JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Musician Message Forum Anyone dig Jazz?

[This message has been edited by keyplyr (edited 12-05-2002).]

I dig jazz and you have a cool site.

I think the artists from the various Native American nations would disagree with your last statement.

Good luck to you!

Chuck

I don't hate jazz...

Americas only true art form.....

That's a bit self serving...who cares....

Jazz, much of what is called Jazz today at least, is in a sorry state....

Endless ramblings around funk-derived loops...smooth jazz....huh..that ain't jazz !
That's elevator music !

Just play the music...open your heart, free your spirit and let it move......
If Jazz happens..well..that's great !
If it's something else...well...that's great too !

Bob

Interesting start to a thread...

What types of music HAVE started in the US? You could certainly say that all music derived from whatever the first music was... and if people came to the US from other lands that nothing could be considered truly from the US, except as Chuck suggests, American Indian.

But lets get past that semantic.. what types of music sort of sprung up from the US Culture? Blues? Jazz? Rap? R&B? Did Rock come from the US? How about computer generated music like Electronica, Techno, etc...? Where did Country come from? How about Metal and Industrial? Did Jimi Hendrix copy something before or was he truly an original?

Just throwing this out.. might be fun to read what comments ensue...

Brian

I'm a jazz artist and fan, new to JPF. I enjoyed poking around your Passion4Jazz site, especially the Virtual Chord page, that is very cool and will be useful in the future!

As for the smooth jazz = elevator music comment, as with all kinds of music, there is some really good, satisfying smooth jazz out there, and then there is a fair amount of uninspired, bland stuff also.

------------------
C M - Javamusic mp3.com Besonic 1Sound IUMA mp3.com.au

Hello,

One place I would start looking for the roots of American music is with Carl Sandburg's "American Songbag" - where you might see American folk music evolving into something unique. And Alan Lomax's catalog of recordings.

This isn't really an area of expertise for me, but I used to make the same statement about jazz. Then I began to think about the "why" of it. Why is jazz the only truly American art form? What qualities allow you to make that claim? It's a useful claim if you're trying to get funding for a music education program that includes jazz studies. Or to keep a program from slashing those programs! But I don't think the arguments I've heard really hold up under examination. I'd love to hear more though...

I'll say this much - there is probably no music as much fun to argue about as jazz! And I wish I had the chops to play it the right way!

Chuck

[This message has been edited by keyplyr (edited 12-05-2002).]

Fascinating topic! A bit of an intellectual discussion is refreshing here.

So that I'm not misunderstood - I love jazz music. My description of it would be more like, "a national treasure." Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington, Miles Davis, Charlie Parker, and John Coltrane! An amazing part of American history.

"Collective improvisation" is the element of jazz often sited as the element unique to jazz. I am a skeptic, yet I have no examples to offer to dispute this claim. I guess this is a learning opportuntiy for me. I will seek examples of collective improvisation that precede jazz. Maybe I'm wrong. It could be that none are out there to be found. THAT is the joy of learning. Debate is healthy and does not need to be a matter of "winning." Definitive authors invite debate. That's how we grow. That's how we test our ideas and claims.

However, the reference to Native Americans as some sort of "prehistoric culture" is a bit disturbing. A simple internet search of "Native Americans" would reveal a huge amount of vibrant, contemporary cultural activity. And full of "the arts."

So I'm left wondering the motive of the author? The initial post was essentially a sales pitch, but there's more to it than that. This is a very worthy topic for our attention. I hope there are others here who have ideas about this topic.

Cheers,
Chuck

[This message has been edited by Chuck Cheesman (edited 11-30-2002).]

Ya know....

I'm not embarrassed to say that I don't know what "collective improvisation" is...

I know what collective means..and I know what improvisation means...but together as a phrase...I dunno...

I do know that improvisation as an accepted form goes back hundreds of years....
One of Mozarts particular abilities was to improvise performances based on the themes of others....

