• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Smooth Jazz is Jazz

Dr. Cheese

Supporting Member
Mar 3, 2004
57,319
120,611
Metro St. Louis


This video illustrates something that has been on my mind lately. Smooth Jazz is often dismissed as formulaic are simply background music, but the same can be sound about acoustic Jazz or Classical, which are often employed for atmosphere at swank events. I am not saying a fair amount of Smooth Jazz is not lightweight, what I am saying is that all music should be listened to seriously before making any judgement.
 
I don't worry about labels. When the Bad Plus, a fantastic piano/upright bass/drums trio, started covering Smells Like Teen Spirit, it was playing a "rock" song. A lot of jazz standards started as Broadway or Tin Pan Alley pop songs. Maynard Ferguson covered the Rocky theme. Chuck Mangione had some sick trad jazz chops. Etc.

If you like it, you like it.
 


This video illustrates something that has been on my mind lately. Smooth Jazz is often dismissed as formulaic are simply background music, but the same can be sound about acoustic Jazz or Classical, which are often employed for atmosphere at swank events. I am not saying a fair amount of Smooth Jazz is not lightweight, what I am saying is that all music should be listened to seriously before making any judgement.
The passage that he slows down at 4:27 is very much like a classical music line, if it isn't one he borrowed from such.
 


This video illustrates something that has been on my mind lately. Smooth Jazz is often dismissed as formulaic are simply background music, but the same can be sound about acoustic Jazz or Classical, which are often employed for atmosphere at swank events. I am not saying a fair amount of Smooth Jazz is not lightweight, what I am saying is that all music should be listened to seriously before making any judgement.


Agreed! Given my druthers, I would much rather listen to 20 hours of smooth jazz than 10 minutes of listing to Coltrane. JMO.

As you point out, there is smooth jazz and there is "smooth jazz". I think in general the reason it is more popular than other forms of jazz is it is easier to digest. It doesn't take as much work to understand the musical logic and it can make an easy transition to background music when needed.

But on the other hand for those with sophisticated musical understanding, I can understand why listening to smooth jazz might have all the appeal of a renowned neuro surgeon having to deal with somebody's butt rash.
 
Agreed on “not judging a genre by it’s (album) cover”. I used to say “country all sucks” but then I discovered that there is more to the genre than what you hear on the radio, and I enjoy a good bit of it. Admittedly, I haven’t dug into smooth jazz but I’m not surprised that the same is true for it, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr. Cheese
As Duke Ellington told us, there are only two kinds of music, good and bad. I'm pretty much a "mainstream" jazz guy, but I love Michael Franks, Al Jarreau, George Duke, Bob James, Lee Ritenour, etc. Does that make me a bad person, or does that make labels dangerous?
 
For me personally, smooth jazz went south when they stopped using the great rhythm sections and started using "programming" as a replacement.
I would go see artist like George Howard live and his band would be killing, but his CDs were all programmed, all the soul and pocket drained from them. I don't blamed them, the new format worked and some jazz cats got paid for a change.
Kinda like how "power-ballads" wimped out the metal scene.
 
Last edited: