Krelldog: your points are well taken, but let me elaborate on my previous comments. First, I think serious jazz buffs lack an enjoyment of "smooth jazz", rather than disrespecting the music as such. I do think that most long-term "serious" jazz listeners would disagree with your opinion that the top "smooth jazz" artists are among the "most talented musicians in the world". This may sound like hair-splitting, but I would posit that "smooth jazz" artists are highly competent instrumentalists rather than talented as jazz musicians. Most of the music played by "smooth jazz" artists tends to be quite formulaic, and lacking many of the fundamental characteristics that defines jazz. The truly great jazz improvisors are always striving to find unique ways to express themselves musically.
To use an analogy, let's think about cars. "Smooth jazz" artists are essentially the Ford Taurus's of jazz-flavored pop music, whereas world-caliber jazz artists are the Porsches or Ferraris. Jazz is, at its heart, about more than just technical competence -- it's about soul and passion, and about playing music in an intensely personal, improvised way that conveys something of yourself.
To be honest, there are a lot of "young lions" who are acknowledged as true jazz artists that still leave me totally cold -- Wynton Marsalis is perhaps the best example. Wynton knows more about the history of jazz than many experts, and he has superb mastery of his instrument and of jazz composition and its many forms. Wynton is, by any rational standard, an enormously talented jazz musician. Nevertheless, he is -- to me -- essentially a conservatory-trained musician who plays with very little "soul". Do I disrespect Wynton? No, I don't, but I have very little interest in listening to the vast majority of his recorded work.
We could start an entire new thread about the merits of various artists, and how they should be classified in terms of "school". For example, some of the newer vocalists being touted as "jazz singers" don't even belong in the same category as Billie Holiday, Ella Fitzgerald, Sarah Vaughn, Carmen McRae, Betty Carter, Sheila Jordan, and Ernestine Anderson. Singers such as Jane Monheit and Patricia Barber may be talented vocalists, but it's a real stretch to call them "jazz singers". Monheit, Barber, and company are -- to my mind -- more properly classified in the group which includes singers such as Rosemary Clooney, Peggy Lee, and many of the female crooners of the 1940's. Many were fine artists on their own terms, but they weren't jazz singers.
This particular debate may continue for many more years. So let me close by reiterating the point in my first post: music is about what pleases you, not other people. If that weren't true, how else could one explain rap -- which isn't even music?