Gotta be careful with Jazzers...
I been clobbered with Be-Bop attitudes many times for daring to tell the truth.

Jazz is like Picasso.....some good stuff...and lots of Bull---- !

Bob

Funny I should just read this post.

I just got a drum kit, being I wanted to return to my youth and get one again. (Was for years a keyboard player after the initial drums, and casual guitarist), but not playing any Jazz.

I was given a tape to view, along with the vintage Rogers kit, and on it was a long section on Buddy Rich! I heard Jazz before, but now,,,,,it is really attracting my senses. WOW,,he's amazingly creative! That music of his bands is being played over and over now,,,,,and I'm LOVING IT!

It's given me a whole different direction to consider,,,and is seemingly making me a better piano player as well. Guess it's the precision which Buddy Rich, and ALL those band members have,,,,with all those specific beats and notes, and creative melodies! I now have gone through Beatles music, general Pop and Rock, of the 60's and 70", to Counntry, to Classical, to Buddy Rich's Jazz,,keeping all of those, and some other genres close at hand. But this Jazz is so epxressive!

LOVE to "try" to play drums along with Buddy Rich!,,,(like keeping up with Einstein). It's just FUN though! Very uplifting! Stimulating! Even with all miss hits!

Now I know why Jazz has always received the "cool" slogan! Very cool, this Jazz is! It's been the backbone to most other music I guess,,,a springboard for other lively music.

Jazz feels like Life's Energy itself, wanting to be known. Hard to get to really know it, but it's "a gas" just trying! Reminds me of the new math we had to take as a kid. Complicated at first, but makes you think!

I think I just edited in Jazz terms! Going back to some similar ideas, but in slighly different descripts! Yeah man!

John


[This message has been edited by dhsongs (edited 12-04-2002).]

Hi all,

I hope I'm not beating on a dead subject. I'm certainly not interested in putting anyone's music down. Only looking at something a bit deeper.

I've found one example of collective improvisation. It goes way, way back before the appearance of American jazz. However, it could also be argued that it lacks the complexity of American jazz. If you have any interest at all go to http://www.icmcdfw.org/literature.shtml. How many improvising musicians are required before you have collective improvisation? I haven't done extensive research. Just a few searches on the net. Whether or not that means jazz is or isn't "America's only true, original art form" is (I guess) still open to debate.

To Bob:

I don't think you have to be careful with anyone. Tell them what you think. Some people are narrow minded enough to think their way is the only way. You have those types of folks representing every musical genre under the sun. Nor do I think Keyplr is one of those people. (since I'm obviously debating his statement) He just happened to write a couple of things I thought were worth debating. I can be somewhat contrary and I like a healthy debate.

Bob wrote, "Jazz is like Picasso.....some good stuff...and lots of Bull---- !"

I agree, but everything is like that. At least it seems that way to me.

Peace to all of you,
Chuck

[This message has been edited by Chuck Cheesman (edited 12-03-2002).]

[This message has been edited by keyplyr (edited 12-05-2002).]

Didn't spend much time, but the time I spent looking for this information wasn't a waste of time. I learned a few things about North Indian music, Japanese improvisational music, and Native American flute music.

Attempting to start an intelligent dicussion on the topic does appear to have been a waste of my time.

Chuck

Sitting here with my own music, and yes I am still thinking about this subject. In fact, this whole thread bugs me. I asked my wife, "Why am I the kind of person who seeks a debate on the internet?" Maybe because I'm just a stubborn fool. Maybe because I care about certain ideas.

Keyplr, you present a topic labeled, "Anyone dig jazz?" What I probably should have done was just answer "yes." A cheerleading squad. Is that what you were looking for? But I was actually interested in an idea you presented.

And I challenged the statement. Why? Because I think it's the kind of statement that creates barriers. It's more than one sentence. It's a very big concept that is designed to separate jazz from everything else. But it also turns people off to the music. Look at how a few other people responded to the post. I am an educator and a musician. It appears you are as well. Are you interested in testing your ideas or are you already the "definitive" author? The 'statement' you made is a fairly global statement, and I personally think it's a faulty one. It bothers me that you might pass your prejudice down to your students.

