What is jaz?!

[fishdreams]

Just to get your history right....

This type of high minded "correcting" is exactly the type of negative energy that has given jazz a bad name in the last 25 years. Let's please all stop doing that. Nobody holds a patent on what jazz is or not is.

 

[sanderic]

Interviewer: Can you explain jazz?

Yogi: I can't, but I will. 90% of all jazz is half improvisation. The other half is the part people play while others are playing something they never played with anyone who played that part. So if you play the wrong part, its right. If you play the right part, it might be right if you play it wrong enough. But if you play it too right, it's wrong.

Interviewer: I don't understand.

Yogi: Anyone who understands jazz knows that you can't understand it. It's too complicated. That's whats so simple about it.

Interviewer: Do you understand it?

Yogi: No. That's why I can explain it. If I understood it, I wouldnt know anything about it.

Interviewer: Are there any great jazz players alive today?

Yogi: No. All the great jazz players alive today are dead. Except for the ones that are still alive. But so many of them are dead, that the ones that are still alive are dying to be like the ones that are dead. Some would kill for it.

Interviewer: What is syncopation?

Yogi: That's when the note that you should hear now happens either before or after you hear it. In jazz, you don't hear notes when they happen because that would be some other type of music. Other types of music can be jazz, but only if they're the same as something different from those other kinds.

Interviewer: Now I really don't understand.

Yogi: I haven't taught you enough for you to not understand jazz that well.

 

[bass12]

Just to get your history right...

Ragtime was a precursor to jazz that developed at the turn of the century, not the teens. Dixieland has roots going far back in the 19th century evolving from marching music and caribbean influence, and isn't just some "larger orchestration" of swing. Big band got its start in the 20's with guys like Fletcher Henderson and Don Redman (and even Duke Ellington in the late 20's)

It's rather funny, by the way, to whitewash the big band era in the 30's by saying "from Paul Whiteman and his Orchestra to Glen MIller and everything in between." It's like a music historian 50 years from now talking about the highlights of rap music from the 80's and 90's with artists like "Eminiem to Vanilla Ice and everything in between." Duke Ellington and Count Basie are guys you need to know, period.

The 1980's brought about a trend in jazz far more important than smooth jazz - it brought about the "Young Lions" or the neoclassicist movement spearheaded by the Marsalis clan as a reaction to the 60's and 70's. Marsalis' influence (at least here in the US) is still extremely strong today.

+1

 

[wrench45us]

that chronology needs a little cleanup
BeBop was a major milestone in jazz and evolved out of the swing era
Hard Bop is one development out of BeBop .. the cool modal jazz of Miles Davis was a reaction to BeBop
Maybe it's just me but I see BeBop as a central defining period where it's easy to categorize other history as pre be bop or post be bop

in your theory world jazz basically means that core chords move from (mostly) 3 voices to 4 voices +

 

[bass12]

This type of high minded "correcting" is exactly the type of negative energy that has given jazz a bad name in the last 25 years. Let's please all stop doing that. Nobody holds a patent on what jazz is or not is.

Historical facts are historical facts - and we as a society have some very clear established notions of what constitutes different musical styles (including jazz). There's nothing "negative" about correcting someone when they've posted inaccuracies.

 

[projectMalamute]

A good place to start learning about Jazz is here:

Amazon.com: Jazz : A Film By Ken Burns: Movies & TV
!

This is essentially 10 hours or whatever of Wynton Marsalis' jive ass revisionist, reactionary, BS. A fair amount of good footage and music but the information being presented is very, very skewed.

 

[fishdreams]

Some bass players to check out from various era's who I believe are not yet mentioned, and who are interesting stylists:
-Wilbur Ware (look for Sonny Rollins, Live at Village Vanguard)
-Walter Page (Count Basie)
-Peter Kowald (Was Da Ist, solo bass)
-William Parker (alive and playing today)
-Israel Crosby (w Ahmad Jamahl)
-Niels Henning Orsted Pedersen(a lot with Oscar Peterson, the Joe Pass duo's are nice)
-Sam Jones (on Something else by Cannonball Adderly)
-Richard Davis (Eric Dolphy's Out To lunch and manu many others)
-Reggie Workman & Jimmy Garrison (with John Coltrane Quartet Live in Europe)
on bass guitar:
-Gerald Veasley (specifically, look for an Odean Pope record "Almost Like Me". You'll have to dig up someone else's mp3s for it probably, but it's worth it)

 

[fishdreams]

Historical facts are historical facts - and we as a society have some very clear established notions of what constitutes different musical styles (including jazz). There's nothing "negative" about correcting someone when they've posted inaccuracies.

that Charlie Parker died on March 12, 1955 is a fact, which can be accurate or inaccurate information. An "established notion", is not a fact. Instead of "we as society", why not just speak for yourself?

