The Blues in Jazz...

[Alan Vorse]

I actually play BG, but have been seriously studying jazz for the past 2 months. I've noticed most of the jazz players are on this side.

As I dive deeper into the theory and have met a number of other players, I occasionally meet someone who calls themselves a jazz player, but has a great disdain for the blues. Not the tradition of Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters etc.. but actually using the language of the blues in their playing.

Is this common? It just seemed to me that even the more "modern" players like Bird, Miles, Coltrane, Ornette, Mingus and Monk had strong ties to the blues. I know there is no official rule book or anything, but I always thought blues was one of the most important elements of jazz.
However, I have met people who don't care about Armstrong, or only go as far back as the late 40s, or listen to ECM exclusively.

Let me know if I'm way out of line here.

[mchildree]

Any player who "disdains" any form of music is only limiting his horizons and hampering his musical ability. It's amazing to me that certain "sophisticated" players will deny the more humble roots of their perceived "elite" style of music. It all came from banging sticks against rocks, way back when.

That said, I hate gangsta rap.....

[Sam Sherry]

Hmmm . . . Your handle's "Harmolodic." Your tag is Shannon on Reid. Yet you list a bunch of amazing musicians who (with one exception) have all been dead for at least thirty years as "more modern." And you express surprise that there are some people today who don't listen to music from the 1920s and 1930s or who only listen to music from 1972 onward. My response, for what it's worth:

* You're not out of line. Listen to whatever moves you! Who cares what other people (including me) like or say!

* Shift your question into the world of electric guitar. Among your peers who are into Reid, how many spend a bunch of time listening to Elvis & Scotty Moore? How many don't own a record older than the Beatles? How many have checked out, to choose an example a random, Tommy Bolin? How would your peers react if you called him a "more modern" player -- after all, he's been dead for 30 years? How many spent months or years listening to just Sub-Pop or [insert your old favorite label here]?

* I don't disdain Louis or trad jazz. I don't like trad jazz much and never did. It's not my cuppa tea (and, for that matter, neither is The Decoding Society). Part of it is about the minimal role of the bass in trad jazz. I dig oom-pah but I just don't care to live there.

* I spent years with the music of the masters of the 40s and 50s a lot and I'm a better player and person for it. But fundamentally, my listening time gets spent on the jazz of this moment because that's what I enjoy.

Because as a jazz musician I have GOT to believe that essential jazz is in the air RIGHT NOW. Otherwise, I would be relegating myself and all the kids yet to come to a fruitless effort to recreate the spontaneity of the dead.

[Alex Scott]

One might argue that these are post postmodern times and everyone is waiting for someone else to say something.

I for one, used to be a hater of traditional styles, and have grown to enjoy Ellington, Armstrong and others. I am consistently amazed at what great lines Bach wrote down. It would be scary to hear him improvise.

I have yet to play anything as beautiful as Bach, but don't need to slam anything to make myself feel more accomplished.

I have not been too aware of anyone who doesn't appreciate a lot of different styles who is also a musician I like to listen to.

I sense you have an open mind because you are asking this question, and I also bet those guys don't appreciate a tasty ballad either. Keep it open and you can go far.

[ToR-Tu-Ra]

I once read somewhere:

"The Blues are the roots, the rest of the music are the fruits" -Willie Dixon-

I'm not sure those were the exact words, but that's the idea

I think improvisation and "swing" are blues' legacy. So, anyone who improvises and/or swings is playing "blues" (to me at least).

[anonymous0726]

Blues was/is a rural/country music and generally a vocal form. 'Jazz' was an urban phenom and generally instrumental. The two musics have different roots, but have always flirted.

[jsbarber]

In Pop Foster's autobiography he mentions blues as a type of music that was very popular in St Louis. Pop was from New Orleans and jazz was what they played there. He definitely did not refer to jazz as having evolved out of blues. (Although I have heard this said.) If you are interested in hearing about the very early days of jazz, it's a great read. He has very clear and specific recollections of the times, bands and players.

Jim

[Bruce Lindfield]

Originally Posted by harmolodic

As I dive deeper into the theory and have met a number of other players, I occasionally meet someone who calls themselves a jazz player, but has a great disdain for the blues.

etc.. but actually using the language of the blues in their playing.

Is this common?

I have met people who don't care about Armstrong, or only go as far back as the late 40s, or listen to ECM exclusively.

I wouldn't call it "disdain" as such - but why should music that was old before I was born, necessarily be a part of my playing influences?

To be honest, I only realy like Jazz from the late 40s on - but that doesn't mean I disdain anything further back - as Sam says "It isn't my cup of tea"

Why shouldn't I be more influenced by the music I grew up with and which is "of my time" - so Jimi Hendrix was around, when I was growing up; for older guys and some of the Jazz legends mentioned, they were growing up with Louis Armstrong - he was was their contemporary - but he wasn't mine....

The other thing is - you talk about using "the language of the blues " - well that's OK for an influence, but I think that I would be pretty disappointed, if I went to see a modern Jazz group that only used this language, to the exclusion of all else ... "recreating repertoire"....

There's a lot of music/styles out there - no need to be obsessed with just one!!

[fingerstyle]

Originally Posted by Bruce Lindfield

The other thing is - you talk about using "the language of the blues " - well that's OK for an influence, but I think that I would be pretty disappointed, if I went to see a modern Jazz group that only used this language, to the exclusion of all else ... "recreating repertoire"....