You site "collective improvisation" as the defining characteristic of jazz that is/was unique. I found an example to dispute that claim. Is it all that awful that I should be interested enough in your claim that I do a little research? If it is truly the defining characteristic of your music, then I would hope you would find it's use in other music more interesting. But maybe not? Instead you defend your claim with some statement from the 1960s and rant on about me wasting my time. Why defend? How is learning more about music a waste of time? Why not just look into the possiblity that there was something you didn't know? You might learn something new. Imagine that.

But you also made a statemtent that placed Native American culture in the realm of "the lands of prehistoric cultures." This did set me off a bit because it's a statement based on ignorance and probably prejudice. It is just plain insulting. Native American culture is not prehistoric at all. In fact, all Native American art is unique to America. Most of it precedes African, Asian, and European immigration to America, but it has also continued to grow and change - even during our history as a nation. It's not prehistoric in any way at all. Prejudice and ignorance? Did those things have any impact on jazz and jazz musicians? Gee...

The really disturbing thing about your statement is how it mirrors the attitudes of many of my music professors when I was in college. The one difference was that their prejudice was directed at jazz. Many of these "authorities" on the subject simply wrote jazz off as some sort of lesser music. They already had their own gods and nothing was going to open their eyes to anything else. It turned me off to what they had to say at the time. I wonder why?

I'm tired of people who declare themselves the definitive authority. You can hit the exclamation point as hard as you like. "period!" It doesn't do anything for me.

Very disappointing thread.

Chuck

[This message has been edited by keyplyr (edited 12-05-2002).]

keyplyr..

a rereading of this thread clearly indicates the "anger" and, indeed arrogance emitting from your end and not Mr Cheesemans !

You sound like one of those guys that harps about jazz and secretly wishes he could play some !

Bob Young...

I number among my friends several Jazz players of national and indeed international reknown.
I can promise you that not one of them has ever uttered the words "Jazz is Americas only true art form"...
They don't give a damn about what's first or who's first or who had what idea first or any of that crap.....
They only care about doing a good job musically.....they love the music...simple as that......

And Chuck...my point in the Picasso line was that alot of Jazz guys take the attitude that Jazz is holy...somehow more "important" than other forms of music..that's what I refer to as a "Be-Bop" attitude...just like art purists....
My advice is..quit thinking, and play something !

Bob Young

I am sorry to see Keyplr has erased all of his posts and vacated the premises. That was not my intent, and for that I am sorry. Since I am fairly sure curiosity will at least bring him back to read this - I wish you the best in all of your future endeavors.

However, it should not come as a shock when a comment depicting another culture as "prehistoric" generates a bitter response. If you have any doubts about whether a comment is offensive, I suggest inserting your own culture, ethnic heritage, religoun, etc.., in it's place. Then take another look at it. It's not even a matter of being politically correct. It's a matter of truth.

I would also suggest that if you make a statement claiming authority on a subject (in your case the "definitive" author) you be prepared to support your claim with evidence AND be willing to look at others' ideas. It is possible that I was wrong in what I posted about collective improvisation in North Indian music. Maybe I have a bad source or misunderstood what I had found. But from your response it also appears you didn't even give the idea a chance. That is too bad. This could have been a really great thread.

And thank you Bob for giving me a bit of support. I appreciate that a lot.

Chuck

I wonder what Keyplr said originally?

Brian

Yeah, me too.

I myself am a jazz musician (and r&b/rock - yes, I'm musically pschizophrenic). Little late on the uptake here, but better late than never, right?!

