What (almost) everyone gets wrong about Jazz
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ต.ค. 2024
- Become a Patreon! / andyedwards
Andy is a drummer, producer and educator. He has toured the world with rock legend Robert Plant and played on classic prog albums by Frost and IQ.
As a drum clinician he has played with Terry Bozzio, Kenny Aronoff, Thomas Lang, Marco Minneman and Mike Portnoy.
He also teaches drums privately and at Kidderminster College
I believe it was Jack DeJohnette who was asked "what is jazz to you?" and he said "surprise". I like that definition.
I think Bill Evans would agree with that statement from Jack. He said something along the lines of, when when listens back to themselves after a recording or a performance, and are surprised to hear what they played.
My discovery of fusion in 1991, in particular Al Di Meola, was how I transitioned from heavy metal to jazz. It happened so fast. One day I'm listening to Testament. The next day I'm listening to Elegant Gypsy. This opened up a door. I walked through it and my musical world exploded.
I was a thrash metalhead who got into jazz via John Zorn's Spy vs Spy Lp, worked my way back to the Hot Fives & Sevens with a dog eared copy of Humph's 'Best of Jazz'. His attitude was always 'have a listen to this, it's great!'. Had more than enough of Jazz critics telling me what not to listen to. More power to your elbow.
I love the Hot Fives but you have to learn to listen to them with a certainn ear. If you havent already check out my video on Louis...I think its my best...
Love SPY VS SPY...just checked it out (by accident) in my car via a loaded USB stick. 🙂
I’m a naked city fan, followed them around the country!
So much great music from the late 80s - especially on the JMT label - that got completely overshadowed by post-bop purist movement [a lot of which was really good]. Tim Berne, Marc Ducret, mBase, and so much more. And yeah, Spy v. Spy [and the Naked City and Masada albums, too] were and are a fantastic way to bring people with big ears to new music. Cheers.
@@billdubilier Some of the best shows I ever saw. Joey Baron is so brilliant and fun. And Bill Frisell is one of the loudest guitarists - and genuinely nice people - on the planet.
Wrt Snobbery: There were many rock and pop groups that I liked growing up. One notable one was the Yardbirds. Jeff Beck goes off and does his Jeff Beck Group albums, which I didn't particularly like. I didn't hate them either, but there were plenty of other albums I liked more than those. And certainly I still liked Jeff.
Then I got ahold of _"Wired"_ and later (in my discovery) _"Blow by Blow"._ I thought they were great. I was talking to someone else at my college, and said something like "These albums by Jeff Beck are really excellent", and he replied "Well, that's not *REAL* Jazz, you know". My reaction to that was "WTF?". I didn't claim it was real jazz, I didn't even claim it was any kind of jazz. I just said that I thought they were excellent albums. So at that point my attitude became: "I don't know what *real* jazz is, but if I have to choose between *'real'* jazz and Jeff Beck, then Jeff Beck is going to win".
And now a significant part of my music collection is what I consider Progressive Rock. And I realize there are some progressive rocks fans who are just as snobbish as the some of the rabid "real jazz" fans that I'd run into in the 1970's and 1980's. But for me, I'll just say "I like *this* album" or "I don't like *that* album". I hope I'll avoid making any claims of "this isn't real progressive rock". The idea of music genres is useful for giving a general idea of what some new album sounds like, but genres become poisonous once they're "important" enough that people feel they must be gatekeepers of who is and is not in a specific genre. IMO.
For me, I gravitate to what either sounds interesting, and or, emotionally connect with. This changes over time. I like how, I think it was Thomas Hayek, from Meshuggah, once said about their song writing: we play what sounds interesting to us.
I had a friend who was deep into jazz ask me about Meshuggah, as he'd heard they had elements considered jazz. He could not get past the metal sound. Wasn't 'jazz enough'. Fast forward five years, I learned Fredirik Thorendel is heavily influenced by Alan Holdsworth; fast forward ten years and I learned Meshuggah have influenced top tier jazz musicians like Tigran Hamasyan.
I find this absolutely fascinating. Jazz challenges conventions with a distructive creativity, that can blend any genre into it, in any way. Yet, jazz has been formalised as a genre with gate-keepers. Utterly childish.
I gravitate to Jazz not because I intellectually understand it, or I think I am more "high cultured" in liking it, I just find it interesting and expressive. However, ask me to choose between jazz or Meshuggah, I'd choose Meshuggah. Like you chose Jeff Beck.
Dude, you have stated so eloquently the exact feelings I have regarding music genres; they are a guideline, not a tight pigeonhole from whence nothing can escape. Thank you for your comment and I hope you don't mind if I paraphrase what you've said in future conversations.
I did a significant proportion of my undergrad and masters degree writing about exactly this kind of thing - this is clearly a very well read and experienced critical perspective of the ‘canonised’ version of jazz as it is generally presented publicly and in education. This would have been invaluable while I was writing on this subject, but I’m glad to have come across it now! I think It’s so important to have this perspective presented in a public and popular forum, not just in academic writings and specialist texts
I’m one of those 60-70 year olds you mentioned who embraced John McLaughlin in 1972 and walked forward and back since then - and listened and learned never to have someone else’s opinion of what was jazz or wasn’t cloud my thoughts and close my ears
Hey hey my my Jazz will never die
Good man...I'm with you 100%
I am of the same generation and if you had asked me for the first 40 years of my life I would have told you "I do not like Jazz." But it never was true - what this video has articulated for me is what I always felt, namely I never liked and still do not like the "jazz museum". The living, breathing, ever-changing, the "surprise" like DeJohnette put it has always attracted me. I tried to give it other labels, not jazz, to explain why I loved Miles, McLaughlin, Ornette, James Blood Ulmer, Brötzmann & Co, many European jazz artists etc.
Today I would claim that jazz is just as unspecific as blues or rock and if I claim to be a rock fan it does not mean that I have to like Journey as well.
I agree that the similar discussion can be held for almost any kind of music and my observation is that it has gotten worse with more and more "labels" or "genres" being attached to some type of music. It automatically gives the zealots their weapons to raid against those who "sell out". Or plug in, remember Dylan.
@roxannewalsh yes the commercialisation is not really fair. destroys the art. if you asked me. there's good and bad in any genre. if it's good it's good I say, and leave the rest. i appreciate everyone has different tastes. i play both styles of music 🔥🚬😎
hey man, thank you for putting this out there. Jazz is about self expression through musical improvisation, how can someone tell anyone else how to express themselves? It's the ones that go against the grain that change the world.
