• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Double Bass Do you tire of jazz?

K

Kitschead

Sep 14, 2008
114
0
Sydney, Australia
#1
Just creating this thread out of curiosity really. I'm interested to hear how many jazzers on here ever tire of jazz. I figure it's normal to go through phases where your enthusiasm for something may waver. I seem to be going through a stage of lessened appreciation for jazz at the moment. I haven't been as into it for a number of weeks. I wouldn't be thinking much of this if it weren't for the fact that I'm in my first year of a four year jazz performance degree. I've been doing quite a bit of self evaluation recently, wondering if what doing is worthwhile etc.

As a follow up I'm also interested in how many are passionate about other genres of music. Anyone with any "guilty" musical pleasures which they'd be keen to share? :D
 
#5
When I was in music school, I studied improv., jazz the standards etc. I love listening to the classic jazz recordings for inspiration. My playing is down to earth heavy rock,funk and blues. Still,the experience of studying jazz is now done on the piano with my jazz/classical Teacher...........................Good luck at school.....
 
#6
Okay, I'll be more helpful now that I've had a little coffee. It's early in the morning.

You say you're tired of jazz. Which musicians do you like? Do you have a favorite bass player? Are you plugged into the local jazz scene? Do you go to clubs to experience it live on a regular basis? Are there any jam sessions around? Do you ever jam with your buddies? Jazz is a spontaneous improvisational art form, you have to keep it alive in yourself. School is an efficient way to learn the mechanics of playing and give you experience with other musicians, but it can't teach you to be a musician. You have to seek inspiration on your own.

It sounds like school is wearing you down. In the U.S., we have road trips. What do you call them down under? Walkabouts? Get away for the weekend with some good friends, have a little fun.

In answer to your second part, you could say that my "guilty" pleasure is bluegrass, but I don't really feel very guilty about it.
 
#7
pedroims said:
I listen everything from Punk to Opera, I love Jazz but I could not live with only this genre of music.
Click to expand...

This ! Was brought up on jazz, country (real country imo-pre C '75, yes I know there's still good country music being made, but the mainstream ' country ' today seems to me to be ........... :-/ ) classical, rock, blues...etc. But mainly Chuck Berry, Stones, Hank Williams, Lois Armstrong Billie Holiday & Nina Simone-coz these were my Dad's faves & he played a little bit of guitar. So he pushed me into playing it too, tho I gravitated toward the bottom end :-)
I occasionally get sick of a certain genre, be it jazz, rock, punk, classical, but I never seem to tire of PLAYING funk! Funny that. :-p
 
#8
Jazz can be really boring when it goes: head, horn player solos, piano player solos, bass player solos, trade 4's with drummer, head, end; over and over and over from tune to tune. Unless the improvisers are amazing, this format gets old for both the listener and the musicians. Innovating the forms and the instrumentation can help keep it fresh. Also, with conservatories all over the world teaching jazz nowadays, one rarely hears an exceptional talent who sounds unique; you hear mostly very-well-trained improvisers who tend toward similar modalities and techniques, because teaching jazz requires breaking it down into its component parts and then using those components in an "acceptable" way. Hearing a tightly-knit jazz ensemble that is rehearsed and uses different formats and instrumentation can be really exciting. But the typical jazz jam session format can be stifling and dull, especially for bassists. I think the emphasis on transcribing and mimicking solos also has a dulling effect on jazz because the emphasis should be on each musician striving to find his own, unique voice, not learning another player's bag of tricks. Brad Meldau is, I think, a good example of a fine "jazz" player who has a unique voice and can be exciting to listen to.
 
#9
I know what you mean, but there is a certain niceness about the fact that you can throw a bunch of jazz players together and they can produce something that sounds like music just because they all understand some basic rules of engagement---like a bunch of baseball players who can get together and pretty much play like a team. For my part, I think there's two best cures for small ensemble nausea. First and best is big bands: the combination of big, structured ensemble playing, section precision and contrasting solos always reminds me why jazz is great. The other antidote (a sort of purgative) is pure improvisation and exploration without rote rules with some willing compatriots. Clears the ears and the brain. I remember listening to Cecil Taylor records when I was young and not getting it at all---but I was sure there was something cool going on. Get enough of these two and you can survive small ensembles as a purely practical matter. In the words of Frank Zappa: "Jazz isn't dead. It just smells funny."
 
#10
I think ANY style of music can get mighty boring in that case.
There's a reg. gig here in my town, that attracts heaps of ppl to it. It's free entry, on a Fri eve after most finish work & close to the CBD. But the bands that play there, seem to play damn near EVERY song consisting of a 1-4 chord jam, complete with solo's for each instrument! & EVERY song lasts for 10 mins. MAN that gets OLD FAST IMO.
 
