Phil - I started reading this thread out of morbid curiosity (the subject was a frequent topic with my high school friends growing up). I was pleasantly surprised by the different perspectives and mostly lack of flaming.
But Phil, I could not agree any more strongly with your points. The title of the thread reads why doesn't contemporary jazz get any respect... It does by fans of the idiom. It may or may not get respect from those with real knowledge of the jazz tradition (be they players or listeners), but it is an entirely illogical premise in that smooth jazz is a completely separate category of music. Yes, great jazz musicians have performed in the idiom, some quite well, but jazz musicians can do that in most styles of music (Ala Brecker playing his ass off on a James Taylor album, Herbie Hancock recording a Ravel piano concerto, even the guy trying to sound like Freddie on the Us3 cataloop). The moniker of Smooth Jazz was absolutely a term devised by a marketing exec to piggy back off the prestige and image of the Jazz art form. Today, it is so bastardized that people who see jazz being advertised in a local club really have no idea what they are going to find if they go (jazz, smooth r&b, show tunes, funk, etc...). No wonder audiences are confused and sometimes give up...
And Phil, while I will probably never get to hit with Elliot Zigmund or some of the other cats you play with, you are not the only full time jazz musician on the thread! We exist...
Greg
Piano
Washington DC |
Though I find a lot of contemporary Jazz interesting and beautifully recorded, nothing pulls at my heart strings like a good swing pulse. Seemed more transparent to me as well. |
To me, the modern smooth jazz souds as if it is being performed by musicians on Paxil. There seems to be no real tension, creativity or nuance. The accent seems to be on flow and a relaxed groove. It puts me to sleep. |
Jazz-Lovers Take Heed!! A few weeks ago NARAS decided to cut/get rid of quite a few categories from the Grammy awards. One of the genres chopped was my favorite music; Latin Jazz! I realize there aren't many fans here but cutting Latin Jazz further marginalizes ALL Jazz within the context of the Grammys. A knee-jerk reaction would be to think; "who cares about the Grammys, they're irrelevant!", and you'd largely be right. While this decision doesn't affect MY listening or buying habits, I can't help but think by further limiting the already tiny amount of exposure Jazz (ANY kind) gets doesn't bode well for the future of the music. Doesn't affect US NOW, but how about our grandchildren?
The Grammys have decided MY Jazz is irrelevant, how long before they come after YOURS!? |
The funny thing is that if you ever go to see any of these "contemporary" jazz musicians live you are probably goin gto be treated to some good playing. There are always exceptions, of course.
The bad thing is, as good and as full of fun and life and chops in a live setting, sometimes the albums just sound dull and lifeless and over produced. Mindi Abair comes to mind - what a great player live, but her ablums make me sleepy.
Rick Braun's early albums had planty of life and live he is a blast to see, but the later stuff sounded stunted by comparison. |
Are you kidding? Some of the best bop era jazz was released on the Contemporary Jazz label. :) |
Because 'smooth jazz' is not jazz. Almost all of the real jazz artist are long dead. |
It's not punk or hip-hop. |
Music is a reflection of the times; these are some lousy times. |
This is what I said almost ten years ago- in anger and disapointment probably- I don't remember. I wonder if it still holds good...for me it does. Things haven't got better as far as I'm concerned.
"Contemporary Jazz is an attitude, played by epigones and mostly, to someone who is intimately familiar with the "old stuff", its just plain stale and boring. Technical excellence is usually high, but an essential part is missing, probably disolved by political correctness, masss culture and the creative brains (usually black), going different ways these days. With Monk the anger was REAL and it gave his music a presence and a rawness which you could feel. The loneliness of Coltrane could be heard not only in his lonely woman theme, Miles'aloofness, his despair was in his music, Ellington, a musical genius, was driven by a social message, who swings like Basie these days or is funny like Carla Bley? Where is the velvet of Hodges, the clear smoothness of Bechet? Where is that deeply engrained musicality of Satchmo's...even his farts were music....etc.etc. No, Jazz was never really smooth, except when it became commercially bastardised. Was Parker smooth?
But these times are gone, what we have now is the attitude, but neither the pain, nor the cojones. Just MO." |
"But these times are gone, what we have now is the attitude, but neither the pain, nor the cojones.