I can't play any instrument, and I love "jazz" and "jazz fusion". I think of it as a conversation between the musicians. I grew up with popular groups like Chicago and Earth, Wind & Fire, and it was a short journey to "jazz" from there. Like you said, jazz DNA is in most modern music. Interesting and wonderful analysis, Andy.
Just stumbled over this channel. I'm absolutely enjoying these videos and find myself nodding in agreement throughout.
‘79 and still agreeing whole heartedly with you about the open mindedness and potential that jazz music has fostered !!
That was very informative. I'm one of those 70s guys you mentioned who spent countless hours trying to master Giant Steps, and was right there when Winton began to preach his gospel that Monk, Duke, and Mingus are the only musics worth studying. I've never agreed with that, frankly. You're so right that jazz is enormously generous and will welcome everyone with love and respect. It certainly was that for me.
So glad to hear you name drop the likes of DOMi, Knower, and Thundercat.
It was those artists that got me into jazz fusion over the past couple years and eventually led me to channels like this and Sea of Tranquility!
There is an amazing resurgence of jazz/fusion and the musicians doing it are truly something to be witnessed.
"It's all Jazz"- No pushback here mate- hitting 68 tomorrow and I couldn't agree with your take on this subject more.
Thanks David. I appreciate it...
I am not a musician, but we are brothers in our thoughts. Your taste in music is awesome . Thanks for sharing!
I began to get into Jazz in the early 70s right after high school. First I discovered the blues and that led directly back to Jazz. John Mayall's Jazz and Blues Fusion introduced me to jazz virtuosity. Living in suburban New Jersey I could be in Manhattan within an hour. Quick access to concert halls and clubs was like heaven for me. Then I latched on to Jazz snobbery. The idea that other nusic didn't matter. During the fusion explosion I was conflicted. The nore I listened to live nusic the nore I could accept that all music matters. My music collection looks somewhat like what's behind you. From Louis Armstrong and Scott Joplin to Duke Ellington, Lester Young,Charlie Parker, Mies Davis, Mingus and then Herbie Hancock, Chic Corea and the Brecker Brothers. I like very much what you say about Jazz being love and inviting everyone in.❤
Andy, you and your channel are the best discovery I've made in recent years. Speaking about jazz you speak about the freedom of being yourself in this world and this cannot but resonate my soul!
I took an online class with a guy who is an excellent, working bluegrass banjo player. It is sometimes said, I think correctly, that many of the best bluegrass players today are bringing elements of jazz into the music. My teacher was talking about getting together with other players and just playing in informal jam sessions, and he said it was easy to do in bluegrass settings, because people are generally friendly and accepting. But he said that jazz jams he has participated in were a different story, with everybody looking at him with serious expressions he found intimidating. This seems like it might be an example of a problem caused by some of the misunderstandings about jazz that you are talking about here.
Also, I liked your closing idea that love is an essential element of jazz. Absolutely!
Speaking of bluegrass and jazz, have you ever heard James McKinney play banjo?
You go, brother! Contrary to the purists who want to limit its range and scope and the critics who want to place it in a box and discount it, you have clearly demonstrated that jazz music is the most ubiquitous form of music and that at its very core, its nature is to express humanity. That's pretty damned beautiful and powerful. Awesome essay, Andy, Awesome. You are Jazz.
Much love to you Ron!
My old dad was a huge jazz fan primarily of the 20s and 30s. The only rock he knew was Dylan and Beatles which he admired but wasn’t really into. Back in the seventies I played him some fusion music probably mahavishnu and he didn’t like it, I then played him a live Grateful Dead record and he said well this is just Django with Dixieland and ragtime mixed with Hank Williams and bebop, they just do it with guitars in a rock format. My dad was pretty dismissive of rock in general but he genuinely liked the Grateful Dead which surprised me at first. In retrospect I realized he understood it better than I did. He accepted the Grateful Dead as a form of modern jazz, probably because of the jamming and the derivative 1920s aspect to their songs. You could dance to it, it had a swinging sychopated groove with improvisation, so he recognized it as jazz more than rock. I agree with everything you said in this video and I think my dad would too. Thanks
My God...he nailed The Grateful Dead...I think they would have agreed too.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer I think they would have too. About Led Zeppelin my dad said “ last time I heard anyone scream like that was during the Korean War.”
@@Hartlor_Tayley That's priceless ! The Robert Plant war cries !
Yes Sir Andy Edwards, well said. Your account of what jazz is the most accurate account I have come across of what Jazz is in public media. Your video should be played as the first class of every Jazz program in every institution everywhere in the world !!!! continue to do what you do sir, you are one of the few people who really understands. For people like me that understand exactly what Jazz is, I will augment your account by saying categorically that Jazz is an AWARENESS (as opposed to an artform) I always say Jazz is a way of life.
We can't leave out musicians like Craig Taborn, Gerald Cleaver, Ron Miles, Myra Melford, Kris Davis, Steve Coleman, Marc Ducret, Tim Berne, Ralph Alessi, Ingrid Laubrock, Steve Lehman, Muhal Richard Abrams, and many others who have been developing, evolving, and combining, the straight ahead, free, fusion, and 20th and 21st century "classical" composition of the late 60s, 70,s and early 80s into a new branch of jazz.
Totally agree Andy, music in it's most creative form never stands still for a second, it's always changing & evolving. That's what I've loved about Jazz & prog. Those who choose not to acknowledge this fact are more politically motivated than artistic. Keep up the great work, cheers
Totally agree. I started playing bass and was immediately experiencing both inclusiveness and snobbery. One of my first regular Sunday sessions was in Oakland led by none other than Pharaoh Sanders. My first jazz band included Vijay Iyer. I couldn’t believe these people accepted me, a new player who was just starting to find my way. They did so because I was pure. I had no prejudices yet. They heard it and liked it. Later I moved to New Orleans where players had to be able to play anything and that ultimately led me to other forms, namely back to folk forms which had less chords but more space to be yourself. I play now with Rhiannon Giddens an American singer whose music encompasses all kinds of forms and disciplines.
Well said and I absolutely agree with you. I'm a big jazz fan, have learned to play that genre a bit (I'm a drummer too) and have hundreds of records in all kinds of sub-genres... and yet I've never been a snob about it and enjoy many other genres equally, even ones that are cognitively basic in terms of the skills required. I agree that jazz is much broader and a much more important force than most give credit. I also think that as a listener we benefit from thinking of things in broader ways, rather than closing ourselves off to certain forms only because we need to feel that we're some kind of purist. I stopped thinking about different genres of music in terms of the differences between them as these days I think about it more in terms of commonalities... which I believe is ultimately far more useful.
