One of the most interesting stories in all of jazz lore and one which goes to the topic of the evolution of jazz styles has to do with Sonny Stitt. This verified story, however, flies in the face of some of what has been discussed here so far.
The issue of players’ influence on each other’s styles is well established. As pjw suggests there is a big difference between copying an influential player’s style “to a T” and using some of that influential player’s conceptual ideas to inform one’s own playing. The former type of player seldom becomes a major player. The latter type, players like Art Pepper, Phil Woods and Jackie McLean, took some of Bird’s conceptual ideas and added them to their own to create a Bird-influenced, but still personal sound. Bird himself was a big fan of and was very influenced by Jimmy Dorsey (!) and Lester Young. However, there is another force that comes into play in all this that is very interesting, imo.
Some here have at times asked the question “why does jazz have to evolve?” as a argument against the validity of contemporary players’ styles and “new jazz” in general. The answer is simply that it evolves because it has to. It is the nature of the beast. It has evolved from day one and will continue to do so. There is a certain logical inevitability to the evolution of jazz styles. Sonny Stitt is a perfect example:
The story as told by players who were there, players like Kenny Clark and Stitt himself, is that Bird and Stitt lived in different cities and had never had any contact. In fact, because Bird was still new on the scene, Stitt had not even heard recordings by Bird. Yet, when they first met they found that their respective styles were remarkably similar. This is all well documented for anyone who wants to read about it. Stitt had heard other influential players like Hawkins and these influences along with his own voice led him to a similar place as Bird. This is the reason why it is generally and inaccurately believed that Stitt emulated Bird.