Detlof, your point is very well made. Thats why, now-a-days, the best jazz is coming out of Eastern Europe, IMO. |
PTMconsulting is totally right ... I gave up on SACD several years ago because of the 45 or so that I owned, fewer than 10 were worth playing. I'm quite convinced that we're asking components to make up for the failure of the recording industry, and all who record to CD/SACD, to offer recordings that are truly concerned primarily with sound (in all aspects) QUALITY. That isn't happening.n No one should have to spend $1000's of dollars just to be amazed by (the sound of) the music being played. |
Low exposure ? After 6 or 7 tunes, smooth jazz is predictable. Have you heard the Riita Paakki Trio from Finland ;Christoph Spendel Trio, Germany; Gregg Karukas, USA;
Incognito, UK -- the MP3 only combo on Tupelo Records. |
"Almost all of the real jazz artist are long dead."
Rok2id
Spoken like a card carrying member of the Dead Poet's Society.
My listening room walls are laced with wall hangings of a few of the greats. Miles, Trane, Gillespie, Gordon, Parker, Peterson, Montgomery...I've run out of wall space and have a ton of wall hangings boxed in the garage.
It sets a certain mood while sitting amidst visual reminders of these 'dead poets'...each of them a poet in his/her own right.
It's enjoyable to revisit this thread on an annual basis. Happy New Year 2 All! |
I tried to like it,but it just did not take. |
I love Contemporary Jazz! I just don't like how much of it is recorded. |
Comtemporary in a musical sense could be defined as 'an imitation of the original. All things go through natural trajectories. Right now technology and medicine etc... are going up at an amazing speed, while music, literature, social cohesion and many other things are heading downward at an even greater speed. Nothing stays great forever. If you are a musician and you play in a 'comtemporary' genre, that means you are just a pale imitation of the original. It would be more accurate, and perhaps kinder, just to 'retire' the genre at a certain point. There are just a few still worthy of the name Jazz player or bluesman. Once they pass on, that's it folks. We can all snooze then. And don't get me started on gospel, R&B or country. |
"There are just a few still worthy of the name Jazz player or bluesman. Once they pass on, that's it folks. We can all snooze then. And don't get me started on gospel, R&B or country."
Brother, all I can say about this astoundingly naive statement is; you're 150% wrong! It stands to reason that if you think a genre of music is dead/dying, you're probably not actively looking for new music within the genre. While I'd agree that POPULAR Jazz, Gospel, R&B, and Country is practically unlistenable, as far as Jazz is concerned, there's such a wealth of great music being created here and abroad. Sorry dude, yr proclamation simply sounds ignorant. And I say this with all due respect!;) |
"Brother, all I can say about this astoundingly naive statement "
Oh, come on now, It wasn't THAT naive.
"you're 150% wrong!"
What percent would I be wrong If I was completely wrong?
"While I'd agree that POPULAR Jazz, Gospel, R&B, and Country is practically unlistenable, as far as Jazz is concerned, there's such a wealth of great music being created here and abroad."
Well POPULAR jazz is the jazz that's dying. Are you saying that all this great stuff being created is the unpopular Jazz?. Name some of this great music being created around the world. What country? Artist? CD? Maybe you are being influenced by that hotbed of hard bop, Norway!
In any event, I hope you aren't one of those people that think any music that is improvised is JAZZ.
From your post, I feel that you are not well versed in the history of Jazz in this country. And I say that with all respect due or not due. |
"Oh, come on now, It wasn't THAT naive."
Um, yeah it was. Your witty remarks suggest that you know all you're ever gonna know. I could write a very, very long list of extraordinary Jazz but I doubt you'd pay any attention to it. The fact that you don't seem to be aware of the wealth of Jazz currently being created tells me everything I need to know about your knowledge on the subject.
A man that thinks he knows it all doesn't know very much at all.
-shakin' my head in wonder-
Your opinion about Jazz pretty much jives with that other pearl of wisdom you dropped in the Muddy Waters thread; "The social conditions that produced the Blues no longer exist." Spoken like a true caucasian! I bet there might be a few people of color that might disagree with you!
So, according to you, there isn't anything noteworthy being created currently in either the Blues or Jazz Genres?! I'll say it a little more gently this time, seeing as how you've got your panties all in a bunch, you might want to do a little homework before making your blanket statements.
I hate these cyber-pissing contests, I usually refrain from engaging but god forbid someone who doesn't know any better actually buys what your selling! |
"Um, yeah it was. Your witty remarks suggest that you know all you're ever gonna know."
Please explain the logic of this statement.
"I could write a very, very long list of extraordinary Jazz but I doubt you'd pay any attention to it."
I didn't ask for a very very very long list, just a few would suffice. I answered your post, point for point. Why would you conclude I would not pay attention your list of greats?
"The fact that you don't seem to be aware of the wealth of Jazz currently being created tells me everything I need to know about your knowledge on the subject."
Thats why I asked for you to point me in the direction of this wealth of Jazz. If I knew about them. I would not have asked.