If it were up to me, you would be invited to the Alabama Jazz Hall of Fame for a lecture series! Thanks for the videos and much love from Alabama USA.
Sounds like something Alabama would do,bring in a English white man to speak on American Jazz music lol Good ole Alabama.
What a refreshing presentation! I appreciate your outlook on the music we call Jazz, which has shaped a lot if my creativity as a visual artist. Keep up the great work!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Fantastic video. I’ve been into jazz since I was a teen in the early 70s and you are absolutely right about the Burns/Crouch/Marsalis axis.
My sentiments entirely, from the start to the very finish. Thanks Andy for putting your case so persuasively.
Thanks for this brilliant essay. As a musician made me think about music in ways I’d never conceived of.
I love the entire history of jazz from Armstrong to Esperanza Spalding. I spent 35 years collecting the records and going to concerts.
"Love as the most important attribute" ... that's so good
I'm a guitar player but I think you need to know something about sax players and different schools of them to get it. My favorite player is Stan Getz. I got to see Miles Davis and Jamal, Branford and Winton, Dave Brubeck, Ahmad Jamal, and Gerry Mulligan. I think people should know the standards to some extent. I thought the first players were like Jelly Roll Morton. I include Django and Stephane Grappelli. Big bands brought it to the masses. I think you have a decent understanding of it listening to this video. Players got their starts in the big bands.
I recently saw a video about Miles Davis, and it proposed the idea that why he changed and electrified his sound was that 60s rock had taken over the market and Miles couldn't make any money. He was staggered by the fact that a bunch of people who had such a rudimentary understanding of music could be so popular and get so unbelievably rich. So he reinvented himself and his music to sell to the R&R audience.. the result was Bitches Brew (1969). The fact that Miles could reinvent himself is a testament to his creativity and some would say his genius, but the motivation behind it was simply that Miles needed to make some money! He wanted sell records and make money like the likes of Jimi Hendrix and the Rolling Stones.
I wonder if Muddy Waters felt the same way when he made Electric Mud?
Just remembered.... I got online in 1998. I used to hang at a site called JAZZ CORNER. Man, the daily food fights between the Traditionalists, the Freedom crowd, the Fusioneers, & the lovers of Smooth. Entertaining, but eventually, too much. God forbid if you liked it all. Everybody hated you. 🙂
23:34 I wholeheartedly agree with your video. You have expressed points of you that I’ve always tried to articulate into words and debate with other jazz musicians with limited success. Thank you for saying what you have said far more eloquently than I ever could. Really appreciate your work. Long live jazz.
jazz leads to bebop and from bebop it goes everywhere else
Absolutely bang on, Andy. This one’s been simmering for a while!
Cheers.
I have created another video coming out soon that goes deeper into identity. I am quite apprehensive about that one....
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer Let it fly. You’re voicing an important topic, which I (and I’m sure many others) find extremely refreshing.
I taught a course "Musics of America" in 2000 at Metropolitan College in Denver, Colorado. I used to improvise my lectures from 3 X 5 cards containing outlines I had made previously. It was fun teaching the section on jazz and playing the records. One day I said something like "Jazz is the African-American experience in US. So that would include Blues, R & B, Soul, Gospel and Hip Hop. The students were all screwing up their faces and saying "Naw, uhn uhn, no way!" ; they thought I was nuts!
but you weren’t nuts ! because you know and understand what jazz is all about , a free form of expression .
You have just got my music gears smoothly engaging again 😎
Thats brilliant
Man what a good video thank you! I don’t know a ton about jazz but this breaks down so many barriers and makes me so much more interested in a form of music that I respect but have a hard time wrapping my head around. This makes so much more sense! Do you think this same type of phenomenon exists with how we tend to think of what classical music is?
Great stuff again Andy.😊
It's interesting how dance disappeared both from classical and jazz (besides in choreographed works for shows) - perhaps there's a correlation between class/hierarchy and dance... If the media never picked the word "jazz" to define this music, I believe it would've been considered as world music - since mazurkas, tarantellas and jigs were also dance forms for the common people.
Andy, you have fast become my favourite music commentator. Your drumming on the "Frequency" album absolutely whips ass, by the way. Keep up the great work as a musician and commentator!
Thank you Scott...I am very proud of that album...have you heard my prog band RAIN and the album Singularity???
Not yet, but I'll be sure to check it out.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer -- I've been checking out Singularity lately. It's fantastic. It keeps drawing me back in for repeated listening. Engaging playing from all members (I'm particularly fond of your vocalist, especially when harmonizing), and delivers many delicious melodies on top of the heavy playing. Is the band still active and working on new material?
Andy I love you! This was such a great video start to finish.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Once upon a time, jazz, the blues and rock and roll were considered the devils music.
So at some point, one guy told his friend, "When I die, I want to go to hell". And his friend said,
"Hell? Why would you want to go to hell?" And his response was, "The music's a lot better".
Amen
Isn’t the harp string music in heaven prog?
You know, I don’t have a lot of problems with Wynton Marsalis. A great musician, if not a great innovator. It’s been a while since I listened to his early stuff, but I remember it owing a major debt to the Miles ‘60s quintet. It seems he didn’t become majorly didactic about jazz until he started leading the Lincoln Center Jazz Orchestra at which point he became enamored of everything up to and including early(ish) Ellington. That being said, I do remember reading a joint interview in “Musician” magazine back in the mid-80s that he did with Herbie Hancock. Herbie was riding high on “Rockit” which Wynton wasn’t particularly keen on (boy, that’s an understatement). I remember him telling Herbie right to his face that he was selling out the music (as well as black culture in general) for a buck. It was cringe-worthy and way over the top. From that time probably through the 00s, if the mainstream press needed a quote regarding jazz, they always went to Wynton - because that’s the only guy they knew. Should the press done a better job? Absolutely. It’s not completely Wynton’s fault they that took his opinion as gospel and ran with it. He certainly benefited from it though.
It seems that there’s a lot of hip-hop being integrated into jazz these days. The first artist that comes to mind is Robert Glaspar. He’s still considered a “jazz musician” but his style is all over the map. Domi and JD Beck are an interesting band that is definitely doing something different with the form. And both of those artists are on Blue Note. Do I like the hip-hop influence is jazz? Some of it. Hey, I got into “classic” jazz via “jazz-rock” back in the ‘70s. Maybe the future road to “classic” jazz is going to travel through hip-hop.
What is jazz? Hell, I don’t know. Is it a cop-out to say that I know when I hear it? It does though seem to require a certain amount of improvisation. It’s like the difference between the “sweet bands” and the “jazz bands” during the ‘40s big band era. Virtually the same instrumentation, but one played the songs straight through the same every time and the other didn’t.
