Are jazz musicians musical elitists?

[bassbrad]

There are elitists in all styles and yes many jazz musicians are elitists. Jazz as an improvising art form takes a lot of knowledge and skill to execute and you are never done with the study as each new discovery or accident opens new doors that constantly evolve, or at least that is my description.

I am a bass elitist and my goal is to be as complete a bass player as possible. To me that means knowing as much about music and styles as possible, that takes study, practice and an open mind to the nuances that make up the differences. I have intentionally not engaged in discussions of one style over another and have turned myself into a bit of a chameleon, able to fulfill my part no matter the music. I have worked with a broad range of musicians and very few are aware of all that I can play and are surprised when they find out that i cover a lot of styles. The country guys don't know I like to bang and swing, the classical folks don't know I can funk and jam.

To me the really sad thing is if some of those musicians knew I could throw down in so many styles the would likely stop calling me so i keep it a secret.

 

[Planespotter]

Elitism in general is the hallmark of insecure hacks. Most of the truly elite players I've rubbed elbows with are very humble and are quick to encourage players of all skill levels. Just my $.02, your results may vary.

 

[Gravedigger Dav]

Fair point, but I think it is a misrepresentation to refer to anyone who took lessons from a private instructor (ie - anyone) as "classically trained."

Perhaps. How would you describe such training? - not a challenge, just curious.

 

[bassinplace]

There are elitists in all genres, not just jazz.

This.

 

[ManOnEarth]

Cant remember where I read this/heard it but I'm sure its popular...

"Rock music is playing three chords for 1000 people. Jazz is playing 1000 chords for three people."

I always added in... "And those three people are sitting beside you in the band".

Main point, elitists of all kinds suck. Don't listen to them, and furthermore, don't let their vitriol destroy your taste for their chosen genre of music, lest you find yourself developing the same kind of musical tunnel vision that turned them into elitists in the first place.

Agreed. I play whatever I like and is fun personally... I have the most fun playing speedy metal, and Opeth's slower ballad like songs... But TalkBass had a thread about difficult to learn songs, and just going with suggestions from that thread my brain has exploded with cool grooves I would never have listened to let alone set out to learn.

 

[RustyAxe]

The only thing I've learned about jazz cats is that they are often very well schooled in music theory. Which gives them a common lingo with which to communicate complex musical structures to each other. If you don't know the lingo, you might see it as exclusionary. Should they "dumb it down" for those not as well educated?

 

[Fat Steve]

"Dumb it down" is a pretty elitist phrase.

 

[Jean Rodriguez]

If you think you can't dance to jazz, you need your groove sensors checked.

Example 1: Snarky Puppy. Bassist Michael League composes and arranges all their stuff. He also shames anyone who thinks that a P-bass doesn't belong in jazz music.

Example 2: Jukka Eskola. I mean, seriously, just try not to tap your foot to this poopie.


Example 3: Herbie Hancock. Needs no elaboration.


Example 4: Robert Glasper Experiment. Fluid, sexy blends of jazz and r&b, combines virtuosic musicianship with head boppin grooves.


Also I think that there are indeed many elitists in every genre, but all those people should be ignored because they're playing with their heads stuck inside a box of whatever tropes in music they've grown used to. It takes some work, but if you actively seek it out there is fantastic musicianship and songwriting to be found in every genre (yes, even country) and listening to that attentively will put you, as a musician, leagues ahead of the jazz fanatic who has transcribed all of Jaco's solos or the classical dude who plays Bartok all day or the metalhead who shreds nothing but (insert iconic metal bassist here)'s riffs.

To address the question of why teachers shove jazz down your throat, I think that's because historically speaking it's one of only a few genres of music that have been deeply analyzed in an academic/music theoretical fashion, and so naturally it has spawned the most methods of teaching music and applying music theory. Not to say that other genres couldn't be approached in the same way and that you couldn't learn just as much from them, but teachers who decide to go with that approach might, in some senses, have to reinvent the wheel. However, I will defend the decision to teach jazz because I feel that it can fluidly incorporate aspects of other styles (again, Snarky Puppy and Robert Glasper are really really great examples of this), but I digress.

Main point, elitists of all kinds suck. Don't listen to them, and furthermore, don't let their vitriol destroy your taste for their chosen genre of music, lest you find yourself developing the same kind of musical tunnel vision that turned them into elitists in the first place.

Interesting. This makes me think about the last two guitar teachers that I've had in the past two years (Both of them jazz heads though the first one was more of a blues player). With the first one, I noticed that he taught all of his students a ton of theory, soloing techniques and licks which made their solos sound amazing. With me, he only taught me stupid things like strumming patters, how to extend the minor pentatonic scale by using it's relative major and how to figure out the Comfortably Numb solo by ear. Comparing that to all of the things that he taught the other students, I was left thinking "hey man, what gives?". After asking around a bit, I found out that it was due to the fact that I told him on the first day that I didn't like jazz and he didn't know how or what to teach me. That perplexes me a bit because he knew that I'm a blues player and he himself is really good blues and rock player. It shouldn't have been that big of a challenge to show me all of that theory and soloing techniques using the music that I liked.

The second one was a fusion guy and the same thing happened. I told him on the first day that I didn't like jazz and all he did for the whole semester was teach me a bloody chord melody, a jazz standard and give me fingering charts of the modes without much explanation. Needless to say, I didn't learn much with any of them. But hey, at least I can play both Comfortably Numb solos and a chord melody version of the Beatles song "I will".

 

[InhumanResource]

Perhaps. How would you describe such training? - not a challenge, just curious.

