Why do modern Jazz musicians all sound the same?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 кві 2023
- 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
"There's too much Jazz education and not enough Jazz." - Phil Woods
Exactly!
Not to mention that jazz education pretty much ends in the early 60s. I can't think of many jazz musicians that are inspired by like the popular stuff Herbie or Donald were doing in the 70s
I don’t even have to watch the whole video now. Thanks 😂
True
I don't think it's so much jazz education I think it has a lot to do with the lack of clubs and other jazz venues.. I mean way back in the day you could at least make a living playing jazz where you can improve you're a craft and get your own unique voice on your chosen instrument..but if you got nowhere to play & make mistakes and grow that's a major problem with artists
It's not just jazz, it's every other form of music. Including classical.
Exactly. I was thinking the same thing listening to piano competitions in the classical world…phenomenal virtuosity, flawless…but often soulless.
Good point. Classical improvisation is super rare, now a days. Back in the day, if you didn't know how to improvise, you were not considered a complete musician.
Except for when you compare Mark Anthony Turnage with Thomas Adès.
Very accurate and perceptive observations. I played in Chicago for 30 years and, being self-taught, found myself swimming against the current with the prevailing musicians all coming from college programs. The older pros, most of whom came up in the hard bop era, were very welcoming and encouraging, although they could be strict. The younger guys/girls were often cliquish and snobby.
I use this analogy: the older jazz is like dance, an art form where athletic virtuosity is sometimes necessary to fully express yourself. The newer jazz is like gymnastic floor exercise- the athletic virtuosity is the point, but you get extra credit if it’s aesthetically pleasing.
It's still the same way now. Some younger players in NYC are making their way without going through the college programs but it's rare, and their self-determination is extraordinary. The other piece of what you're saying is that "chops" can be measured, and soulfulness can't be. How hard something grooves, how beautiful something is can be negated by a judgmental professor.
About a decade ago when UA-cam had really become established, I noticed in the ensuing years a prevalence of "tutorial videos" teaching pieces of music note-for-note. In the case of jazz, there's been a growth in transcription videos, complete with manuscript, of great solos that gained a lot of traction with learners. There's a place for both activities but it seems that being able to reproduce the work of others verbatim has become (for some) more highly valued than personal expression.
Transcribing an improvised solo is very unusual, I think counterproductive.
The growth of college jazz programs is significant. Before their emergence, players learned from whichever players they could find to work with.
And from their ear, instead of cliche theory.
@@herrbonk3635 ...or Realbooks!
Boom
@@herrbonk3635 if you’re saying the early jazz musicians didn’t know theory, you’re way off base. They didn’t go to jazz school, but some had music degrees and aside from Chet Baker, I don’t know of many other pure ear players.
@@tbonealex Yes, pre-college jazz players mostly could read and understand theory. But they mostly got the "jazz" part of their skills and knowledge from working with other musicians, not an officially approved proper jazz oriented music program. There are advantages to both learning methods.
Everything you’ve said in this video is spot on.
I was a high school music teacher for 20 years and I discovered two things about high school learners: 1. They had a fear of making a “mistake”, not just in music but in any subject, and 2. Children were programmed to pass exams. So when teaching GCSE music (U.K. high school music exam) the children would often ask me what they had to do to get a grade A, especially for composition. The idea of coming up with ideas of their own was alien to them.
I then switched to teaching primary school children and it was completely different. They did not know what was “wrong” or “right”, a bit like how a baby learns, which is why they had no “fear” in music and would think outside the box.
And for me, I think that is the issue with performers today: musicians, actors, etc, they all confirm to what will be universally accepted.
You make some interesting points based upon your teaching experience. Don't you think the issue of today's performers being conformists can be explained by the restraints imposed on them by their employers?
@@neilyounger7585 only just saw your reply, sorry.
I guess that depends on the employment situation
If you’re a school music teacher you would be bound by the curriculum and/or exam board to some degree but you method of teaching need not just come out of a text book.
If you’re a gigging musician then yes you are bound by the requests of the person booking you if it’s a private or corporate function etc.
But I think in the case of someone’s individual style a lot of musicians seem not to want an individual style but are happy to sound like everyone else!
For me, the musicians and singers that stand out are not always the ones that are technically superior but the ones that sound distinctive from other people.
What do you think?
