• 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.

What is jazz???

I always found it interesting that, what historians refer to as "the jazz age" (the 1920's), did not have any of the music that most people identify as "jazz music" (the be-bop, of the 1950's).
And that song from the musical "Chicago" All That Jazz…. it doesn't sound jazzy at all.
 
There are many ways to approach "what is Jazz?". There are several "eras" of Jazz. Several subgenres. It certainly has nothing to do with "being difficult or sophisticated music, a priori", or hermetic, instrumental, or whatever it is that has a negative and antagonistic connotation to popular music.

Jazz was once POP music, sung, movies soundtrack, and sung and played by the people. it's like Rock and all its infinite sub-genres: it's just a state of mind, with 2 or 3 little rules. Rock is a very broad manifestation that "contains music" - it's not exactly, or only, music. Jazz is similar, it just contains a little more music, or a lot more depending on who you ask.

There is one thing that people prefer to ignore: Some genres of music need to be "learned", as do many forms of art. As a common example: Cooking and its appreciation are often cultural phenomena that need to be learned, assimilated, in short, not everything is easy and simple as people would like it to be. Much of what is good in life needs to be "a little" learned, Jazz for example.

A good clue is the respect that jazz musicians have for classical music. For me Jazz is freedom (although I appreciate notation...) My thoughts only.

All of this ^ ^ ^ , very well said!!!

Jazz is a very broad musical umbrella, like rock... It would be perfectly normal for you to love some types, mildly enjoy some types, be ambivalent toward some types, dislike some types, intensely despise some types, etc. Personally I love the catchy stuff from the end of the 1920s to the start of the 1950s, as well as the rare modern bands that authentically keep those styles alive.

For the older jazz, something that really can make it or break it for a newer listener is the sound quality of the recordings, even more so than with vintage rock music. Over the years I've heard a lot of the same recordings released in digital format by various small and large record labels, and the sound quality can range from harsh/unlistenable, to dull/muffled, to overprocessed/EQed (sometimes with disgusting added reverb), all the way to gloriously and judiciously restored to like-new sounding. Mosaic Records is one company that has meticulously compiled, restored, and re-released tons of older jazz with well-researched and -written liner notes, thorough discographical information, and amazing sound quality.
 
Yogi Berra Explains Jazz:

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 what's so simple about it.

Interviewer: Do you understand it?

Yogi: No. That's why I can explain it. If I understood it, I wouldn't 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.

Interviewer: What's the difference between theory and practice?

Yogi: In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.

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.
 
There are many ways to approach "what is Jazz?". There are several "eras" of Jazz. Several subgenres. It certainly has nothing to do with "being difficult or sophisticated music, a priori", or hermetic, instrumental, or whatever it is that has a negative and antagonistic connotation to popular music.

Jazz was once POP music, sung, movies soundtrack, and sung and played by the people. it's like Rock and all its infinite sub-genres: it's just a state of mind, with 2 or 3 little rules. Rock is a very broad manifestation that "contains music" - it's not exactly, or only, music. Jazz is similar, it just contains a little more music, or a lot more depending on who you ask.

There is one thing that people prefer to ignore: Some genres of music need to be "learned", as do many forms of art. As a common example: Cooking and its appreciation are often cultural phenomena that need to be learned, assimilated, in short, not everything is easy and simple as people would like it to be. Much of what is good in life needs to be "a little" learned, Jazz for example.

A good clue is the respect that jazz musicians have for classical music. For me Jazz is freedom (although I appreciate notation...) My thoughts only.
When pondering if i wanted to ask a question and get insight, rock is the other genre i though about because it does feel like a wide umbrella.
When I wanted to learn to play guitar, it was mostly about rock. When i got the inkling of bass, it opened me up to a bunch of music that i either wasn't exposed to or was avoiding. Even "yatch" rock i would avaiod because it was "cheesy", for "old people". Now I get the vibes and I'm listening to it, maybe im getting older too, .
Thanks for your post.
 
All of this ^ ^ ^ , very well said!!!

Jazz is a very broad musical umbrella, like rock... It would be perfectly normal for you to love some types, mildly enjoy some types, be ambivalent toward some types, dislike some types, intensely despise some types, etc. Personally I love the catchy stuff from the end of the 1920s to the start of the 1950s, as well as the rare modern bands that authentically keep those styles alive.

For the older jazz, something that really can make it or break it for a newer listener is the sound quality of the recordings, even more so than with vintage rock music. Over the years I've heard a lot of the same recordings released in digital format by various small and large record labels, and the sound quality can range from harsh/unlistenable, to dull/muffled, to overprocessed/EQed (sometimes with disgusting added reverb), all the way to gloriously and judiciously restored to like-new sounding. Mosaic Records is one company that has meticulously compiled, restored, and re-released tons of older jazz with well-researched and -written liner notes, thorough discographical information, and amazing sound quality.
You talk about the sound. Even if I've never been able to process jazz in my head, ive tried a few times, what ive always liked about it is the warm tone it has. I guess maybe big band and similar stuff would be the exception since it's louder, but then that's just fun.
 