Very interesting discussion here. On another track of the discussion, a point was made in an earlier post about "jazz not being what it used to be". I suppose that's true in many cases given the quality of some music. However, can jazz be subject to the same development and (eventual) acceptance of that development as, say, classical music? In that genre, we have renaissance, baroque, classical, romantic, modern, etc. Of course, these are very general and limited classifications. As a modern jazz artist/composer (not quite in the muzak camp I hope), I sometimes feel a little discriminated against by other jazz artists because A) I write a lot of my own music and B)I'm not writing be-bop or hard core swing tunes. Not to say there's ANYTHING wrong with be-bop or any other more traditional forms of jazz - quite the opposite. That's where I learned and got my start. I wouldn't be what I am without it. But can the genre branch out somewhat (not even necessarily as far as "smooth jazz" but just a BIT more modern) and still be classified as "jazz"? I guess that's a matter of definition, which for music, is a complicated thing in and of itself.

Has anyone else ever been "vibed" by club owners for trying to branch out a little? Nothing bizarre, just playing music the club owners might not know.

Just my two cents. Thanks for enduring my ramblings.

Cheers all!

TKT
www.cdbaby.com/tracykash2

I think collective improvisation is a longwinded term for a jam Bob.
Heck I missed an argument by the look of it.
Darn. I love them things.
I like Jazz.
The old school stuff before they invented a new abuse for the word cool.
Graham (if ya can't dance to it it is noise. Bad noise) Henderson

You are absolutely correct. I am a Jazz drummer in Philadelphia and the things i hear which have been passed off as Jazz is herendous. Thr funk loops or over orchestrated unison lines are redundant and boring to say the least. People such as the masters like Miles, Dizzy, Coltrane, Monk, and dexter would and probably are rolling over. There has to be a re-incarnation coming soon.

I was reading a music trivia card from the board game. The question was: What album hit the top of the Jazz, Rhythm & Blues, and Pop charts all at the same time? The answer was "Promise" by Sade. I bought it and loved it. Masterfully understated instrumentation, mood extraordinaire, lyrics that listen very well, although when I finally got around to reading them I realized they weren't that special or complete. But they were sung so well in context with the music it didn't matter then.

All genres have stuff that just gets categorized there because it aspires to the genre or someone thinks it should be in that genre. It's not a judgment of quality, but of form or style. Much, maybe most, of every genre is of poor quality, not rising up to the qualitative standards to qualify as Jazz, for example, just dabbling at it. But every so often someone comes along and does attain the heights in a given genre. Not very often though, these days. Mediocrity has settled upon the land, hence we wax nostalgic and find the old masters anew.

Damn, looks like I missed out on a good thread (with Keyplr deleting his comments). But the Jazz topic has always appealed to me and I always enjoy taking part in any discussion that has to do with Jazz.

I grew up on the road touring with my parents and ther Jazz trio. My mom was the pianist/singer and my dad was the drummer. It was an awesome time filled with terrific music and I often reflect on those days on the road (being the 70's and early 80's) any chance I get. Hell, to this day I feel more comfortable in a hotel room than I do in my own house!

Sorry I missed out on this discussion, just a few years too late I guess.

Jake-

Can someone elaborate on this for me. Growing up I thought Jazz was just someone playing a horn or piano in a very unstructured, unorganized fashion, yet it sounded good. I know alittle different now. I did use the word "alittle". But what would you say the percentage of jazz with lyrics is as opposed to jazz without lyrics? Just an estimate percentage is fine? Also while I'm on this point, for instance "My Funny Valentine" is listed under a jazz genre yet I would've thought it would have been under Adult Easy Listening. Is that based on how someone sings it, the style of the melody, or the type of instruments they are using or all 3 or a combination thereof.