#11
It's funny for me... I was a jazz performance major, so I adore jazz, but can listen to only so much at a time. I often can't listen to a whole jazz album, but I have lots of it in my iPod, and when shuffled in, I always feel better.
 
#12
A few years back, I used to listen to a lot of early bop and fusion stuff but now when I'm trying to sit down and give myself a listen on, let's say, Eric Dolphy stuff, I just can't do it!! I prefer Michael Jackson or James Taylor any given moment. Any way, there's a lot of jazz influence in my playing so as hard as I'd try to avoid jazz, I couldn't! :D
 
#14
Kitschead said:
I wouldn't be thinking much of this if it weren't for the fact that I'm in my first year of a four year jazz performance degree. I've been doing quite a bit of self evaluation recently, wondering if what doing is worthwhile etc.
Click to expand...


I think this is more the crux of the matter than Jazz itself - I think if you start to make something an academic study, rather than something you love to do - then it gets like work and you start to make it what you have to do - rather than what you want to do!

I had two experiences like this - so I was very interested in Philosophy - but by my 3rd year of doing a degree, I was so bored with it and found it so dull, I avoided it for over a decade!

Secondly I started a part-time open university course in music - which was partly by correspondence - but it made the subject so dry that I gave up after a year.

On the other hand I got into Jazz and grew to love it - this has helped me learn more about music than anything before. But I treat it like a hobby and a relaxation/recreation from work and so it seems constantly fascinating and entertaining.
 
#16
Some jazz I feel I can keep hearing forever without tiring of it...even just the recording, which doesn't change.

Funny it's not because it's jazz vs. some other style, it's because it says something to me that I just can't ever get tired of...something that I can't explain...something that I always want to be able to say just like that.
 
#17
As people might guess, I think "guilty pleasures" are usually uninteresting and rarely worth discussing - if you need to listen to Mike Jackson to get through the day, go ahead and then get back to "work"!
I tend to go through phases in my listening that mirrors the music I am working on. I haven't played a straight jazz gig in years, but I never really tire as a listener and I continue to work on it in practice.
I can listen to jazz at work so I am always checking out the variours bodies of work that I hadn't listened to in depth - I am working through the classic Blue Note albums now, for whatever reason I just kind of passed over them.
Later in the week I have some classic Brubeck albums to check out.

"Jazz" made now is a harder sell, there are a few great players I keep up with, but for the most part I prefer recordings from the vital period of the style I am interested at that time.

There is a lot to learn from the music, but I also just like hearing it - when I want to hear harmony, melody and rhythm I just listen to jazz and classical music rather than pop music.
 
#18
arnoldschnitzer said:
Jazz can be really boring when it goes: head, horn player solos, piano player solos, bass player solos, trade 4's with drummer, head, end; over and over and over from tune to tune. Unless the improvisers are amazing, this format gets old for both the listener and the musicians. Innovating the forms and the instrumentation can help keep it fresh. Also, with conservatories all over the world teaching jazz nowadays, one rarely hears an exceptional talent who sounds unique; you hear mostly very-well-trained improvisers who tend toward similar modalities and techniques, because teaching jazz requires breaking it down into its component parts and then using those components in an "acceptable" way. Hearing a tightly-knit jazz ensemble that is rehearsed and uses different formats and instrumentation can be really exciting. But the typical jazz jam session format can be stifling and dull, especially for bassists. I think the emphasis on transcribing and mimicking solos also has a dulling effect on jazz because the emphasis should be on each musician striving to find his own, unique voice, not learning another player's bag of tricks.
Click to expand...

You just saved me a lot of typing. I agree.

When I hear a jazz group play, I want to hear what they have to say, not how well they can imitate what has worked in the past. The music needs to be spontaneous and alive, and mixing things up helps keep me interested. I like to hear the interaction of the different members of the group so that the music sounds like an intimate conversation rather than a series of speeches with polite applause. Musically speaking, I am easily bored by fireworks and pyrotechnics, but will follow genuine melody and lyricism through the circles of hell and back; I would rather hear a musical poem or story than a metaphysical dialectic in notes, no matter how well executed and correct the latter may be.

I also enjoy listening to other styles of music and bringing elements of these styles to the improvisational arena. Variety is a good thing for both audience and performer (IMO).

EDIT: the concept of "guilty pleasures" is beyond me. If I want to listen to something "lowbrow" or "unhip", I'm going to go ahead and do it and enjoy the hell out of it and not apologize to anyone for taking pleasure from what pleases me in that moment. The "taste police" can all go rot as far as I'm concerned.
 
#19
After years of performing between many genres on a daily basis, I'm of the opinion that jazz is more of an attitude and approach to music-making than a genre. Some may disagree, but applying an improvisational, virtuosic approach to any kind of music is at the heart of it. You may be playing a rock tune, an operatic aria, or bluegrass chart, but if you hold true to the spontaneity, group communication, and playing off of a form, then you are playing jazz.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back