So, there you go. Just some rambling observations from one of your “old guy” viewers... ;-)
Thanks for that Martin...Wynton has toned down his rhetoric in recent times, but I have watched his recent interviews and he is still a great conservative musically. But my take is based upon his, and Stanley Crouch's take over of the Ken Burns Jazz doc which has become to all intents and purposes the mainstream view of jazz history. And you can see that version of jazz history everywhere when you read or hear people discussing jazz. You are right that TH-cam has challenged this recently by bringing forth a new generation of alternative jazz musicians: Louis Cole and Knower, Vulfpeck and the Fearless Flyers, JD Beck and Domi, Snarky Puppy, Robert Glasper, Dirty Loops, Nate Wood, Thundercat, Mono Neon, Jacob Collier (there are ten there, do you sense a video coming up soon?!?) that are totally jazz but go beyond the genre. This is an interesting tension that exists at the moment....
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer I remember being of two minds about the “Jazz” documentary. For one, I was glad it existed at all but I was definitely disappointed at many of the things that weren’t covered in the film. Not only the fact that it stopped in the ‘70s and the 60’s were hardly addressed at all, but the ‘50s got kind of short shrift (given that was one of the “golden ages” of jazz). I understand that many people won’t do this, but if one looks at the doc more in terms of part of a trilogy exploring the “American Experience” (especially in terms of race relations), and less of a history of the music, then I guess it makes more sense. I’m sure Burns picked the stories from the history of jazz that would support the thesis that he was exploring in “Civil War” and “Baseball”. In the latter series he also stopped in the ‘70s, but some years later made a new episode exploring baseball from the ’70s through the ‘90s. It would have been great if he had done the same with “Jazz”, but I’m sure there was probably more demand for a “Baseball” update. And, again, I’m sure Burns chose the “experts” that he thought would best further the through line of the trilogy. As a history of jazz music, it’s not that great. As a “social” history of jazz and it’s reflection of twentieth century American culture (at least up to 1960), it’s better. And as part of the trilogy, I’m glad it was included as a major part of the American landscape.
Wynton Marsalis epitomizes everything that is wrong with jazz right now - it has become academic, dogmatic and that only black people can play it. And while Wynton is technically proficient - he can't play a fucking blues - Thank God the world is adapting the concept of jazz and they will bring the new waves and the new styles.
@@1eflat Wynton and Stanley Crouch had personal experience with "the new thing" (Sun Ra for Marsalis and Crouch was a free jazz drummer and I believe was a second drummer for David Murray, I think on the Wildflowers series). Both were disappointed with the results, as I believe Marsalis was rejected by Ra. Ra's music covers everything, and maybe Marsalis's ego was hurt. (This is pure speculation on my part.) Crouch found drumming unfulfilling and switched to writing and didn't want to play free again.
In fairness, many new thing performers had a lot of experience in more traditional forms (Eric Dolphy, Coltrane, Albert Ayler, Jackie McLean, Paul Bley, Sun Ra for examples) and others studied it as part of their musica development (the entire AACM, Anthony Braxton, and Archie Shepp-who also recorded with poets Chicago Beau and Julio Finn, who could have been seen as the bridge between the Last Poets and Rap). Marsalis and Crouch are similar to classical music critics who insist that all "serious" classical music ended when Schoenberg introduced his innovations. They ignore the facts that serialism was a logical extension of Wagner and other composers still wrote traditional tonal music or took different pathways, including polytonal music, microtonal music, improvising, electronics, just intonation, even minimalism.
The Dutch had jazz studies programs that studied traditional jazz in universities in the 1970's. So did the U.S. If anything, Marsalis and Crouch were behind the curve...no offense to them, but they came to the party late. Scott Hamilton was a hot name in the 1970's-acoustic jazz, traditional, but a reaction to fusion even then.
Of course, jazz was invented and developed by black players. But straight jacketing a form is a bad, limited idea... it's recently stymied the development of rock as a vital form.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer Don't forget Bugge Wesseltoft!
Great video and outstanding points made. Jazz snobbery does exist especially among record collectors, Some collectors think if it's not late fifties to late sixties Blue Note,Prestige or Impulse it's not valid jazz. I was a teen in the seventies and had a dad who turned me on to the classic Monk,Miles.. but I got really excited when fusion came on to the scene,I was ready perhaps cause I had a rock background as well. The Dead,The Beatles.... Lots of great music today Laura Jurd,,Emma jean Thackery just two of my favorites that come to mind and at the same time I just finished listening to Bud Powell. I love it all beacuse it encompasses all as you stated with your beautiful closing comments,
Thanks for this comment
" *Jazz innovates three things:
One - The use of improvisation* "
Bach, Mozart, Chopin and likely many others would disagree with that statement.
" *Two - It's got a groove and a beat you can dance to* "
Definitely most, if not all folk musicians are almost obliged to disagree that it was Jazz's innovation. Anyway, all those weird names in Chopin's music are Polish dances.
" *Three - Bringing up the individual voice, which serves as the flagship of the whole performance [paraphrased]* "
Again, primadonnas and soloists did exist before Jazz.
Maybe the "wrong" history of Jazz isn't all fake, after all? Maybe it really is all about the sophistication of playing the acrobatic changes, and being able to express emotions on top of that?
Maybe I’m a jazz snob, but what draws me to jazz is the beauty of what jazz does with harmony - chord substitutions, solos that dig into the changes, rather than skating over the top of them, the endless reworkings and reinventions of standard tunes in creative and novel ways. Compared to that, I find all other forms simplistic, reductive, and somehow lacking.
An astutely observed, incisively argued, brilliantly presented piece.
If you haven't listened to Sun Ran and seen his movies, that is essential viewing. I worked at HMV records in the 1990s as the "jazz expert." I wasn't a super expert when I arrived but I was allowed to listened to any cd I wanted to and I listened to it all. Don't forget Shakti and John Mclaughlin. I'm not a huge fan of Miles in the 1970s but that is ok.
Great video!
I'm just a 20 year old metalhead but been dipping my toes into jazz for a while. I had to start the opposite of how most people do: I started with the avant-garde stuff and have been working my way backwards towards the more "traditional" stuff.
I know a few jazz purists and they disgust me. This idea that you have to go to some pretentious college to learn music invented by people who were barred from educational institutions, music that was meant to be completely free from the restrictions of classical, that seems completely ridiculous to me. Oxymoronic, actually.
The best jazz is made by doing the opposite of "playing it safe". Going into these unknown territories, that's what makes it such a fascinating genre.