Good question! Let's say I put up an ad for a pianist and someone contacts me, introducing themselves as "classically trained." I would expect that person to have studied western music at some kind of conservatory and be able to read and perform written material, both melody and accompaniment. I would expect them to have an understanding of diatonic harmony and at least SOME chromatic harmony applications (not talking about Stravinsky here, but an advanced level of study wouldn't be surprising). They should have a sound enough understanding of harmony that there are no problems communicating ideas verbally (hey, that phrase starts on the V chord!, etc) as well as on their chosen instrument of specialty. They should understand time signatures and the differences between them, and that it is about both number of beats as well as where the pulse is (I'm looking at you rockers who really play in 1/4. Looking with love, but looking). Hell, they should probably be able to sing through phrases we are discussing and be able to use the correct syllables too. Can most people do this? Of course not, but calling oneself "classically trained" sets a pretty darned high bar.

At the very least, if I said play a $chord in $key they should be able to reproduce that without much thought. That's not even classical training, that's basic musicianship. Especially on an instrument like a piano!

 

[bnolsen]

What if "ace of spades" was a jazz tune first? It came out like that first. And then Motorhead did a metal cover of it...or hard rock cover... as it were. It could very well be just like that from the start on.

Ok, here's another one, what about this then:

wow this is like the first time I've actually ever understood the lyrics to that song.

I was mostly classically trained...piano, choir, voice, viola da gamba (bass). There is a nice challenge to be able to quickly sight read and play the complex stuff. While it can be fun to prepare and perform, I found that I personally can't actually stand listening to most of the material for any lengthy period. I feel the same about jazz and always scratch my head when talking with people who are huge jazz fans.

The little details and intricacies just don't appeal to me. I guess I just prefer the overall experience of what I'm listening to, which I guess makes me "uncultured".

 

[RustyAxe]

"Dumb it down" is a pretty elitist phrase.

I suppose you don't see the irony in that statement, do you? If you want to hang with jazz players, then do the work they did. Otherwise, stick to what you know.

 

[SanDiegoHarry]

Learning the 12 bars blues doesn't take as much time as learning jazz.

+1000

 

[01FromFinland]

Why do you care of others opinions? I love playing with heavy distortions and use a pick, guess if I get a lot of whiners picking on those things? I just don't give a crap.

 

[AngelCrusher]

There are more elitists in Rock at the national/major level. WAY more. And a lot of them can't play. The guys who can play are usually cool as hell.

Jazz to me is where it is at. It takes a ton of more time and effort to ever be good at it, but just like any form of music, there will always be elitist nerds. They are in every genre of music.

 

[azureblue]

Jazz requires full command of your chops and improvisational skills. And knowing the skills of the other people you are playing with. A good jazz bass player pays close attention to the solos of the other instruments and underlines them by adjusting his or her part, while, at the same time, listening to what the drummer is doing, to respond to his or her improvised rhythm patterns. Jazz requires playing and improvising as a unit, and failure to understand that is the downfall of a lot of jazz wanna be's. No, it isn't soloing away in a vacuum, or playing like you have some cheap karaoke tracks supporting you.. Once you get a taste of how amazing that is, when the ensemble's improvisation takes a life of it's own, and you are in full and effortless command of your skills, then you will understand why musician love jazz. That is when, also, you find out that you really don't anything about jazz..

I've been playing jazz for some 30 years now, and I will be the first to admit I have a whole lot more to learn... The more I know, the more I know I don't know....

 

[PortlandBass77]

Yes, they are better musicians than 75% of musicians.

 

[Mantis Tobaggan]

They should be.

 

[I am Soma]

i hope not as jazz music is pretty darn terrible

 

[Helaskold]

Jazz and classical musicians can act as elitist as they want. Nothing beats a songwriter who only needs a few chords to compose a simple song/hook that keeps people humming it all day.

Agreed! Who needs the deep, complex, heartbreaking melodies of Beethoven and Mozart? They aren't even simple OR catchy, which are the only important characteristics of music. Clearly Taylor Swift is superior and her songwriting "unbeatable".

/sarcasm

 

[MikeOnBass73]

Allow me to elaborate a bit more on this. I've been playing music for 8 years covering a variety of popular genres and going to the Berklee in Puerto Rico seminar for 4 years in a row. During this time, I've noticed that in every program both in school and outside and guitar and bass lesson that I've taken gives an emphasis on jazz music. I've never minded jazz and can play it if needed, but I have never understood the elitism behind it (every jazz musician that I've known treats it like it's the holy grail of music and looks down on all other genres). I've always been a rocker at heart and as such, that is what I will naturally play and is what I excel at the most. Whenever I mention that or I start playing it, I notice the jazz heads of every age giving me snarky looks or the stink eye. They'll then start talking about how bass in rock is boring and how they prefer to transcribe a solo played by whichever jazz player they love or play the same standards over and over again. It's even gone as far that they started to snicker because I said that I was going to play an Ed Sheeran bass chord melody at a competition and they were gonna play solos that they transcribed.

Alright, I'm done ranting and I'll get to the point. Can someone please explain the elitism behind jazz and their musicians or is it just something that the jazz players here in Puerto Rico do? I don't mind the genre and can play it enough to defend myself, but I don't like the emphasis that it's given to it at every music program and most music schools that I've seen.

I love, can play well and have gotten a ton of work over the years in so many different genres, ..... rock, broadway shows, country, folk, R&B / Funk AND Jazz in modern and classic forms. The truth is that jazz is the most difficult to master. Jazz is HARD and musically you will learn more about harmony and rhythm studying jazz than ANY other form of music. It's just the truth. Why do you think University music programs emphasize Jazz so much? I love so many different styles because I just LOVE music but there is so very much to learn in Jazz ..... a massive, seemingly infinite body of work to play and learn from. You must be able to see that.