The op did provide an example illustrating the confusion. What that station is playing is smooth jazz, and I totally understand being confused when people call that the same thing as other "jazz". Some think smooth jazz isn't jazz, others think it is.

It's kind of like if you heard a lot of R&B for a long time but it was only stuff from the 50's like Little Richard. Then you turn on an R&B radio station playing today's music that uses that same genre term. Even though they're both called the same thing they're not particularly similar.
 
While I 100% agree that Salsa and Mambo deserve their own spot in a genre, and they are for sure, here in NY it is at least, however a lot of jazz songs have a "mambo" or "salsa" influence and feel in jazz history and songs. Classics like Willie Colon are put in the jazz categories on radio stations, and lot of school jazz bands or college jazz bands who can not afford to make a separate salsa/mambo band will simply combine with a jazz band, since a lot of salsa bands used similar instruments, mostly percussion is the newest aspect for learners. I'm not a fan of it, however not many people would be introduce or get into salsa/mambo if it wasn't for it being on a jazz station. A lot of amazing bassist come from those genres and because of the language and musical genre barrier many do not venture into it sadly. I'm a huge fan of all latin genres, tango, salsa, cumbia you name it, a lot of amazing players that sadly will not be seen by the rest of the world, but I know many people do know of them at least. Anyway yes I see your point for the jazz debate, I agree that jazz is sadly overly used in the wrong, I am almost positive same made a similar post about smooth jazz and the mis-use of jazz as wording and things being clump with it.
One reason i mentioned salsa and mambo is that i grew up listening to it and Im very familiar with the sound. Every time I've come across latin jazz, its been, mostly, instrumental salsa or mambo. One specific example is Mambo Influenciado. Probably 80% salsa and 20% mambo, but if you sang to it, it would be in any Fania album.
Another example, Bobby Valentin. Big fan btw. His latest stuff is "jazz", but really mostly salsa. I didn't think of it as jazz until like a month ago that i read that jazz is his first musical love. Awesome music. Check it out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: salmon256
All great videos posted here and great information too. Doesn't seem like a trolling post. I was opened up to jazz back in college. What I thought was jazz, was jazz, but just a sub-genre of jazz. As bass players we are exposed to a lot of things we don't expect and it makes us very different musicians than others who play other instruments. At a spitting distance to 60 years old, and calling myself a musician, I'll simply say jazz is history, the unexpected, but mostly it's just the way your brain is wired. You either get it, or you don't. It doesn't make one musician better than another, it probably just makes you different than another. Despite what people say, you can "learn" jazz but to understand it and play it well, you just need to rewire a few synapses. That's the most difficult aspect of the music of jazz I find most people who don't understand it or like it much. To each their own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: carlosjrf
I would ask what kind of music you like to listen to so I could suggest records that might interest you. You need to go inside the music before you can go outside of it.
I open to almost any kind of music. Growing up in Puerto Rico was almost exclusively latin. Then mostly rock, blues, funk, 90s r&b and anything that was popular or my friends liked. For some reason, bass opened me up for almost anything and have found a lot of great music i wish i had found way back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: salmon256
During the pandemic, I took a "history of jazz" virtual discussion course. It ranged from the very early origins of jazz back to say 1920 through what most people (don't get mad at me TB for generalizing) consider "Jazz" — the "bop" era largely dominated by Miles Davis and his offshoots (1950's and 1960's) — then went into fusion (which is a blend of rock and jazz) — i.e. Weather Report.

To the OP: the above absolutely includes Latin Jazz — bossa nova rhythms, etc.

Radio stations or even jazz "festivals" often times try to be a big tent and include all the above sub-genres — and even veer into R&B (look at this year's Montréal Jazz Festival: Buddy Guy and Herbie Hancock). Do I consider Guy to be jazz? Nope. Hancock = yes (look at his history).

Our virtual study group often debated, "so then, what is jazz??" OP — your question is valid.
 
I don't really listen much anymore and suddenly had an inkling for it. Found myself tuning into a local college station that's all jazz (WCLK in Atlanta).
I don't know much about jazz. After listening for a while i realized that most of the songs sound mostly like R&B or maybe instrumental covers of known songs.
I know there are different styles of jazz, but the more a listen the most i think that anything can be called jazz. Even latin rhythms like salsa, mambo, etc., i find them being classified as jazz when they are all instrumental.

So, what is jazz? Is anything jazz?
Learning expensive chords and every damn scale ever imagined. Oh yeah, lots of soloing. I'm not a jazz musician but my father is and I've played a lot of jazz tunes and a few jazz gigs. It's really fun when you take the time to learn some thicker theory and apply it to your playing. It's funny though, I used to hear how free feeling jazz playing is for a musician but when I learned that expensive chords are quite constricting when choosing notes to solo with I started to appreciate soloing over simpler chords with all sorts of scales, chromatic phrases, and its always fun to play outside the chord/walking off the beaten path. Love jazz sensibilities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kubicki Fan