If you want a form of music where everyone has to follow restrictions, go listen to some classical. And even those guys (Bach, Tchaikovsky, Beethoven obviously) were breaking all the rules.
As someone who primarily listens to Progressive Rock and Jazz Fusion, I have profound respect for Jazz. There is an element of surprise in Jazz and the musicianship is simply unmatched. I love listening to Jazz live, but rarely for playback on stereo and here is why. For me downside to the mainstream Jazz genre (think mid 1950's Jazz) is that while passages are incredibly innovative, they are too inconclusive. For me this is solved when approaching it from a Rock approach, you retain alot of the suddenness and virtuosity of the Jazz genre, but all of a sudden it becomes storytelling.
Andy I'm 68 year old musician and I couldn't agree with you more. I like the idea of being aware of jazz' history, playing the classic jazz tunes if that is what thrills you, but don't let it censor your own individuality. Like you've said, jazz WELCOMES individuality because "individuality" is the DNA of jazz. Every new stage of jazz' history had it's critics and always will, but let's keep open a seat at the table for the ones that hear something unique to themselves.
I'm 60 [just turned] and I agree with everything you're saying.
I’m absolutely loving your videos bro. Though on reflection I’m wondering if it’s a little sad that yourself and Beato have been more influential on me than my uni teachers?
Yep. I lived in New Orleans for 8 years. Jazz is dance music. Anybody who loses sight of that loses sight of the whole point of the genre. And now we should all go listen to Rebirth Brass Band.
What I think is very interesting that maybe would warrant another video, is how Latin America and Brazil specifically, created MPB and Bossa Nova from Jazz. One could argue that Jazz Fusion existed in Brazil before it existed in the United States as these styles existed in the mid 50s and it is a fusion. However, when Return to Forever came out with tunes such as "Spain" with it's amazing samba ostinato by Lenny White, Chick Corea was embraced and loved by everyone in Brazil and it wasn't seen as a hack. My point is that critics are not consequential when it comes to audiences and music fans.
I very much enjoyed your lecture here. Everything you say is true. So, the problem is to try to make those who have opinions about things, rethink that opinion and open up to other possible scenarios. This would include our politicians as well, who really have a problem with opinions as opposed to more factual and open-minded possibilities. I am 78 and fall into the category you speak of. I have played all kinds of music, call it 'jazz' if you will, and find that the spirit of the music and the commaraderie between the musicians makes it so, mainly because it is based on 'love' as you say. Meanwhile, your knowledge of all old and modern musicians and musical groups makes your argument that much stronger. Thank you for your enlightened viewpoints. I think you will change many minds about what jazz really is.
I am so pleased you agree Ralph...you know this stuff way more than I do!!!!
Just discovered this channel (the algorithm's not THAT bad, I guess), and it's a lot of fun. I'll restrain myself to one point. As to the snobbery of jazz folk, like the snobbery of French people towards me as a tourist, I allow it, I think it's fair. I should know some French, they're right, I'm not fully educated, it's all right to admit that, I've got other virtues, probably.
I grew up on classic rock, and unlike you falling in love with fusion and prog virtuosity as a young teenager, I fell in love with Neil Young's soloing--searching around the pentatonic scale and hammering notes until they bleed...playing for melody and abhoring licks, is how I thought of it. So when I came to jazz as a listener as an adult, I knew I'd never be playing that stuff. So I allow the snobbery of jazz folk, y'all can play circles around me. It's OK I've got my thing, and it's rooted, but y'all play some great stuff and you should be proud of the work and talent, and that will sometimes come out in what sounds like snobbery. It makes the music aspirational, and that's one reason I made the effort to cross the Charlie Parker blues bridge as an adult and discover all the great jazz that I now love to listen to. Play on, whiz kids.
Bedst jazz music is for me the tunes that have the great melody as the main point and thats why the standards are so popular. And the bedst jazzmusicians are the dudes that
find the soul in these tunes. My goal is to improvise with slim lines that don"t try to impress the listner, but have a forward mowing swing, and my strive is to youse the concept
LES IS MORE !
I don't know how to define jazz. I just FEEL it. Some pieces can tell a story, literally, without words. Just feel. My personal two cents.
(I'm a listener, not a player.)
Just discovered your channel mate. Your discussion of Hendrix and this video are some of the best and most astute music videos I've ever seen - I record all kinds of music, and also fully believe Hip Hop is another type of Jazz with the turntablism, rhymesetc, as are things like Fishbone, Old school Jungle/Drum n Bass. Over the last few years Ive started to get my head around some fusion - via years listening and absorbing Hendrix, PFunk, Prince, Old school Hip Hop etc - Love Jean Luc Ponty, Weather Report, and Mahavishnu - and hunting them ALL on original vinyl of course!. subscribed! 👏 🙌
Thanks for watching...two fusion albums that hip hoppers love: Sweetnighter by Weather Report, where Joe Zawinul, their keyboardist, claimed to have invented hip hop, and Melodies by Jan Hammer, especially the song Don't You Know...possibly the greatest groove ever....
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer Thanks- I'll hunt those records out 👍
The places jazz goes never ceases to amaze me. Especially, in metal and electronica. Creative destruction seeking the new and interesting.
great video and breakdown Andy👏🏼👏🏼
Ben!!!!
I'm 92 and have been listening to jazz since I was twelve. I basically agree with most of what Andy says. I listen to virtually all types and periods of jazz, and cannot understand all those , who just listen to one period of jazz and think that that is it. They will not listen to the jazz of the 20's or what is being put out today. I don't really like so called fusion jazz, but I try and listen to it, and can certainly understand that it is just another part of jazz, and is important to the development of jazz , as was the Armstrong Hot Fives, the Basie or Ellington bands, Parker/Gillespies music etc etc.
Thank you for mentioning The Last Poets. All my life I've said that The Last Poets and George Clinton were a major influence on Rap and Hip Hop.
I appreciate what you said about Jazz. If you look at Rock and Pop you will find it formed by Jazz musicians. Case in point, Led Zeppelin: John Bonham and John Paul Jones were Jazz players.
Thanks for this vid. You have won my heart.
“Modern” music genres aren’t separated by thin black lines, there are instead, wide grey areas that tie all genres together. They’re all related in some way. Some very closely, some not.
@Caleb
Perfectly put, my man.
I have a theory that heavy metal, progressive rock and jazz-fusion all developed from the same root around the same time and there were a surprisingly large number of musicians common to 2 or all 3 of those developments, either as players, innovators or listeners. I also think that folk rock played a huge part in their development and that psychedelia {and LSD} was an important staging post through which certain ideas and sounds coalesced and helped bounce the music off in different directions.