@@amathesaxylady Yes I'm also drawn to distinctive articulation - I love grainy, breathy tenor sax lines eg Getz and Iain Ballamy with Food. I've recently discovered Van Morrison's singing which is not exam board perfect but I find his wailing celtic blues style very moving.
I couldn't agree more. I've also been an educator and had exactly the same issues. Unfortunately with kids, they can see if they don't comply, they're not going to make any money. The music industry isn't allowing for innovation, unless it's innovation they decide to sell.
I believe one of the main drivers of conventional playing is that there is essentially nowhere to play. Growing up, all of our school dances were live bands. Every school had dozens of them. There were clubs for young people as well as grown-ups. Churches were having rock bands during service. Private parties. Garages. YMCAs, etc. Schools had music programs. We all had nearly unlimited opportunities. Today, if you want to play you attend a college with a jazz program. And here we are.
'Bingo' Thomas ... You have spotlit a major, even, central contributing factor to many 'ailments' of jazz, and music in general - problems born of insular learning within a virtual environment saturated with options of what's been done ( - thus - 'what to do'), which, in turn, sits within a real world environment offering few viable options for real 'outdoor' presence and continuity of social connection through music. So yes - here we are indeed!
@@jazzwarrior7206You write like a jazz musician plays. Very intricate passage but when I got done reading it, I felt I didn’t learn anything.
@@Primus-ue4th Super rude, show some respect to musicians who make a point even if it's in jargon.
@@Primus-ue4thkek, burn
@@Primus-ue4th The first things you could get busy learning are relevance, and ... tact. Failing that, you could maybe get a grip on the fact that I wasn't trying to 'teach' you anything - so you've merely aired a pointless critique, while adding nothing of value to the thread yourself. As for your presumptions about me and "jazz musicians", I just don't know where to begin, so I won't ..
They all come out of programs at Berklee and the like, and that beats the individualism right out of them. Can you imagine somebody today coming from a great jazz program like at Berklee or North Texas State with Monk’s limited chops but completely unique approach?
As a UNT guy. Yea I agree 1000%. My peers solos generally sound like musical brain dumps. However, a couple cats have REALLY found their sound in my 5 years here. Austin Ford (trumpet), Kazunori Tanaka (trumpet), and Coleman Burks (drum set) to name a couple. But overall I agree that the program has beat the individuality from most of us, even myself. I've been on a recent journey to re-find my sound and my musicality after having theory and technique rammed into my skull for 5 years. In fact, despite my technical deficiencies of the time, I'd say I had a STRONGER musical intuition before college.
Don't worry AI Jazz players will have more originality
Because it is institutionalized music
@@Zuhdj Honestly, I and this is probably gonna sound like some nonsense coming from some rando on the internet (for context I am currently a senior in high school in my schools "B" band and combo (A is higher, C is lowest for both, I was in the A band last year but got cut and missed my chance at the A combo both by a hair, only because of an inability to get my physical embouchure in enough shape by audition time, trumpet is a tough instrument) might even sound a little woo-woo or whatever, but I really think the highest practice in music is to really consciously make an effort to 'listen to yourself'. People 'find themselves' in various ways, but I really think you can go straight to the source if you just stop, maybe even close your eyes, and try to tune in to that part of yourself where musical sense comes from, as impossible as it is to actually identify what that is, it's more about intention. Intend with you mind to play according to it. You may not intellectually like what you hear yourself play right away, but try your best to keep your judgements at bay, keep with this process, see if you can 'sense' in some way something deeper being expressed and if you are playing so in accordance with that musical sense in you. I think If one practices this enough, you will develop a different kind of musical intelligence, a sense which isn't really sourced in theory, jazz language, or anything like that, but which lets music spring forth from you unadulterated.
This is my take on why I think people have been so moved by people like Miles Davis, as opposed to someone like Charlie Parker. People like Charlie Parker chased virtuosity, quite frankly 'playing what he thought sounds really cool' on a surface level. But I feel like sometimes, Miles can really shake you, move you, and I find that infinitely more powerful. He had a deep artistic vision. You can hear the obvious notes he doesn't play, he never played just to sound flashy and cool, In my opinion he was dedicated to a vision of the music he wanted to express, and he abided by that completely by really listening to that muse in him with discipline.
I feel like people think you kind of either have this or you don't. But I've found in my personal experience you can train this by doing that thing I said earlier. It's a skill that's hard to understand. It's not a technical or intellectual skill, it is most importantly the practice of restraining judgements or should/shouldn't, good or bad, but instead rooting yourself in the intention to play for the muse in you, your musical sense, that spark of something in you from which art is truly sourced, just filtered through a particular genre/idiom somehow.
