You sound just as biased as the author? Do you think "real jazz" players music isn't emotional? Seriously? As a musician I would think you are fully aware that the emotion is open for interpretation by the listener. To each his own. As great a players they all are, I am much more emotionally moved by recent releases from Chris Potter than I am Boney or Koz.

Hi SH,

Exceptions exist... meaning not ALL Smooth Jazz players 'reach' me. To be honest, I have invested my "hard-earned" on precious few Smooth Jazz CDs.
I, just as every music buyer, have standards and that intangible 'something' that stirs my emotions enough to pull out my gold card and buy.

To answer your statement "As a musician I would think you are fully aware that the emotion is open for interpretation by the listener."
YES - I fully agree.

Music is subjective; and that's the precise reason I DON'T think ALL Smooth Jazz has it over the purist variety. I think most Smooth Jazz sucks. But I've heard and listen to a lot of INCREDIBLE music most people would categorize as Smooth Jazz.

Enough rambling: I do agree with your premise - "beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder".

And this surprised y'all? Stories like this are long overdue since the BA of radio killed it almost 10 years ago. The only thing I truly disliked was mentioning groups like Yellowjackets and Spyro Gyra the way he did.

Now what will happen?

Honestly, a lot of this article rehashes points made here often over the past ten or so years, just said in a more snarky way. The delivery of the author is abrasive, to be sure... but a lot of the content is familiar.

There are those who make enjoyable instrumental music with a pop or soul bent to it that could just not be one's taste perhaps, and then there are those who have been making elevator fare to please The Format. I saw that as what the author was responding to. But once again, like Shannon said the radio format name Smooth Jazz is confused with genre and I'm so over it. New name plz. kthnx!

Ah, but as we have discussed before: what should the new name be? I prefer contemporary jazz. Peace.

Funny rock music doesn't have this problem but then the rock music they played in the 70's is pretty much the same as what is played (and commercialized) still today. Not such the case with jazz. None of what is commercialized today sounds like what was commercialized back in the 60's and 70's and this is why we have this issue today. Call it what you want but... a band like the Yellowjackets to me seems like textbook contemporary jazz and they have been that way since Mintzer joined them. It's laughable to refer to them as "smooth" (perhaps Pre-Mintzer?) and just shows how out of touch some "critics" are. I wouldn't even call YJ's a fusion band. Definitely contemp jazz. Having said that I couldn't put Ripps and YJ's in same category. The music is quite different IMHO. I would classify most of what the Ripps play as pop/smooth yet over their discography they do tend to touch on many aspects of jazz which is great. Spyro falls somewhere in between Ripps and YJ's.

Well said, Steve. Particularly after "call it what you want". I agree totally.

I agree too. Yet, those are three of my favorite bands. Peace.

The hammer hit the nail yesterday. There was one satellite fed network that was competing with BA's smooth jazz network. Jones Network smooth jazz sounded a little "elderly" for my taste with their focus on relaxation and mood over song but they did play a lot more original instrumental music and at least two new songs an hour. New owners, syndicator Dial/Global are streamlining Jones' operations and have eliminated three formats, one being Smooth Jazz. So of course BA jumped right in..as the press release reads:
In a joint statement, Dial Global Programming president Kirk Stirland and Broadcast Architecture president Allen Kepler announce a cooperative initiative to move Dial Global's smooth jazz programming, formerly under Jones Radio Networks' aegis until its recent sale, into BA's Smooth Jazz Network. The announcement impacts Dial Global's 17 smooth jazz affiliates and goes into effect on Sept. 30, bringing BA's SJN affiliate count to 40 stations.

This pretty much caps Keplers "we want the world and we want it now" quest. BA now controls all but about 5 fulltime SJ stations in the country and as of now there are no alternatives out there.

Believe it or not this is a good thing. Tough love. BA is moving toward a vocal driven "Smooth A/C" format that will mostly play old music from the 70s and 80s and new vocals from neo-soul artists who are under 30. (preferably females who wear lingerie in their videos or guys who sound like Al Green circa 1970) This means artists are going to have
to create and exploit other ways to get their music heard and that this instrumental music and vocal music that doesn't fit the retro cookie cutter is now back to being what it was before BA took over. Adult Alternative. It was exciting then and lots of fun.

Yep, sometimes what seems bad can turn out to have good consequences. If very little instrumental smooth jazz is played on the radio, there will not be so much pressure to make music that fits the what-radio-wants formula. I used to hate the term "smooth jazz", but now I am coming close to embracing it. If most of the muzak-like stuff goes away, I could become one of smooth jazz's biggest fans. Peace.