But they were all, by necessity, related. The end results may have been different, but that's no different to 3 children from the same family ending up as very different people, seeing things in different ways, even though they were brought up by the same parents in the same household.
You are so right in this video!
I very much agree with all of this. The thing that always bugged me about the Crouch/Marsalis camp is that they not only hate the fusion "sell-outs", they also hate the group that perpetuated and expanded the beard-stroking bebop development into the avant-garde in the 60s and 70s. They think fusion Miles Davis isn't jazz, and also Cecil Taylor, Ornette, and late Coltrane aren't jazz. They want you to believe a narrative where all the giants of the music except Duke Ellington and Art Blakey collectively lost their way in different, opposite directions all at once. It's a very "anti-jazz" story about jazz they're asking you to believe. I like that the Crouch/Marsalis movement brought a certain historical appreciation to the music, but as you point out that brought an urge to kill and embalm and put on display a specimen that was still very much alive.
This is exactly right....they are measuring it not against creativity, but their idea of authenticity
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer
This perfectly summarizes your video and is applicable to the criticism of all forms of art.
Thank you for this. 🖤💟💓🧡💛💚💙💜
With apologies, I'm from the other side, the people who don't like jazz, and honestly don't understand it, but I liked your video and the sincere effort you put into it. I watched the Ken Burns doc, and I lost interest after the Dixieland part. I like Dixieland jazz and used to go to an annual festival before declining attendance caused it to fade away. I'd like to see a video where you detail the evolution of jazz with a representative song or album to listen to for each period. Maybe then I'd understand it better because I have no idea what the difference between bop, bebop, cool jazz, etc. are.
There's hip hop with jazz instruments like he Roots and things like Digable Planets and US3, but the hip-hop DJ is really a compelling musician, combining samples and rhythms. I never understood why people can't see that. You have to have a vast musical knowledge, and cultural knowledge to do those kind of things like Afrika Bambataa using Kraftwerk, from incorporating James Brown, rock guitar riffs on the old school days, to the G-funk and George Clinton samples, DJ Shadow or J DIlla doing instrumental hip hop records, the WuTang Clan using karate movie's samples, or horror movie samples, to the trap when they create their own electronic music samples, Childish Gambino going back to classic funk, to Bad Bunny using latin music like Mix Master Mike did decades before. For me all of them are jazz people too.
GREAT VIDEO!
From a musician's stand point I've always made the distinction between jazz and pop/rock/blues and funks as this: You play the key or you play the chord. Now, a good lead rock guitarist does both...Dave Gilmour comes to mind as constantly suggesting the changes...but, who is ostensibly a modal player. Ironically, 2 of the greatest selling jazz albums of all time break the classic tropes of bop changes...Kind of Blue ( an experiment in modes) and Time Out (and experiment in odd times and middle eastern melodic influence).
Personally, I come from the jam/improv scene of The Grateful dead, Allman Bros., Phish etc. For me, improv has only 2 rules...mind the key and mind the time. 1) Both are subject to change at will depending on the level of players involved. 2) Don't play the music...let it play you. The songs are used as a backdrop for improvisation much like jazz uses tunes.
From a players standpoint, I think jazz (at least the Blue Note bop era stuff) is considered a right of passage because playing changes is much harder than playing key centric lines and licks. There's a hard learning curve for arpeggio playing that changes require. I always say I can play jazzy, but I can't play jazz. It's that and the 7th chord language and need for a large inversion catalog that keeps a lot of players away.
Funny thing is as I listen to more Big Band, I'm drawn more and more a way from modern jazz and towards the earlier players. Seems to me the simpler that musical language was, the deeper the sense of swing was. Kenny Clarke comes to mind...I've only just started looking at videos of him. But, it's clear where players like Jeff Hamilton are drawing from. In contrast, the Marc Guilliana's of the world seems to have complicated the music to the point where it's lost it's sense of purpose. It's music for music school grads....heady and academic. It's prolific but not fun.
Ken Burns and Wynton Marsalis absolutely ruined the jazz idiom with that f__ing PBS documentary. Felt like jazz is supposed to be kept in a level four sub-basement at the Smithsonian Institution.
I SO agree. That documentary was racist and full of half-truths.
The fact that jazz has been an influence for other genres of music, and that certain elements of jazz have been incorporated into other genres, doesn't mean you can properly call those other genres jazz. Jazz-Rock is neither really jazz nor rock. It has influences from each, but it is properly its own genre, and I really think it ought to be called something else. But once labels become established it is hard to change them.
English drummer Bill Bruford, who had a fantastic fusion band with guitar wizard Alan Holdsworth hated the "jazz-rock" moniker. He considered his music simply "rock."
Nice one, Andy... ☝️😎
I agree with a lot of what you say here but disagree with some of it. Yes the Wynton/Crouch traditionalists and their blanket dismissal of fusion and free jazz is a lame conservative perspective. But conversely, the idea that jazz is anything and everything makes the term meaningless, and I would not pretend for a moment that Carlos Santana, Jeff Beck or the Grateful Dead are even particularly jazz-fusion artists. They featured jazz artists at times and makes some nods to it, but they're not in the same category as Weather Report or Chick Corea at all.
The idea that jazz is an exclusively African-American and blues derived form is also overly simplistic - from the beginning, the pioneers of jazz looked to European classical music and impressionism as influence, and jazz significantly came from the Creoles, who were upper class, classically trained mixed race people, often with French blood in them. In this sense it is very true to say that jazz always was a cultural fusion, and it included a latin element from early on too. What can't be argued is that African-Americans were central to it. But let's not pretend they existed in an isolation chamber, unaffected by European things.
I also think the cliched argument that modern jazz is bad because it isn't specifically meant to be dance music is unrelatable and silly. There's tons of good music that isn't dance based, and I personally listen to music for an emotional and contemplative experience by myself. I could care less whether the music can be danced to or not.
Lastly, it is very true that part of the problem with jazz is the double-edged sword of it becoming academic. It was accepted into the college music programs alongside classical at the expense of it becoming too much like classical. The upside was that it achieved high culture recognition, and in some ways that's exactly what the black jazz greats wanted, I.E. to prove that black music can be as highbrow as classical. They succeeded. But perhaps more explicitly, jazz's public image is damaged by the fact that it's *class* based signaling is boujie. You practically have to wear a suite and tie in the straight ahead jazz world and it's associated with wine sipping upper middle class to rich people. A dirty ragged Jew like me does not fit into that at all.