I kinda feel like Herbie's experience of trying "not to play the butter notes" is somewhat of a similar thing to what I'm saying here, I remember from some interview clip that floats around YT about how he was feeling depressed that he was just playing the same things over and over again before Miles' (mis-heard) advice of trying to avoid "excess", doing things that make chords sound a little too obvious, and how on the next concert he got a greater applause than he had in a while, and he thought that some curious thing about the "purity of the search" is what made that performance. I think this purity of the search is something like what I'm describing, and I really think there is some great undiscovered holy grail of power to looking at things in a way similar to this. It's just hard to intellectualize, so no one touches it. Hope any of this made any sense outside my own head, and good luck on rediscovering your sound.
and also, unrelated, for my own sake, are you aware of any other musicians coming out ot UNT you find are doing something interesting?
Hey, Monk played like Tatum until he got his sound. He had TONS of chops. Just food for thought.
Jazz playing has became a form of sport, like a form of olympic artistic discipline, where they make some obligatory figures fitting in a theme trying to impress a jury.
Partly true, but also pretty old. People like Wayne Shorter, Josef Zawinul, and Miles Davis talked about this already in the 1960s. Trying to avoid the most tiresome cliches.
Nope, it moved from that. Just listen to Oscar Peterson and Count Basie talking about Art Tatum. Just because people today have higher musical baseline, that doesn't mean they are trying to impress someone and are not musical
@@Tomica031 It doesn't mean they're interesting, either.
@@petarticinovic2710 interesting is subjective. But saying that jazz is now like competition, when it actually was like that in beggining is silly
Same goes with modern metal lol
In every kind of music but especially in Jazz you got to have a story to tell. Without a story, feeling or mood a musician will put the focus on technique and cliche.
Art Tatum in early days told amazing stories with technique, don't be like one of those guys that thinks playing with emotions never means playing fast
Bravo.... well said !! You can display technique, and it's impressive from a mechnical point of view. From a musical point of view, it may be less impressive, though. If an artist is wishing to present technical prowess, that works, but understand that, it may be at the expense of musicality (or the perception of musicality, in a lot of people's minds.) As an artist, you have to decide what you're trying to present, and in what porportion (and endless display if speedy playing may be different thatn a short duration, presentation of speed, as a break for a main melodic section. It's commonly about porportion.)
@@ilragazzodoro-3210 First of all have you listened to all new jazz musicians so you can say that or? There is reason why they are called standards, you can't force genre to stay same for more then few decades, look at any genre of music. Also, we always made new music by combining elements from multiple influences, I really don't get any of your points, if people play standards, you are not happy, if people try something new with old standards you are not happy
@@ilragazzodoro-3210 Yes, they essentially removed every popular element of traditional jazz and then wonder why there is no audience anymore. Back then you could sing and dance along to songs and even it lower tempo, they had that flat-out big band energy.
Now you just have some guy noodling around without any dynamics and going through scales that objectively just sound shitty.
@@ilragazzodoro-3210 but look at any genre of music, from classical to modern, it cannot last too long and it will eventualy evolve into something else. Also when we talk about genres of music, it is much easier to categorize things when enough time has passed, jazz in it original state ended around 80s and it will never be the same like that, today we can just emulate it and play in style of old masters, like we play any classical music, or we can arrange it and make something new and different, you can't expect genre to stay the same for too long, it doesn't have anything with jazz particular, it is same for all genres of music in whole history, that is what I am trying to say. And I have nothing against someone not liking new jazz influenced styles, but complaining that it isn't like it was before doesn't realy make sense to me, like I said, any genre in music history at some point has to evolve and move to something new, with compilation of influences of past styles
I think I remember a well known New York jazz saxophonist referring to your point and using the term "the institutionalization of jazz". I'm not a jazz musician, but I love to listen to jazz and you make fantastic points.
Everyday I watch videos of young musicians playing jazz and their dedication is admirable. What I do not hear is many with much to say. They are mimicking rather than expressing their own feelings. Success is judged by level of imitation rather than innovation or expression. As Miles said (and I paraphrase) "It can a long time before you sound like yourself." Miles when asked what he looked for in a soloist said "They should project and have something to say." We should not discount what they have accomplished but rather encourage them to express themselves. If we want them to carry the torch we should at least guide them on the path until they find their own way.
