Jazz is boring? Boring is a mediocre cover band playing mediocre covers. Those seem to be endless....
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 Why isn't Jazz that popular? (DB forum thread)
- Thread starter gai113
- Start date
To understand how jazz works and how it is put together
musically requires a bit of an IQ. There's your problem right there.
If you tested the world's IQ and took an average, I don't
think the results would be that great.
musically requires a bit of an IQ. There's your problem right there.
If you tested the world's IQ and took an average, I don't
think the results would be that great.
I believe it's presumptuous to say one must understand how jazz works to enjoy it. I suspect MOST people have no idea how any of the music they enjoy "works" whether it be jazz, rock, rap, or whatever. They usually end up focusing on what is familiar, which is ... words and the singer. Everyone can speak, so they gravitate toward that. Hence the shrill hype around "The Voice" and "American Idol" and all the other karaoke crap on TV. Has nothing to do with IQ and everything to do with experiencing music at face value on terms that are familiar. Besides, IQ tests of the masses resemble a Bell curve. MOST people are in the middle bulge -- i.e., average. Very few are on the top end (or low end).
It's also "dumb" to think that anyone who isn't smart can't enjoy jazz. That's just a total fallacy.
Most of us don't know why or how Van Gogh put his paintings together, but it's not hard to recognize that they're sublime.
Most of us don't know why or how Van Gogh put his paintings together, but it's not hard to recognize that they're sublime.
I agree. I think I've actually played with more *not very bright* but brilliant musicians than in other industries/businesses that I've worked in. I think intellect too often gets in the way. Music is an aural art, not an intellectual one.
C'mon guys. You know what I'm talking about.
To appreciate what made Charlie Parker great,
you have to know about what happened in
jazz history, before him and after him. Most
normal people aren't gonna do the reading,
listening and research to learn about jazz history.
I think it takes some smarts to even wanna
do that type of historical research. It's a shame
because you couldn't have The Beatles, Whitesnake,
Beyonce or Bruce Springsteen without the
American invention of the art form called jazz.
To appreciate what made Charlie Parker great,
you have to know about what happened in
jazz history, before him and after him. Most
normal people aren't gonna do the reading,
listening and research to learn about jazz history.
I think it takes some smarts to even wanna
do that type of historical research. It's a shame
because you couldn't have The Beatles, Whitesnake,
Beyonce or Bruce Springsteen without the
American invention of the art form called jazz.
So we come full circle again. Charlie Parker specifically and bebop in general were not popular, and with the death of swing jazz ceased being dance music first. Which "jazz" was when major studios were making bio-pics about the most popular swing band leaders.
The more I play this music the more I get the feeling that I'm part of a cult that worships a buncha dead people.
I'm not saying I can play better than they did or that I don't love what they played or don't appreciate who they were, but you have to admit, it's very Cult of Personality-ish with a heaping amount of anachronistic tendencies thrown in. Strike that, more than tendencies - almost fundamentalism at times.
EDIT: One point tho... AFAIK, Jazz is the only style that adapts and changes and evolves. Most of the other styles eventually stagnate and die. Name any style and just about all of the have stopped at some point in terms of their development in any significant way. I haven't heard any new grunge in some times. Classical is still around since there are composers that come around once in a while and really push the envelope.
If ain't jazz if it doesn't keep pushing and redefining what it is. Rebirth, improvisation, and reincarnation is sort of a constant theme. That said, I guess it's possible to have one foot inside the cult and one foot outside. Plenty of people have done that and they're usually called innovators.
I'm not saying I can play better than they did or that I don't love what they played or don't appreciate who they were, but you have to admit, it's very Cult of Personality-ish with a heaping amount of anachronistic tendencies thrown in. Strike that, more than tendencies - almost fundamentalism at times.
EDIT: One point tho... AFAIK, Jazz is the only style that adapts and changes and evolves. Most of the other styles eventually stagnate and die. Name any style and just about all of the have stopped at some point in terms of their development in any significant way. I haven't heard any new grunge in some times. Classical is still around since there are composers that come around once in a while and really push the envelope.
If ain't jazz if it doesn't keep pushing and redefining what it is. Rebirth, improvisation, and reincarnation is sort of a constant theme. That said, I guess it's possible to have one foot inside the cult and one foot outside. Plenty of people have done that and they're usually called innovators.
The cult aspect comes from the fact that Jazz is still a place where musicians go to learn. The style is dead, but the information still remains. Grunge music was an attitude of the times; it didn't really contain any distinct informaton. Jazz is pretty much like any other music, though. It was a style that died out like all the rest.
How do you define *died out*? I haven't heard any disco or dowhop in quite a while, but I think I've recently heard innovators in jazz, classical, pop, and country, at least. Admittedly, jazz and classical has a tiny audience, but I know there are still talented people moving the music forward. I don't necessarily like what they've done, but then I think I liked country better before it got *popped* and I think I'm in the minority there too.
You haven't heard any disco lately? You may want to check out "Get Lucky" byDaftPunk- #1 in over 50 countries around the world at the moment and featuring a giant disco guitar hook from Nile Rogers.
"Get Lucky" IS disco and it's godawful horrible. All it did was remind me of why I never could stand disco. And, yes, I just watched it on youtube where it has over 48,000,000 hits. So there you have your answer of why jazz isn't popular and maybe I was wrong when I said that there is still hope. God help me, I think I was wrong.
The sound of jazz is dead, meaning instrumental, horn and piano based music which swings is long out of fashion. The thing that can never die about jazz is its sophistication. Musicians and adventurous listeners will keep the important jazz alive forever. Can you name some recent innovators in jazz?
One thing that boggles my mind is that all this absolutely sorry ass dance based music coming out today is 10 times worse than disco ever was, and not a soul seems to have picked up on it yet. At least disco occasionally had some interesting instrumentation, harmony and real singers performing on the tracks.
TV ONE had an Unsung episode on disco. They made a case that it wasn't disco music which caused the backlash, with Madonna's first albums as prime evidence, but rather the racial and sexual preference blending of the disco audience.
Today the dance music audience lives in a world with a Black president and same sex marriage. Thus the "disco sucks" crowd are now on the other side of history as that era of white flight and social racial segregation is over.
Today the dance music audience lives in a world with a Black president and same sex marriage. Thus the "disco sucks" crowd are now on the other side of history as that era of white flight and social racial segregation is over.
Okay, then by that definition, I agree, jazz is dead. It is certainly long out of fashion.
Recent jazz innovators off the top of my head: Dave Holland, Pat Metheny, Charlie Haden, Ari Hoenig, Charlie Hunter, David Freisen, Bill Frissell, Keith Jarrett, etc.
I think you're right about disco too, but isn't it just because technology has improved? Hasn't the entertainment industry always used any advantage it can to collect cash? Pitch-correct is just a more recent technique. That's their job. In other words, disco would have been pitch corrected too if the technology had existed then. A few acts wouldn't have used it because they didn't need it. Not very true for today's pop stars, me thinks. Looking good is more important than feeling good in the entertainment biz?
Jazz takes requires some musical education to be appreciated. Not all people will understand a song with too many changes, intrincated lines, instrument solos, sometimes there's no singer, average people doesn't get it. Most people will hear the beat and the catchy melody, thats it. That's why POP is so POPular, you know?
. (Not everyone)