But, as much as I push back against conservative jazz elitism, in some ways the elitism is warranted, in that the music does in fact defacto require a certain level of skill and knowlege to legitimately do, and that level is definitely a higher one than the average rock and pop standard. I say this as someone who literally grew up on grunge and heavy metal, then got into prog, fusion and jazz later. I also think one does have to legitimately actually like jazz from before 1970 to have some legitimacy with it; the type of 3rd generation fusion player or listener who doesn't even particularly like or listen to jazz is woefully out of touch, you do have to have appriciation for the classics to some extent, otherwise it's like being a mechanic who doesn't like wrenches.
Some of the newer fusion-shred stuff seems like it's fusion as interpreted from the lens of metal players, and while there's nothing wrong with coming from somewhere else, not everyone crosses over convincingly. The most lacking thing in a lot of the newer crop of fusion guitarists is a grasp of the time feel and articulation of jazz; they're approaching it like classical music and it's not like classical music in that way; there's a lack of dynamic range, rythmic push and pull, and smooth articulation and instead we get something that sounds more like prog rock or metal in its execution. The element of having a strong individual voice is also often missing. Most of the players sound like each other, because they're basically all copying from the same lick book and have a standardized approach to guitar technique. As such I actually find most TH-cam fusion boring these days and still go back to the 70's/80's classics.
Excellent post!
I'm in my 60s 70s love this channel. I don't like all rock, I don't like all classical, I don't like all pop, I don't like all jazz. But I DO like and will give any music a listen.
Best ..king thing I've heard about Jazz ever. I love it all.. It's all pop(ular) music.
Well said - thank you!
A few quotes: Miles Davis "Why call it jazz?" Duke Ellington "I you don't get it, forget it." Louis Armstrong (when asked to explain jazz) "Well man...if you have to 'explain' it.....!" One word jazz poem in the Melody Maker (many years ago) "Listen". I introduced my wife to the piano artistry of Bill Evans. She countered by introducing me to the Mozart the wizard Friedrich Gulda (who also plays great jazz). Fortunately, Lester Young is beyond discussion, I think (when I'm not actually listening).
We can agree that the mostly disingenuously put forth argument that jazz - especially of the pure sort -- belongs in the museum or opera house only- is not helpful or reflective of the reality based on jazz's "true story." nor that jazz must - to be considered "real jazz" exist in a sort of rarefied and sacrosanct bubble and approached accordingly.
BUT...the sort of "everything is everything" argument you put forth is so "all encompassing" that it ends up as rather empty, meaningless, and mostly specious. Rock had some blues roots, of course it did, but where it ends up is totally different (who dances to rock now, btw?) from where jazz ends up. So, that is what I mean by meaningless. It's drivel. You have some sort of well meant destination, but the road you've taken is a dead end.
BTW, playing "real jazz" IS - and always has been -- aspirational -- like aspiring to perform Rach III with the Moscow Phil. What's wrong with that? Should we lower the Himalayas just to have more climb Everest? I think not. And though a "dance orchestra" one had to be exceptional to play with the Duke or Basie or Goodman.
Bebop takes up where Baroque type (yes, Euro) improv left off; one example: the employment of subdominant and diminished chord structures in addition to the more basic I IV V and blues based structures. Says who?/ exemplified by whom? Well, for starters, people like Barry Harris, (who teaches all of Detroit which becomes Motown) Bud Powell (Parker-like in his insights, creativity and heights soared) Parker himself (who sought to further his studies in composition in France), Fats Waller, Ellington and Gershwin, - both explore more "classical" based orchestral forms. Ahmad Jamal, Modern Jazz Quartet (jazz chamber music). Doesn't mean any of the aforementioned abandoned the blues. Gospel incorporates those more refined elements as well. This "refined" (Gershwinny) jazz influence gets all the way down to RIO, via Jobim. You can also take this down the third wave, (Billy Childs) or spirtual jazz, (Coltrane, Pharaoh) or jazz advant guard (Don Cherry, Eric Dolphy, Cecil Talor, Ornette) roads. It all applies. (or they substitute modality or exotic scales for more complex diatonic and non diatonic structures). When did you EVER hear a subdominant chord in ROCK? Speaking broadly, in addition, Rock reverted to a neanderthalic BEAT, (heavy "one" downbeat) structure that has NOTHING to do with more refined jazz syncopation, or the more related forms of bossa, afro cuban, even flamenco has more in common with jazz than modern rock and roll. Rock ends up, or too often, eliminating the 3rd in most chords. Jazz EVOLVED, rock DEVOLVED. Harmony (sung) is mostly shit, most rock singing is crap (with some exceptions, Steve Winwood, Steve Perry, Janis Joplin, Lee Michaels, people like that, who were BLUES based mostly). Blues is disappearing as any real influence in modern rock. The "in betweens"? Like a Sting, Moody Blues, Chile Peppers, Doobie Brothers, Steely Dan or other "more refined" rockers? They maintain a scintilla of a jazz approach, but it's not jazz. And that's not a bad thing, and some of that music is excellent. Once you go beyond a Pat Metheny type approach, you're not discussing jazz or meaningful jazz rootedness. Just confusion.
That does not imply that I think jazz flavored music (smooth jazz especially) is pure junk, it's just that is not very interesting, ( a good test is can a commercially viable release be produced on computer, absolutely YES for smooth jazz and NO for "real" jazz- as well as classical) and "real" jazz is intellectually provocative as well as (at least sometimes) dance worthy, smooth jazz is chewing gum for the mind. (OK, you're perhaps not discussing only smooth jazz, but fusion and other forms, but for the sake off discussion, for illustrating the main point, I'm drawing some stark contrast)
It's fine if you like chewing gum. Not all music has to seek a higher plane or to elevate people, spiritually and intellectually.
MUSAK is OK, and there is a lot of jazzy MUSAK, again, all fine. Just not great music. If it pays your bills or someone else's, I'm certainly OK with that, but it's not jazz.
Jazz can go uptown, or downtown, or on a cruise ship, or be at a party, for sure, and if it's worthy of the name, people of any sort of musical taste and discretion will want to actively listen. Don't call McDonald's a fine steak house and don't call "smooth jazz" real jazz. McDonald's is fine when you're really hungry and want something fast. Just don't take your wife there on your anniversary and/or try to say your going to get some fine cut of beef.
Reply
Love this video.
We have similar views of jazz.
Breezin by George Benson great Jazz album. 2 of my favorite jazz albums “in a silent way “ by miles Davis. And Hot House Flowers by Winton Marsalis .
Jazz Snobbery sounds like a target for 'The English Aesthetic'. I hear the idea being formed. Jazz is Democracy! Like your inclusiveness; jazz is the spirit of creativity and humanity. Nice viewpoint. Intolerance of intolerance! Another idea......