Today people don't like it when you say something, they're only comfortable when you repeat what everyone else is saying. You have to have a point of view to say something. People are afraid to be themselves.
@@matthew7419 I saw that when I worked at the college. But I told them the old line "Be yourself. Everyone else is taken." ;-)
You can’t innovate from nothing, it’s important to build a foundation off the language. You learn from others what you like. Every musician has influences from another wether you like it or not. Young musicians are exactly that, young musicians. They are still learning and growing. Young Coltrane was playing alto imitating bird when he was in the navy, and it takes time for them to create their own sound.
@@spode8520 I agree. My point was that they seem to be measured on the ability to imitate rather than innovate-that improvisation is not a substantive part of the discussion. I appears to be a modern musical equivalent of paint by numbers.
You're spot on with this. I'm tired of hearing everyone coming out of Berkeley playing sounding the same. Jazz players are going down the same road as the classical dudes. I've been playing jazz violin and viola for years, but I'm dropping it and starting anew on the keyboard, with the idea of not studying any keyboard players whatsoever, just looking for my own sound.
It's Berklee, btw.
@@jazzleebert2 Sorry. My bad.
My main language is Spanish nowadays and English is a nightmare with the spelling. 😂
@@jazzleebert2 lol, I've seen the same from people from Berkeley, but yeah wrong state.
@@jazzleebert2 it's boring, by the way
Well said. I think what you describe is applicable to nearly all art forms. Art stops evolving and becomes static as soon as you try to define it: _"This is how you should..."_
Or when it's reduced to technique, with quantifiable standards that decide "This student is good."
If people had always had the "this is what jazz is" attitude, jazz today would only be Dixieland.
The new breeds are trying to identify with a language that they are not willing to speak...rather than get the basics they are already trying to create their own language... How creative and original can you get after you learned french?
100% true. Too much school learning. Not enough time out in the world, especially in nature. We're getting the kind of art that comes out of a sedentary and non-wild culture.
Absolutely.
Bang on. So glad I never had a drumming lesson in my life. Spent many hours in my youth listening to vinyls trying to work out what Mitch Mitchell was playing, got some of it, didn't get some of it, but got my own sound . For what it's worth.
Good for you. I didn't either. However other trained guys always ask me which chords I am using 😅😅😅😅 Learning theory has made me sluggish.
My grandfather (who played in the Boston Symphony/Opera) was my first piano teacher. When I was about 7, I wrote my first song (basically variations on the C major scale). I expected him to praise me for my attempt. However, all he had to say was, "Arnie, no matter what you write, it already has been done before." Ironically, this comment spurred me on to try to prove him wrong.
After years of playing piano and trombone, along with writing quite a bit of music, I have come to both agree and disagree with my grandfather. In so many ways, all "new" music is in some way or another a kind of rehash of the past. And as you allude to, just because you have a new sound or instrument as the focus, that does not really effectively change the music supporting that new sound or instrument. I have always been attracted to synths because I wanted to create new sounds that nobody used before.
As with most serious musicians (I best be careful with this), I started out playing classical and jazz music. And I would agree with you, that both genres in general have become kind of like museum pieces, and the "standards" for how it is supposed to be written and performed are set in stone. I recall way back in the 80's wanting to improve my improvisation chops on trombone. But the general advice I kept getting, was to memorize riffs by famous trombonists, and learn to play them in every key. I was immediately turned off by that idea, and backed off in putting in any extra time to try to improve those chops.
And more recently, I was asked to play in a rather good pro-level group doing what the leader (a sax player) called, "straight-ahead jazz." The final straw for me playing in that group, was when a fellow trombonist played a rather good "improv" solo, but I knew enough to know he was simply regurgitating a bunch of riffs Charlie Parker played. He got praised by the leader, while my improvs (which were more original) got little or not acclaim.