Good ask.
I have never stopped to ponder that Lynn.
Probabbly more no vox songs in jazz than any other genre, and I note it is the only genre on soundclick that in fact has a sub genre for jazz vocals.
Me. I work on the theory if it sounds good, it is structured, and if not, it is not.
Nobody had ever gone so far as to even think of a genre like Adault Easy Listening when Jazz came alomng.
I still have trouble deciding if a piece i habve done , or am listening to is jazz, blues or sometimes even pop.
My Funny Valintine is jazz in my book.
And yep. How anything is done would decide what it is in that rendition than anything else.
Think of the band bluegrassing AC?DC stuff. Sure stops being rock and roll there but is still a lot of fun.
Graham

My two cents worth. Music is music and it is all in the mind of the beholder. The fact that all music influences jazz and jazz influences all music makes it universal. Me.... I just enjoy all kinds of music. Bob made a good point but his remarks about shut up and play should refer to all musicians with a chip on their shoulder not just Jazz enthusiasts.
Hey Graham Hayseed Dixie the band you refer to as bluegrassing AC/DC as well as many others including Queen, Aerosmith, Eagles, Led Zeppelin and Lynard Skynard really ROCK.

Hey Lynn,
Here's one good definition of "jazz" from the net:
A kind of music that developed in the southern United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Elements of music from western Africa, American gospel singing and European harmony all went into forming the various types of jazz, which include ragtime, blues, Dixieland, swing, be-bop, and cool. Jazz relies heavily on improvisation, and is characterized by much use of syncopated rhythms.
www.artsalive.ca/en/mus/musicresources/popDictionary.asp

Also, jazz is characterized by the use of polyphonic tones. (more than one note played at a time) A basic chord is a 1, 3 and a 5, which means that you take the first note of the scale, the third note and the fifth note and play them at the same time. Jazz chords are typically more complicated than that and add the seventh and/or ninth notes of the chord on top of the 1, 3 and 5. That's very basic and there is much more to it, but it's a way to get a bit more understanding.

Funny Valentine has elements of blues in the minor key and is easy to improvise upon, which can take it into the category of jazz. Vocally, the song is easy to "scat" to, which you mostly see done in the jazz genre.

Yep they rock all right Jim. Not rock and roll, but they sure do rock the countryside some.
I love 'em even if i couldn't remember who they were.
Hayseed Dixie.
I'll remember now.
Maybe.
Thanks Jim.
I think its great this thread 9is still rolling even if the starter took off with the bat and ball and went home.
Reading the bit about jazz including blues in its styles Heidi, makes me wonder if it isn't the other way around as I believe blues was recognised before jazz.
Graham

I remember our guitarist many years ago practising scales etc. He then played the jazz scale and some weird chords. "Once I have learned jazz scales and chords he said I can play anything."
Regardless of what genre you adopt a great debt is owed to jazz.
Graham could be right. Black slaves developed gospel from a mixture of their own beats and traditional hymns. I believe their own music was banned by the oppressive hypocritical Christian slave drivers as being unholy and possibly rebelious. Blues was born from early gospel and then Jazz came from blues.

Hey guys,
Yes, of course blues came before jazz. I believe the def, above merely places blues into one of the jazz categories. But, here is another interesting article about the origins of jazz if you'd like to read it. http://www.redhotjazz.com/originsarticle.html

I don't believe that there is really a true American art form since we are still called "The new world". Adult african american slaves used to fashion banjos after an instrument called the Akonting of the Jola tribe of Senegambia. Most folk music has roots in the British Isles. Someone mentioned John/Allen Lomax. I would suggest reading and listening to their studies of folk music from LOC. They have in my opinion the most cromprehensive study of American music and origins to date. And John Lomax began his studies in the 30's. He went to prisons to record songs. Leadbelly was discovered at Angola prison in Louisianna. He went to railroad and coal mining work camps. Some of the old songs that we sang as children were discovered by these missions. What if these songs were forgotten? I guess it wouldn't matter but it is still nice to remember the first song you ever learned. Ben

http://benwillismusic.com

Hi I love jazz. Especially panjazz it's a mixture of the steel pan which was invented here in T&T and jazz. I'd try to find a link for you all to listen in to it. I also like Kirk Whalum "Gospel according to Jazz 1 and 2" George Benson (debatable) Al Jareau George Duke etc.

Later

Here's another group from Trinidad that's into jazz as well. Hope it entices your palates.

http://cdbaby.com/cd/patasar

Later