 

[SteveC]

Jmairoquai is not jazz, but it kicks a$$! I love the pop/funk/soul thing he has going. Great bass lines - no matter who's playing.

 

[bass12]

that Charlie Parker died on March 12, 1955 is a fact, which can be accurate or inaccurate information. An "established notion", is not a fact. Instead of "we as society", why not just speak for yourself?

Because I've studied enough music history to know that, as a matter of FACT, ragtime did not evolve in the teens and twenties of the twentieth century. That is not a matter of opinion - just as it's not a matter of opinion that Charlie Parker was not playing rock & roll and Metallica does not play bebop.

 

[fishdreams]

Because I've studied enough music history to know that, as a matter of FACT, ragtime did not evolve in the teens and twenties of the twentieth century. That is not a matter of opinion - just as it's not a matter of opinion that Charlie Parker was not playing rock & roll and Metallica does not play bebop.

what you are talking about I would call paradigms, not facts. Bach Cantata's were conceived, performed and coinsidered church function music when they were written and now are concert stage music in the classical canon. That's a paradigm shift, and yes, in 100 years maybe Charlie Parker IS considered Rock'n roll. And then someone with your mindset will claim that it is a FACT that Charlie Parker is Rock 'n Roll.

 

[FretlessMainly]

As I posted previously, I worte my initial post very quickly off the top of my head - my intent was to touch upon some major styles that have been played over the last 100 years or so. Unfortunately, some of my discusion of how certain styles evolved from others was lacking something (primarily a factual basis). I was only trying to point out that things started with styles like dixieland and ragtime, went through a prominent big band phase, etc. That I chose Whiteman over Fletcher Henderson was simply a matter of who popped into my head - I wasn't necessarily trying to choose the best-known purveyor of a certain style.

My personal interest in jazz pretty much starts in about 1956 and goes through 'Trane's 1965 work. I would have been better served to focus just on that.

Carry on...

 

[bassinplace]

This is essentially 10 hours or whatever of Wynton Marsalis' jive ass revisionist, reactionary, BS. A fair amount of good footage and music but the information being presented is very, very skewed.

Just recommended as a starting point for a general overview. Not a bible. Listening will tell the real story.

 

[bass12]

what you are talking about I would call paradigms, not facts. Bach Cantata's were conceived, performed and coinsidered church function music when they were written and now are concert stage music in the classical canon. That's a paradigm shift, and yes, in 100 years maybe Charlie Parker IS considered Rock'n roll. And then someone with your mindset will claim that it is a FACT that Charlie Parker is Rock 'n Roll.

Sorry, but it is a fact that, by today's standards and definitions, Charlie Parker did not play rock & roll. And to invoke the possibility of changing definitions or parameters in the future is not a valid means of denying the meanings currently attached to terms. That's like arguing that I don't play bass because in 100 years it's possible that the idea of what constitutes a "bass" might be different.

 

[pbasswil]

Hey so i started playing jazz about 1 year ago and everybody keeps telling me i should listen and learn to some jazz. But the problem is im too ignorant and dont really know what jazz is, ...

You've been playing jazz for a year, but you don't know what it is??
Then how do you know you've been playing jazz? What if it turns out you've actually been playing polkas, or renaissance music? :^D

Ok, I'm finished slaying myself.

Most people gravitate towards playing the music that they've heard around them and really like.
Why don't you try that? Rather than attaching yourself to an unfamiliar style just based on the loose label "jazz".

It's a bit like signing up for a stint in the navy, without even checking to see if you get seasick.

 

[HaVIC5]

This type of high minded "correcting" is exactly the type of negative energy that has given jazz a bad name in the last 25 years. Let's please all stop doing that. Nobody holds a patent on what jazz is or not is.

Er...

What?

I was just adding some interesting tidbits and finessing some historical information that FretlessMainly originally brought up.

Would you care to challenge any of the points or opinions that I brought up?

I wrote the post in about 5 minutes as a brief introduction to the broad history of jazz off of the top of my head. Anything but a broad whitewash would have been infeasible. OP didn't know what jazz is, so I gave some general history.

I meant whitewash as in literally "White"wash, which is a term used to describe historical understanding of a cultural movement only through the lens of the white people who participated in it, even if they weren't particularly important. Not to say that Paul Whiteman and Glenn Miller weren't important (or Tommy Dorsey, or Benny Goodman), but it can reek of that sort of racist understanding of history when you don't include Ellington or Basie in that list.

