Double Bass Why isn't Jazz that popular? (DB forum thread)

[mccartneyman]

I'm a fan of "structured" jazz, if you can call it that. Big band with definite arrangements and great ensemble playing. I've never liked jazz where the ensemble states the theme, then everyone takes 32 choruses and they return to the main theme. Don't like long rock jams like this either. I can appreciate the virtuosity of the players, but I don't listen to it.

 

[fingerbun]

What's a "jazz freebie"? You have to get paid something. You're telling me you would work for free. Not a good thing at all IMHO! Once you do that, you don't get paid and others don't get paid. Things get real uncomfortable with no bread.

I deleted my previous answer to you. It was typed at 1am local time after having been up and working for 20 hours more or less straight. It was a bit terse and I'm worried it may have seemed rude. If so I apologise. That was not my intention, but the wording was rather clumsy.

I was picking up on Auriaprottu's comment that in some gigs they might not be what he wants but he still gets paid. When I was full-time I would have had the same perspective. Now I don't need the money, and I can afford to choose gigs that I want to do for their own sake. When I do a gig I am playing not working. In general I will choose a lesser paying gig where I like the music over a better paying one where I don't. The freedom to make this choice was one of the reasons I got out of fulltime music.

While I have a different view on playing for free than you, I don't play for free in any context that should be paid.

P.S. no criticism of death metal intended. If you love it great. For me personally it doesn't move me.

 

[RBrownBass]

I deleted my previous answer to you. It was typed at 1am local time after having been up and working for 20 hours more or less straight. It was a bit terse and I'm worried it may have seemed rude. If so I apologise. That was not my intention, but the wording was rather clumsy.

I was picking up on Auriaprottu's comment that in some gigs they might not be what he wants but he still gets paid. When I was full-time I would have had the same perspective. Now I don't need the money, and I can afford to choose gigs that I want to do for their own sake. When I do a gig I am playing not working. In general I will choose a lesser paying gig where I like the music over a better paying one where I don't. The freedom to make this choice was one of the reasons I got out of fulltime music.

While I have a different view on playing for free than you, I don't play for free in any context that should be paid.

P.S. no criticism of death metal intended. If you love it great. For me personally it doesn't move me.

That's what I got from it. By "you still get paid", I meant that the money does matter, if only because of the principle.

BTW, I've never been a true full-timer in the "professional" sense (I wouldn't call a bunch of $150-$200 gigs a profession, and that's all I get most of the time), but it was all I had while in my last semester of both undergrad and grad school. Too many courses to work full-time.

 

[fingerbun]

That's what I got from it. By "you still get paid", I meant that the money does matter, if only because of the principle.

If I'm choosing between two projects that are equal in other ways, I'll take the better paying one. That's the only time it comes into my thinking. If there's a project I don't want to do musically or a room I don't want to play, I don't even ask about the money, I just say no.

I think I've been very lucky compared to some other people. I've generally been paid a fair wage, I can only think of three occasions when I've been ripped off in 30 years, neither all that major. The money has more or less taken care of itself.

BTW, I've never been a true full-timer in the "professional" sense (I wouldn't call a bunch of $150-$200 gigs a profession, and that's all I get most of the time), but it was all I had while in my last semester of both undergrad and grad school. Too many courses to work full-time.

I was fulltime in the sense that I paid the rent and fed my family for about 5 years from the proceeds of music. I definitely thought of myself as a professional back then. I did some big rooms and festivals (5,000-10,000 crowds) but they were the exception. My bread and butter gigs were probably pretty similar to what you did.

Professional. Well I said that I would play jazz, or blues, but not death metal. As an amateur I can say that. Now if I called a plumber to fix my tap, I don't want a diatribe about how he doesn't work on flickmix taps because they don't move him in the same way as other types.

 

[wdave]

Ha Ha

 

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

Pardon me if this has been mentioned:
Pat Metheny Quote - Smooth Jazz - YouTube

 

[Jhengsman]

Pardon me if this has been mentioned:
Pat Metheny Quote - Smooth Jazz - YouTube

On Kenny G again. It makes you wonder if say Wynton commented on Pat Metheny playing let us say James and being heard on Smooth Jazz radio before the format added R&B and dropped much of its jazz.

 

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

Valid point. Although I don't lose sleep over the question posed in this thread, my take is that the music began to move away from standard pop tunes toward an 'art form'.
Take Coltrane as an example. He would record Ballads, the JC and Johnny Hartman record, interspersed with Giant Steps and other stuff that pushed the music forward.

Granted, A Love Supreme is a great record and sold a gazillion copies but I think that as the music moved away from melody and a simpler form that the masses could understand, it began to lose the larger public. The music began to be seen as self-indulgent elitism.

It will never be as popular as it was into the 1960's because it WAS popular music.

 

[bejoyous]

Featuring Dave Young on bass, from Kids in the Hall.

 

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

The Fast Show-"Jazz Club" - YouTube

 

[joebar]

I just can't get into most modern jazz. It just sounds lifeless to me. Swing and Gypsy/Hot Jazz are an entirely different story though.

for me too. i lean towards swing and smooth jazz and occasionally acid, but fusiony jazz doesn`t appeal to me

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

I'm a fan of "structured" jazz, if you can call it that. Big band with definite arrangements and great ensemble playing. I've never liked jazz where the ensemble states the theme, then everyone takes 32 choruses and they return to the main theme. Don't like long rock jams like this either. I can appreciate the virtuosity of the players, but I don't listen to it.