This experience with jazz was similar to my experience through the years playing chess (surprised?). By the time I entered high school, I played so much chess, that I could probably have entered formal competition. In my junior year, on a whim, I went to the Chess Club during lunch one day, and played against the president of the club (rumors spread before that that I was a very good player). One thing similar to much jazz today, is that all very good chess players are pressured to memorize every famous chess game of the past, and to incorporate moves from those games into their own. By the time I got into high school, I was totally bored with memorizing past games, and tried to go in a more "chaotic" direction. In my game with the chess club president, our first 3 or so moves each followed standard opening moves. However, I then quickly went "off the grid," and intentionally did moves that were unexpected. What I did was, I forced the other player to abandon every set of moves he was trying to do from his training, and also go "off grid." I also traded pieces as often as I could to whittle down quickly to end game moves. I know that I had a smirk on my face and showed lots of confidence, as my opponent was sweating bullets the entire time, while EVERY person in the club was not playing chess, but solely watching our game. Even though I THINK he was a better conventional player, I was better playing off grid, Even though at the end, he had a slight advantage. But because I messed with his head by my strategy, he messed up, and could not win, but got into a stalemate (tie) with me.
My "off the grid" technique would never work if I played a chess software program. Much of my technique was PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE, or what you might call "Poker" bluff strategy.
I think the big lesson I am trying to convey seems to fit with your thoughts on jazz. Conventional jazz music is nice for what it is, which is effectively museum pieces, but true creativity needs to PUSH BOUNDARIES, and in effect, go "off grid" in a similar way my chess playing eventually went. Music is not just an objective/technical experience, but an emotional/psychological, and maybe even a spiritual experience.
LOL, sorry about the verbosity, but your video kind of inspired it, so I blame you and society for it.... 🙂
your grandfather's comment strikes me as discouraging. and a shame that the charlie parker guy sounded better. and also, since you mentioned chess, you might be interested in how ding took nepo out of his prep many times in this year's world championship :)
@@littlebumgorf Well, I wouldn't say the Charlie Parker guy sounded better, but he was much more appreciated by the leader of the group (and the other saxes) than those of us trying to be a little more original in our adlibbing. I think my grandpa was in effect discouraging, but I think his intent was to keep me within his own sense of reality. Fortunately, I took his discouragement as a CHALLENGE to prove him wrong. I will need to check out more about this ding vs. nepo chess championship games.
You’re not wrong. Virtuosity seems to have overtaken style and expression in the genre, and the virtuous occupy an echo chamber of theory elitism. This is not limited to jazz or classical. I find most virtuosity, including in rock music, utterly predictable, devoid of character, and nothing puts me to sleep better. The real magic happens when virtuosity manifests in wildly innovative expression, soulful style and actual pure creativity, which has always been the exception to the rule, but there seems more rule than exception these days.
brillant
No, virtuosity is just a byproduct of instruments and education system evolving over time. I think you are all a bit like "in my time everything was better" and you are getting old. Today we have so much new music, new emotions and feelings, if you are not finding it, you are probably not listening to good music, there was always bad and good music in history. Like there are so many great innovative artists today, and a lot of music today derived from what we now consider classical jazz, we actually moved from simplistic pop ideas (in music history, music always was getting complicated to a point where people wanted to hear something easier to hear, etc baroque music was much more complicated then classical, if you think about it it is same as pop of 2000s against jazz just few decades earlier) and we are in most advanced musical area to this date. We should be happy and thankful, not the other way around
and also, virtuosity battles were common in early days of jazz, pianist would literally battled each other with solos, just listen to Oscar Peterson and Count Basie interview, especially part where they talk about Art Tatum. Todays talented artists aren't trying to be virtuous, it's is just new ways of feeling emotions, colors, it is musical and has nothing to do with theory elitism
In the past, music was about playing for friends, playing for dancers. A party, a church service, a concert or a bar. It was always a social exchange. Something fun and the technical was there to support that. When you start abstracting music into pure theory and technical mastery over anything else, listening to it is more like reading a technical specifications than reading a great novel.
@@catocall7323 You have wrong presumption about music theory, nobody is abstracting music into theory, theory is just a way we developed to describe things we hear, and why do they sound like they sound, and so it can be easier for us to communicate music to others, because we didn't have recordings for pretty much 99.99% of humanity. Also, today many jazz influenced styles got a lot from J Dilla, house music, dnb and others, which is all dance music. What you are saying is like you hate when people talk about rocket science, but that doesn't mean those people are talking about it to be smarter than you, they are passionate about that and talk about it like you maybe talk about football. If something is to complicated for you to listen, it is your opinion and I am not saying you need to like it. But saying that is generally like that is wrong. When people listen to something, they need time to develop familiarity. If you didn't grow up in microtonal region of world, it will sound awful to you because you are not familiar with it, but to people who grew up there it sounds perfect and normal. So by listening something you don't understand and trying to understand it will make you like it more after some time. And music is becoming more social exchange with time, just 100 years ago people only played from notes, not jamming and reacting to each other (in European culture, I know African music has a lot of improvisation and listening to each other), and jazz popularized playing by feel and reacting, people are getting better at it and people can play more complicated things without rehearsing, and they do it out of passion, love, emotion, not the way you describe it
Julian Lage has a unique sound. It's refreshing because, as you said, everyone seems to sound like Metheny or Holdsworth or Scofield
Yeah I dunno,if you listen to American folk music and jazz his playing is not that revolutionary
@@MaxIsBackInTown to be fair, I said unique, not revolutionary. I also think Scofield is unique. But Metheny is revolutionary!