"A man that thinks he knows it all doesn't know very much at all.
-shakin' my head in wonder-"
What led you think That I think I know IT ALL? I never said that. I like the dramatic touch. Like from a script of a play.
"The social conditions that produced the Blues no longer exist." Spoken like a true caucasian! I bet there might be a few people of color that might disagree with you!
If they still exist, where are the blues players? How do you know I'm caucasion? I'm sure a few people of color would disagree. But if I am wrong, why would just a few people of color disagree, what about the rest of the country. They have eyes and brains also.
"So, according to you, there isn't anything noteworthy being created currently in either the Blues or Jazz Genres?! I'll say it a little more gently this time, seeing as how you've got your panties all in a bunch, you might want to do a little homework before making your blanket statements."
How do you know I wear panties? Has that damn Jackson been talking? The rest of this statement is nonsense and not an accurate quote of what I said. I assume you read, so go back and read it.
"I hate these cyber-pissing contests, I usually refrain from engaging but god forbid someone who doesn't know any better actually buys what your selling!"
I didn't know this was a pissing contest. I know I am not in one. And I am not selling anything.
Music is History. if you don't understand that, then we will never see eye to eye. If I have the time, I will state my views on this subject later, since I used up all the space undoing your distortions. |
"Music is History. if you don't understand that, then we will never see eye to eye."
OK, against my better instincts, I'll play. You seem to refer to 'history' a lot in your posts. Music HAS history, music CAN be historic. To suggest music IS history suggests that it's over. Based on the opinions you've expressed here and elsewhere it may very well be possible that music IS over, for you. Understand that I'm not trying to see eye to eye with you, I know what I know. Each time you post it becomes more apparent that you're really not the musicologist you think you are.
I know that a large percentage of audiophiles are older guys that primarily listen to the music of their past, absolutely nothing wrong with that. My love of music pulls me in a different direction, a direction where music is ageless and youthful creativity and energy exists in abundance.
Waiting for that rapier-sharp wit of yours to manifest itself!;) |
And i'm waiting for you to provide that short list of the new crop of jazz and blues greats. And answer all the questions I asked. I answered yours. |
Kenny G is the first to admit his music is Not jazz. I would add that most smooth jazz is really just instrumental pop music and does not contain the harmonic elements of jazz. Some sounds alright, most I do not care for but I respect your right to enjoy it (or even rap!). I would not criticize someone who is successful and talented enough to sell records and fill auditoriums... Pat metheny a truly advanced jazz musician and composer once gave a scathing review and condemnation of Kenny G, especially his reworking of a Louis Armstrong tune . Google it, its pretty wild.... |
Chazro, don't waste your time. |
In recent years (since this thread was started more than 10 years ago!), I have become a big fan of Chris Botti. I have attended a number of his performances (at McCarter Theatre in Princeton as well as the Blue Note after Christmas), and I have the Blu-rays of his LA and Boston performances. I especially like his treatments of "The Look of Love," one of my favorite songs. (My favorite -- with Lisa Fisher, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MU0wvr9-o-I)
I acknowledge that purists may regard Kenny G and Chris Botti as more pop than jazz, but I do enjoy their performances. I know they are different from the bebop style, but to me this is just semantics. |
Chris Botti had been on the BLUE project that is a blend of progressive rock, jazz and acid.
Kenny G is just cool lookin' dude with soprano sax. |
is this smooth? http://www.soundliaison.comI find the albums accessible but maybe there is a little too much depth to the music to be considered smooth jazz. Carmen Gomes Inc;''Thousand Shades of Blue'' is a fantastic live in the studio album.4 instruments;voice,guitar,upright bass,and drums(cajon replacing the drums on the lovely title track).Everything is there great separation,stereo imaging,depth and balance. The version of Bruce Springsteen's I'm on Fire is a musical and audiophile masterpiece,check out how the snare drum and the haunting guitar voicing complement but never cover up each other. On the 2nd album,Poul Berner Band's lovely Elvis Presley tribute: Road to Memphis, you've got tr.6 ''the Colonel''Michael Moore's sax enters oo.45 with just the sound of air,as if he is right there up close in front of you,so intimate. Again only 4 instruments; guitar at 8 o'clock,sax at 11,bass at 1 o'clock and 2nd guitar at 4 o'clock.the sound stage is almost 3 dimensional. On the 3rd album Torn,best described as a blues ballad album,you got everything an audiophile album should have (i.m.o.)placement, depth,separation,naturalness,the feeling of being there with the band visible in front you.And musically I find it a great album as well,a beautiful mix of covers and very well composed originals. |