I think you are missing a lot there - a good Jazz soloist doesn't have to show off - it's more about finding alternate melodies and reacting to the band "in the moment".

What always makes me smile, is when you hear people who aren't big Jazz fans talk about "So What" and how they love it when Miles comes in and plays the tune, after the intro.

But he's just playing his solo - the head is gone. But that's how Jazz should be - a great soloist grabs your attention - not through virtuosity, but by making a statement that you want to hear. Where is he taking this - how will he resolve that change... etc etc. ?

That's what Jazz is about!

 

[PimasterPearson]

Jazz is unpopular, dance-pop and hip hop are very popular.

Arrested Development and Firefly were not very popular, Two and a Half Men is popular.

It's hard enough to succeed in making art for a living. If you make the kind of art that requires people to pay attention and actually focus, it's much harder.

 

[dvh]

I think you are missing a lot there - a good Jazz soloist doesn't have to show off - it's more about finding alternate melodies and reacting to the band "in the moment".

What always makes me smile, is when you hear people who aren't big Jazz fans talk about "So What" and how they love it when Miles comes in and plays the tune, after the intro.

But he's just playing his solo - the head is gone. But that's how Jazz should be - a great soloist grabs your attention - not through virtuosity, but by making a statement that you want to hear. Where is he taking this - how will he resolve that change... etc etc. ?

That's what Jazz is about!

Well said, Bruce.

 

[Crash907]

The way I had it put to me that made the most sense was by the head of the music department at my college:


In classical, Milton Babbit's letter to the public essentially saying "My music isn't for you." made the public abandon that genre, and move to jazz.

When, in jazz, Miles Davis turned his back on the crowd while onstage and played to the other musicians (and his shoes), the crowd yet again returned the favor and turned their backs on him.

obviously he meant these things as just symbols indicating a mentality, but I can't say I disagree. with the rise of more music that was more technically driven than anything, such as bebop, it becomes less for the listener and more for the player. It's rarely much fun to be in such a one sided relationship.

 

[The Lemon]

It's rarely much fun to be in such a one sided relationship.

Exactly. It's this kind of elitism that's all but killed jazz as a viable genre. I [DEL]may not[/DEL] don't like KISS, but I understand that there's a reason they're a million times more popular than any jazz artist ever will be. Some artists have been moving towards making jazz more accessible for the general public to appreciate; but the majority of jazz is still a pissing contest of wankers playing for no one but all the other stuffed-shirt elitists.

For new, accessible jazz check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy8uHfnxQM8

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

When, in jazz, Miles Davis turned his back on the crowd while onstage and played to the other musicians (and his shoes), the crowd yet again returned the favor and turned their backs on him.

obviously he meant these things as just symbols indicating a mentality, but I can't say I disagree. with the rise of more music that was more technically driven than anything, such as bebop, it becomes less for the listener and more for the player. It's rarely much fun to be in such a one sided relationship.

Miles played through Bebop and came out the other side.
I think you are misunderstanding him if you think he turned his back on the audience. Miles was a master showman who knew how to tap the mystique of Jazz as "Cool" and exploited that - he has consistently sold more Jazz albums than anybody else - even posthumously.

Miles was always ahead of the game and creating trends - the audience and musicians followed him regardless and even today, having played in one of his bands is a guarantee of a healthy career for a Jazz musician and a crowd-puller throughout the world.

 

[GoesThump]

In classical, Milton Babbit's letter to the public essentially saying "My music isn't for you." made the public abandon that genre, and move to jazz.(

I assume you're referring to "Who Cares if You Listen?"

Babbitt was specifically referring to experimental music in that bit.

The party was long over for "classical" music in the popular imagination by 1958 - I doubt many people's views were influenced by Babbitt's piece. For that matter, Jazz's day in the sun as the dominant form of pop was ending by 1958 as well.

However, that bit has managed to enrage successive generations of music students. I use that article in my electronic music class. It always gets a rise out of everyone.

GT

 

[fep]

Johnny Smith's 'Walk Don't Run' seems to be a very accessible "jazz" tune, it's very "inside", some may say it's even pop. Most people have never heard it.

Johnny Smith Quartet - Walk Don't Run! - YouTube

The Ventures did their version, they simplified the structure, they simplified the harmony, simplified the melody, removed the swing, removed the solo, gave it a surf guitar feel. And they made it a hit.

The Ventures - Walk Don't Run - YouTube

And this was happening around 1960. The unpopularity of jazz has been around for a long time.

Very interesting, at least to me.

 

[dvh]

the majority of jazz is still a pissing contest of wankers playing for no one but all the other stuffed-shirt elitists.

Wow. That is one of those resentment filled sweeping generalizations to which must be asked: provide proof.

Why the hate?

For new, accessible jazz check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy8uHfnxQM8

That's great. But why doesn't if fall into your wankers category? Just because of the somewhat surreal components of the video?

I can assure you of this: those players are totally respectful of and beholden to jazz past and present.

Johnny Smith's 'Walk Don't Run' seems to be a very accessible "jazz" tune, it's very "inside", some may say it's even pop. Most people have never heard it.

Johnny Smith Quartet - Walk Don't Run! - YouTube

The Ventures did their version, they simplified the structure, they simplified the harmony, simplified the melody, removed the swing, removed the solo, gave it a surf guitar feel. And they made it a hit.

The Ventures - Walk Don't Run - YouTube

And this was happening around 1960. The unpopularity of jazz has been around for a long time.

Very interesting, at least to me.

Well, there you go, I prefer the Jimmy Smith version.