Of course, I don't doubt that this was entirely unintentional, but I just wanted to make that point.

that Charlie Parker died on March 12, 1955 is a fact, which can be accurate or inaccurate information. An "established notion", is not a fact. Instead of "we as society", why not just speak for yourself?

what you are talking about I would call paradigms, not facts. Bach Cantata's were conceived, performed and coinsidered church function music when they were written and now are concert stage music in the classical canon. That's a paradigm shift, and yes, in 100 years maybe Charlie Parker IS considered Rock'n roll. And then someone with your mindset will claim that it is a FACT that Charlie Parker is Rock 'n Roll.

Yes, but March 12, 1955 is a different date depending on what calendar you use (Gregorian, Julian), and the paradigm of which calendar we used has shifted. Who knows, maybe it will shift in another 100 years? Perhaps also our understanding of measuring time will change, and the paradigm will shift to a method based upon the decay of the total mass of cesium atoms in the universe versus the rotation of the earth, and the word "Day" will cease to have meaning.



This is a forum to discuss music. Not engage in idiotic rhetorical jousts.

This is essentially 10 hours or whatever of Wynton Marsalis' jive ass revisionist, reactionary, BS. A fair amount of good footage and music but the information being presented is very, very skewed.

I wouldn't say the information itself is skewed, it's just very incomplete. What's there is good, but no jazz past 1960 is mentioned at all, and that's about a half century of development from the rise and fall of fusion to the neoclassicist revolution of the 80's to the ECM scene. So in that I suppose it is revisionist.

 

[gai113]

Type jazz in Wikipedia Jesus

 

[FretlessMainly]

...but it can reek of that sort of racist understanding of history when you don't include Ellington or Basie in that list.

Of course, I don't doubt that this was entirely unintentional, but I just wanted to make that point.

Well to be fair, I didn't mention Bill Evans, Chet Baker, George Russell, or Neils Henning Orsted Pedersen when discussing other genres either. But point taken.

Oddly, I don't own a single Paul Whiteman or Glenn Miller recording, but there is this cheesy picture of Whiteman in The Illustrated History of Jazz that must have stuck in my head. I'll admit to being fairly unversed in the big band era - my interests there would lie primarily with Sun Ra's Arkestra and Mingus Big Band stuff.

 

[HaVIC5]

Well to be fair, I didn't mention Bill Evans, Chet Baker, George Russell, or Neils Henning Orsted Pedersen when discussing other genres either. But point taken.

Oddly, I don't own a single Paul Whiteman or Glenn Miller recording, but there is this cheesy picture of Whiteman in The Illustrated History of Jazz that must have stuck in my head. I'll admit to being fairly unversed in the big band era - my interests there would lie primarily with Sun Ra's Arkestra and Mingus Big Band stuff.

Both awesome bands, but not big band era bands! Mingus himself never maintained a working big band, the "Mingus Big Band" you might have heard is the work of his wife Sue Mingus that looks to keep the legacy of his music alive. Either way, killer band, and just amazing music. Sun Ra's Arkestra was definitely a product of the 60's and he did some crazy stuff with it, and they still perform, actually, the same way the Mel Lewis/Thad Jones big band still performs today as the Vanguard Orchestra.

Big Band music is very near and dear to my heart. You should check out some cool contemporary people that are doing it like Darcy James Argue's Secret Society (Zeno), Maria Schneider (The Pretty Road), Steve Weist (Ice Nine), Joe Phillips Jr and John Hollenbeck.

 

[FretlessMainly]

I met Sue Mingus in the elevator at the Charles hotel in Cambridge, MA while at a Mingus Big Band gig. She's a pistol (I can see why Charles was taken with her). We had a nice chat about Charles' legacy and her work to maintain it.

I am aware of the big band era and, more importantly, my preferences in its style (even if not truly big band era bands). My favorite Sun Ra bits are from:

Angels and Demons at Play;
The Nubians of Plutonia;
Visits Planet Earth; and
Interstellar Low Ways

...all of which were recorded between 1956 and 1960. So, not so much a product of the 60s as a prescient echo of what was to come. Some absoultely killer material and improvs that blow most cats out of the water. Yes, there was significant material after 1960 as well, but that's a bit spacey for me.

Further, neither of these bands really qualifies as a "Big Band," because they have perhaps 10-15 members. But the orchestration is similar, and the role of horns backing soloists is similar. So, it fits the genre to my ears.

But thanks for the recommendations on modern big band - I will indeed check them out.