes to jazz, again it's going to depend on how much the listening audience is willing to work."

And, of course, there's the very technology that makes jazz radio possible in this first place. Bob McWilliams: "I think that there are several things that are happening technologically that are both exciting and scary. There are already digital satellite radio services with jazz programming. And recently the FCC approved the idea of portable satellite radio so you can get satellite reception in your car through specialized services you would pay for. So, in one sense, this is ideal for what you would call 'niche radio' formats like jazz. No matter where you live, you can get jazz on the radio 24 hours a day. The downside is that I think it will severely hurt the health of jazz in cities like Kansas City, or any other place you might be where you wouldn't have the local angle, answering people's questions, telling them where they can go to hear good jazz when they call up, helping to promote festivals, clubs and the local music scene in general. If you skim off enough people who support local public radio, and they go to stuff that's distributed nationally over satellite, the Internet or whatever, you might be undermining the ability of local stations to provide jazz programming."

As always, technological advances bring with them double-edged swords. Even in the world of jazz radio.

Why Jazz Radio At All?
So, what's the big deal here? Why the outspoken passion on all sides of jazz-related topics, topics that pale in comparison to larger issues of the day. What if jazz radio just went away altogether? Who would notice? Who would care? Why have jazz on the air at all?

"Jazz is some of the most historically important music in this country," says Dr. Mike. "And people need to be exposed to it. They need to have that kind of music available to them on the air because chances are they aren't going to go out and buy it on their own if they haven't been exposed to it in some way."

"I'm pretty passionate about jazz and how it's the distinctive art form that America has produced," adds Bob McWilliams. "At its best, jazz appeals to the head, the heart and the feet. It can challenge you intellectually, it can bring your emotions -- whether it's sadness, or joy, or love, or romance -- and, it can make you want to dance! I don't think there's any other form of music, currently, that can do all three. Jazz can enrich us spiritually and intellectually... and it makes us feel good! I think those are real good reasons for people to hear it."

In the final analysis, though, maybe the question of jazz radio's true value is best answered from the perspective of one who's been deeply immersed in the music for most of a lifetime -- both as musician, and more recently as broadcaster. For Dwight Foster, this is not a discussion of bottom lines, genres and numbers. It's about the music itself.

"When you're receiving this music," says Foster, "you're not feeling any negative thoughts. I mean, you could be in a negative mood, but when you listento this music, you come out of it, just like that. Jazz is an uplifting thing!"

...And, perhaps, worthy of a community's continued support.


RETURN TO APRIL/MAY 1997 MAIN INDEX

------------------------------------------------------------------------
© Kansas City Jazz Ambassadors 1996-2001. All rights reserved.