There's a lot of music/styles out there - no need to be obsessed with just one!!

I think you're overlooking some pretty important things here.... we wouldn't have the many altered intervals if it weren't for early african-american blues singers and guitarists 'bending' notes. Jazz is derived from early blues in a massive way... it may no longer sound anything the same, but if you study it enough there are so many aspects of jazz harmony and melody still in use today that are very similar to those in use a century ago.

I understand that you're really onyl saying you don't want to hear a modern jazz group playing 12 bars, four on the beat, blues scale style 'blues', but I just wanted to point out that for most jazz musicians, playing things that come from the blues is almost inescapable.

[anonymous0726]

Originally Posted by fingerstyle

Jazz is derived from early blues in a massive way...

I taught with an ethno-musicologist shoulder to shoulder for a couple of years and heard his lecture on this a billion times and it just ain't so.

[Alex Scott]

Ray, thank you, you are totally right.

Nothing exists in a vacuum, and it is absurd to say that everything in jazz came from the blues. There is certainly a lot of borrowing and comingling through the years, as with many types of music.

Some musicians at least in certain contexts want to limit what they are doing to one form or the other, and I am not enough of an expert to say where one begins and another ends.

[Jeff Guevin]

Maybe this is a little off from the original question, but is it possible that the initial obersvation, that players show disdain for "actually using the language of the blues in their playing" is at least partially referring to a disdain for using (or overusing) blues cliches, or the oft-taught-to-students "blues scale"? Because I, too, share a disdain for that, and reserve the right to roll my eyes when I hear it, especially when accompanied by shouts from the audience indicating someone has recognized a "quote".

[Alan Vorse]

I guess I should jump back in and clarify: I DON'T want to live in the 40s or think everyone should play only "blues licks." I love the music of Steve Coleman, Dave Douglas, Chris Potter and Kurt Rosenwinkle and hope to be able to play that kind of music. I guess when I look at innovators like Coltrane, there was dense, advanced harmony AND blues. Miles had the modal AND the blues. That mix of sounds resonates with me.

I'm a bit of a history enthusiast and like to see where things came from. I guess you don't have to be able to regurgitate the entire history of jazz, but I think Armstrong gave us the blueprint for what a soloist is. I'm as moved by West End Blues as I am by John Zorn.

[Jeff Guevin]

Harmolodic, I didn't mean to imply that you favor cliche--rather I was trying to suggest that perhaps the players who expressed disdain for "the blues" were thinking rather of the clumsy ways blues licks, etc. are worked into jazz, particularly by novices. Thinking way back to high school, I remember being able to tell when different sax players started working on blues scales, because all of a sudden that was all they seemed to play.

I'm in total agreement about how masters like Miles used "the blues"--how a guy can inject so much melancholy into a major third, I'll never understand.

That said, I stand by my dislike of bluesy riffs and quotes. There are probably about two dozen licks I'd be most happy never to hear again.

[Alan Vorse]

Originally Posted by jguevin

Harmolodic, I didn't mean to imply that you favor cliche--rather I was trying to suggest that perhaps the players who expressed disdain for "the blues" were thinking rather of the clumsy ways blues licks, etc. are worked into jazz, particularly by novices. Thinking way back to high school, I remember being able to tell when different sax players started working on blues scales, because all of a sudden that was all they seemed to play.

I'm in total agreement about how masters like Miles used "the blues"--how a guy can inject so much melancholy into a major third, I'll never understand.

That said, I stand by my dislike of bluesy riffs and quotes. There are probably about two dozen licks I'd be most happy never to hear again.

Understood.

[FredH]

I occasionally meet someone who calls themselves a jazz player, but has a great disdain for the blues - harmolodic

Maybe the people showing disdain are not coming at it from the theory/musical-evolution aspect. But instead are sick of doing blues gigs. I think endless blues can be very boring, especially with a "legend" blues guitarist, they never f'n stop soloing in E... can be a very long night.

[fish slapper]

Any "Jazz" player who didstains the Blues is copin' a 'tude and doesn't know their theory or music history too well. Mebbe they're thinking the changes are too easy. How about a modal like "So What" that basically lives in the groove for 8 minutes on 2 chords.

Flip through the Real Book and see all the blues tunes in there.

Anyway, saying what others have said so adding my $.02.

[nicklloyd]

Originally Posted by Ray Parker

Blues was/is a rural/country music and generally a vocal form. 'Jazz' was an urban phenom and generally instrumental. The two musics have different roots, but have always flirted.

What are the roots of jazz and what are the roots of blues?

[anonymous0726]

Roots of jazz are all the stuff that you're accustomed to hearing in New Orlean movie scenes; Processionals, Sousa and other military marches, pop songs, French/Creole tunes, black and white church music, ragtime, classical, etc.

Blues comes from field songs and spirituals. And then, the 12 and 16 bar blueses as we know them are much more modern than you would think and, as I recall the story, didn't really become firm until all the blues guys went to Chicago in the 20's (?) and had to play together. Something like that, anyhow.

I haven't thought about this stuff for quite a while, so some of the subtle details are a little faded.

[Phil Smith]

According to John Fordham's book "Jazz":

One of the fundamentals of almost all types of jazz, and of much Western popular music, derives from the blues. But blues in the twelve-bar, three chord form that every earnest teenage guitarist learns today is a relatively late development, mixing African American rural music and the harmonies of European church song.