British football = Democracy
Jazz is acoustic soccer!
Funny how Winton got into all that classic stuff whereas Branford went and play with Jerry Garcia to a mainly white audience and blew our minds. Jerry had been playing with others like Clarence Clemmons (the E street band) and Ornette Coleman.
In the immortal words of Bill Evans, "Jazz isn't a what, it's a how".
I saw Knower in concert last Saturday with 1500 people in Paris
Jazz is not dead and it sounds so funny !
If they didn't study bebop then its not jazz (apparently)
Jazz was a manifestation of American folks expressing themselves. You had elements of “ragtime” which was mostly European in origin, a very versatile music form played with wide variety of instruments, to which Black folks added “blues” creating a new music form called “jazz”. Both used simple pentatonic scales at it’s simplest form which made it easy to combine elements. The big change came when jazzman, Bix Beiderbecke, combined all those elements with the simple “ballad” song form along with his innovation the “solo”, creating the modern song form as we know it that still exists to this day: an intro, two verses, a bridge, a solo and a fade out. Jazz is like a musical “operation system” it survived because it’s versatile. It will die when it ceases to be. All those who want to limit what can or can’t be jazz will kill it. Keep jazzin’ it up!!
If you value *listenability* of jazz as opposed to *academic* or *self-indulgent* jazz, I HIGHLY recommend checking out the trombonist who played with Sonny Rollins for decades, and developed his own career. His name is Clifton Anderson, and a great starting place is 'And So We Carry On'... a varied collection of some of the most enjoyable jazz I've ever latched onto. He is able to bring in the best talent for his recordings, but the great performances DO NOT make it inaccessible, and that's the beauty of Clifton! If you do check him out, please come back here and share your thoughts!
“Jazz is not thought up, it is prepared for”. Pat Martino
While I think you have some good points I respectfully disagree with much of this. What separates jazz from other art forms is its emphasis on improvisation. This is what makes the traditional view on jazz in my view more accurate than the ideas you have presented. In pop and rock music a performer may improvise or they may not, in jazz music that is not acceptable. In that sense pop and rock are actually closer to classical music, because in classical music there is some improvisation but it is not required. Different styles of music influence each other, influencing a genre does not mean that genre is the same thing. You seem to suggest that because jazz influenced these other styles, those other styles are also in a sense, jazz. Yet, there are clear reasons why these other musical categories are seen as separate from jazz, because they are fundamentally different styles. You seem to want to give jazz credit for everything that has happened in music in the 20th century. Saying virtuosity itself comes from jazz is frankly, a ridiculous claim. You speak as though music itself was actually created with jazz and everything else leading up to it, is essentially a sidenote. There is a certain amount of influence classical music has had on jazz that you ignore, in fact you seem to ignore the impact of classical music on 20th century music altogether. To you jazz seems to symbolize everything noble about the human spirit, but I think your views are heavily biased and based on how you WANT to view jazz. Lastly I think bringing race into this topic is problematic. The roots of jazz are complex. Suggesting that jazz is solely an African American art form that was spawned by an oppressed group of people is a simplistic and problematic statement, not least of which because that view could then potentially be used to justify oppression because it allegedly leads to powerful art forms being created by poor and oppressed groups. That kind of thinking in a sense reinforces and justifies the staus quo.
Music generally is an ever-evolving fusion experiment on the civilization continuum. American bluegrass/country is deeply rooted in Celtic migration to the southern regions. Blues, gospel deeply rooted in African sounds. I’ve always viewed jazz as a fusion of western classical, blues, pop, African rhythms that bubbled up from the American melting pot. The jazz purists you speak of want to preserve a purity that never truly existed because there is no such thing as a pure form in music. It’s all fusion on the music evolution continuum.
I agree...and I would go further...Jazz is not African music. The racists that described it as Jungle music are the same as the critical race theorists that describe it as a Black artform. It is an American artform which has been expanded on worldwide. There is as much classical music influence in it as African music.It was created by Afro Americans who at the time were woefully subjugated in the extreme. The fact that within that society they created the greatest artform on the planet at that time is a testament to all our humanity; human beings at their very best. And so all we can really say with any accuracy is that Jazz was created by human beings. The fact that that sounds racist to the ideologues as sad indicator of the time we live in now.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer Well argued. I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said. CRT has led us away from MLK’s essential message: judge me based on the content of my character, not the colour of my skin. How many great young musicians and potential musicians are being held back by this woke identity fetishism? Too many.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer I'm glad you're not prone to overstatement.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer It's not African, (there are few pure Africans in USA, besides immigrants) but it is Afro American. It's open to and has been contributed to by others, and A LOT of the jazz greats had classical training, (especially the pianists)
but you take AA away and there is no jazz.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer It would be a great mistake to underestimate the influence of black music. Look beyond jazz.....
Hi! This was beautiful. I love music. What you’re saying makes a lot of sense. Thanks.
Wow... I'm afraid that we are going to have to have you bronzed... Fantastic discussion, wonderful insights! FWIW, just my own personal taste, but I happen to prefer the later Miles from about In A Silent Way onward. I just find it more interesting (with the strong proviso of Kind of Blue of course and perhaps a couple of others)
Absolutely *LOVED* your ending thoughts about love in Jazz, very beautiful Sir!
Heh... interesting that you mention Mtume. I don't know if it is the same person, but long ago, probably over 20 years ago, I bought a fairly commercial Funk album by an artist named MTume called 'Juicy Fruit' I haven't listened to it in ages, but I remember it being really Funky. I think it is the only one I have by him. Awesome video mate, maybe not quite to the passionate heights of your Biscuit video, but not bad... 😁
Yes! Jazz was pop music at one time! I prefer to think of jazz today as any music no matter the beat, harmonic structure, ethnic roots (Asia, Africa, Caribbean, South American...) as long as its main feature is improvisation. As international travel became easier starting in the 50s, more music from around the world was incorporated into jazz such as Dizzy going to Cuba, Don Ellis going to India, Ravi Shankar, Eastern European ethnic multi metric music. I could go on and on. Jazz has always had the freedom to incorporate every aspect of music according to the expression of the musician. This is being challenged today and has divided the jazz community and has driven many listeners away specially the listeners who do not care only to listen to historical jazz.
im not a very good musician, but i love making my crappy songs and playing around with my gear. fk them guys that use their virtuosity as an excuse to act like a-holes. it's because they feel weak somewhere else in their life. really love your channel, friend. just discovered you. keep up the great work.
Nothing is limited to anything people think about it, thank God!