Splendid, or as some would say nice! No regrets.
I am open to just about anything that challenges the status quo. Not implying that it works in all instances, but change is inevitable.
I feel differently about the jazz tradition. Vive la difference.
Change is great but I don’t like to listen to a lot of the radical changes nor consider quite a bit “jazz.”
All genres have their “classical period(s)”, together with their experimental periods.
The good new music survives; the bad dies. This is an advantage when choosing to listen to older music.
Their are many who listen solely to classic rock, old school jazz, noncontemporary classical, etc. having no use for the new.
It is all in what one enjoys.
1 Like
It definitely is all what one enjoys. For me it’s also a matter of definig genres. I listen to a wide range of the lifespan of the genre “jazz”–recordings from 1917 to 2023–but some of what gets labeled jazz–and fully enjoyed by others–I find so “evolved” and fused with world, rock, electronic, noise etc. other genre elements that it’s no longer what I enjoy as “jazz.” It’s something else, something that I don’t gravitate towards, no matter how “hip” it may be considered. C’est la vie. As you say, it’s all in what one enjoys.
This morning starting off with this great cd:
Chet Baker “The Sesjun Radio Shows Volume 2”
My appreciation for late Chet really builds year by year. His expressive nature just grew and grew both on trumpet and with his singing. And there were great performances with wonderful engineering.
This morning also a new pair of Wathen Cryotone tubes has seasoned in and is giving me a new lift in playback sonics. I’ve finally discovered that the hype on these tubes can be considered far more real that I suspected before. My first two choices of tube types from Wathen–the 6SN7 and 5AR4 – I just did not enjoy enough–NOS examplse that I paid less for sounded much better to me. But I was encouraged to try their 300B tubes and they are very good sounding indeed, and I bought a preamplifier (Deware CSP3 with the 25th Anniversary Mods, Miflex caps version) that has been entirely cryo treated by Wathen Cryotone and I have a nearly identical preamp to compare it to, and there is a fundamental significant difference between the two. This came with three Cryotone 6922 tubes which sound better in the system to me now than prized Amperex 7308 which were the reigning champions. Live and learn. These Cryotone tubes are something else.
Well said.
1 Like
Ornette Coleman “jazz”?
Many classical listeners have no use for classical music written in the last 125 years.
Are you saying that you enjoy listening to his music?
I have to be in the mood to listen to him. And that mood comes rarely.
His music is challenging, certainly.
I am curious whether those here consider his music “jazz”.
I find many who listen to jazz are actually interested in a narrow time period and presentation of jazz: Miles, Evans, and the like.
Nothing wrong with this, of course.
2 Likes
This question reminds me of a blues band I once played in where the band leader was horrified when I suggested that we include an occasional 2-5. “That’s not blues” was his machine-like response.
If I played a 6-2-5, I’d have to get him a paper bag to breath in.
2 Likes
More or less my intent with the Strictly Jazz Sounds thread was to pursue the genre, its various forms, and to provide examples that some here appreciate. Additionally, as an opportunity to share music that pushes the limits of the generally accepted, what ever that means, notion of jazz. As Elk mentioned some view the form as that recorded from the 1950’s through the mid 1960s, where the recording quality had improved to the degree that the music could be provided as Hi-Fidelity.
Many performers current and past detest the term, and find it condescending. I view it as a label generally at its best to benefit music promoters, recording labels, the press, and academics. For me it is no more than a marketing term, of which the music industry has many. At best a handy way to differentiate itself from Pop, Rock, and Classical music.
Regarding my approach to music listening, it is a journey with highlights in the exploration and delights in discovering new sounds and approaches to presenting music. Is it Jazz, I could care less. Is the music of Ornette Coleman Jazz, he wasn’t supportive of the term. Ornette opened the doors to a different way of expressing oneself musically followed by many players to this very day. Most of them struggle with the term and prefer other labels, which are no more than that, labels.
The key for the listener is to play what you enjoy and can relate to. For me the excitement is in the journey.
I’ll add this, when I think of the term Jazz, what comes to mind is the local Quartet playing at the Ramada Inn Lounge. Nothing wrong with that, but I want more, much more.
This is also an opportunity for me to revisit the reason why I initiated the Strictly Jazz Sounds, a perverse play on the term to strike up a conversation on Creative Music and what it means to the individual listener. Hopefully that thread can one day evolve into a bit more than a series of album cover postings, with no mention as to what that music means to the listener. I’ll admit I am probably the greatest offender in that regard.
Here is a link to the lead in for the thread:
1 Like
I’ll bow out of your thread then as I’m not interested in a lot posted there and have differing ideas of the fundamentals. Have fun!
I’m perplexed. This is the first time I’ve ever thought of the term “jazz” as anything but wonderful. There are actually people who think of the term or label as pejorative? Really?
In that case, they would be yet another group of people who I will blissfully choose to ignore.
And–although I was just listening to Randy Newman sing about Louisiana, 94.656% of my music collection is JAZZ.
3 Likes
As a label yes, as labels limit the experience. Nothing wrong with the music at all, just the notion of how it is marketed by those must likely to benefit from it. Not limited to jazz per se as their are other labels assigned to various music forms.
No reason to agree or disagree as my intent is not to convert. We may differ in the use of the term and how we use it.
1 Like
I do not see giving something a name a nefarious act.
Music is the same no matter what it is called.
While it can be difficult to accurately name something, calling something pop, jazz, rock, classical, swing, etc. gives me some idea as to what I am looking at when considering to buy/listen but have not heard the recording.
There are much more specific names for all types of music if one really wants to drill down.
In general I agree with your thoughts, as the name is no more than that. It provides a means to quickly differentiate, but it can also limit. As musicians, in this case, that try to break out of the proverbial name box, find the label limiting. Maybe conforming and all that it implies is a better term than limiting. You had mentioned Ornette Coleman, which is a good example. In his day the audience and press associated with jazz didn’t know what to make of his music as it challenged the norm. While it is understood Ornette’s music may not be for everyone, it still is important as it opened the door to various music forms that are pursued to this day. The music of Charlie Parker is another example of an individualist’s approach to the music, challenging the norms and opening a door for a new means of expression for many.
Worth seeking out is Nate Wooley’s Sound American issue No. 8, What is Jazz? which explores this very question. Just asking the question created a bit of controversy, and clearly no consensus within the music community. I am not certain his objective was so much to gain consensus as it was to initiate the conversation.
Nate sums up the question more elegantly than I possibly could:
then the debate about what is or isn’t really Jazz, could easily be held up as a prime example of the divisive and damaging social dynamic that can come about by trying to put a name or label on something as ambiguous as a musical tradition.
Musicians can, should, and do pursue their art wholly unencombered by the name someone else gives their music.
Yes, those marketing the music do their best to sell (what musician does not want their music to sell? ) but this does not limit the artist.
I know the lawyer who represented Ornette, represents Booker T., etc. and have been to many shows as a guest and chatted with them. They do not spend any time whining about lables as I recall. They just played. 
2 Likes
Elk we are of the same mind here, just express it differently.
The music industry marketing teams have most certainly commoditized the product and to a degree stifled the music’s growth in the process. I applaud the musicians that demonstrate the temerity to follow their path, unencumbered by labels. In that regard demonstrating an ability to walk away from a label.
I have added an additional link , allowing access to the entire article, to the Sound American Publication SA8 addressing What is Jazz?.
Just scroll down to issue SA8.
1 Like