What is Jazz?

 

Lots of valid points discussed over the last few days.  Not sure I can answer the question, but I can see there's differentiation between commercial jazz and non-commercial.

 

To me the idea of Jazz is that the song is never played the same twice.  I said "song", jazz could even be an improvisation derived from a series of chords or patterns - not even constituting a song.

 

Miles Davis used a lot of popular songs as a vehicle for this, starting out as an instrumental and going on to become some of the most amazing music I've ever heard!  That to me is Jazz - Miles Davis, Charlie Parker, Charles Mingus etc.  Kenny G is definitely a top player, and a gifted musician, but he has obviously decided to go the commercial route and milk it - fair play to him!  His records are not spontaneous - seat of your pants stuff, they're products.  Clearly there's a big difference, which matters to some and not at all to others.  I like them, but it's not what I would call spontaneous jazz.  It's perhaps jazz pop?!

 

I'm there's parellels with Level 42.  As a musician I guess you have to weigh up what's more important - artistic freedom or commercial success.  To me there's nothing more exhilarating than to end up in a jam, and not knowing quite what's around the next corner - I'm no jazz man, but I can appreciate it for it's freedom or form and it's endless potential.  If you look at ethnic music, e.g. Indian Raga's for instance, there's a lot of space for improvisation which is exciting to the listener and the player.

 

I think L42 started out as jazzers for sure, and are quite capable of doing that, albeit with a funky feel.  Jazz-funk is a music genre of it's own with sub-genres in itself.  I think L 42 could be classed as a sub-genre.  They carved their own niche!  The early tapes to me, is blend of jazz, funk, and pop.  Live shows had a fair share of improvisation.  L42 I think found a happy medium for most of it - but it's clear to see the balance swayed towards the commercial towards the end of their careers, hence Phils dissilusionment?!

 

It would be nice to hear them get back to their roots - by getting back to the funk, only time will tell.  Don't get me wrong, World Machine is a great album, and is probably the peak of the mountain, but it's those early days which turn me on the most - because they were raw, and the human feel is the most evident.  I think up to TPOA, the raw edge is still there, after that the manufacturing process had took over and it lost some of the feel, for me anyway.  What do you guys think?

 

 

All the bass

 

 

 

 

Dave

 

 

 

There are plenty of new, fresh and talented jazz acts out there for sure.  Tune in

to your local Sunday morning jazz brunch radio show (or better yet, go out and

see some jazz) and you'll be reassured. In a city where we have a jazz scene

and some decent music conservatories, we're a bit spoiled (Boston).

 

That said, I do think that we're in a period where there are no truly great jazz

masters who are popular...  unless of course you count Santana...  but I'm talking

about Ellington, Davis, Coltrane, etc.  I doubt any random person on the street

would recognize their names these days, and I can't think of any living equivalents

to these folks (again, who would be recognized by most people.)

 

cheers

Eric