Metheny's playing sounds rooted in the bebop tradition. And I hear the influence of Abercrombie, and Towner on his playing. Now Holdsworth, he was truly unique and revolutionary. Nobody sounded like that before he came along.
The internet is a mixed blessing. In the pre-internet world, a musician was forced to find their own individual voice and style. Now with everything on the web, we've developed a culture of musical clones!
This! So true
There is a bias in comparing modern players to older players though. The only old players you hear are the ones who are original enough to stand the test of time. There were probably loads at the time who sounded more alike.
The Internet.
My iPad.
it was also due to academia, the Internet only sped this up
I think one component is that young people learn from videos and as a result they can easily learn exactly how to play something. People my age and older would learn from the records only and as a result we would often play things "wrong" - for example with different fingering, slightly different chords, different gear. This way it was more likely that an original take on a piece would develop. I learned smiths songs when I was young. I play them all "wrong" but they sound good to me anyway.
Funny story! I still learn songs wrong but good enough to get the main idea!😂👍🏾
This is very true. No one develops a style by doing their own thing anymore. They are all learning the same way.
@@Jazzmarcel yea exactly. That can be good. The best covers are not replicas of originals anyway. There are occasions were learning exact things will teach you something new but nothing wrong with just getting the main idea ;-)
Interesting take....
If you don't learn the song "note for note", you will be forced to improvise.
Improvisation is not done immediately, first you have to learn what goes together by doing it wrong.
It also requires you to build your own voice on the instrument because you can't track or know the original solo.
This isn’t a problem in just Jazz. Rock hasn’t changed in decades and pop hasn’t either. Every genre is going through this it seems.
Man, the rock thing really bums me out. It's probably worse than it is with jazz.
@@haysfordays it’s not
Great video. I could not agree more. As a 20 something year old guitar player in the 90's, I had the opportunity to study with Saxophonist Anthony Braxton for a short time. Coming from rock, I could appreciate his rebellious "free" concepts and promptly wanted to enroll in a university Jazz program. I auditioned, was rejected, practiced an entire summer, re auditioned and then was accepted. I was heavy into Coltrane and Wayne Shorter. I remember the the feeling as if it was yesterday. I was asked who I wanted to transcribe for an assignment and I said Eric Dolphy and I was told no. Jazz studies in a university setting is designed to teach everyone the same playing vocabulary and I hated it. I didn't want to sound like everyone else. The guitar professor was a Pat Martino disciple and had us learn his approach, but I felt and still do today, one can come across sounding robotic using only his methods. Suffice to say, after 2 years, I left the Jazz studies department and switched majors. Individualism and fostering a unique voice was not emphasized but rather stifled in my university jazz experience.
Jazz isn't supposed to be done academically.
That describes "higher education" in general.
Universities have become indoctrination centers
In defense of that university, Pat Martino's technique is comprehensive and enables a player to play pretty much anything in jazz. I have no problem with their program because they are focusing more on technique rather than style. In other words, the university is saying become technically proficient FIRST before becoming individualistic. There are too many individualistic players with subpar technique that limits their range of expression.
@@ljp711 no it's a feeling from the soul?
Man, you nailed it! The spirit of "Jazz" is about exploration and experimentation. It is about searching. It is about the new. It is not about following rules.
Yeah, you’re right, jazz is about learning the rules and then breaking them. People (myself included) went to university during our most creative/rebellious years where for 5 years they rewarded us for keeping the rules and punished us for breaking them. And now we womder why Jazz is lacking personality
Exactly! You hit the mail on the head when you said that the influence on jazz is always outside of jazz. In fact the influences that move all art forms forward is always outside of the form.
You try and tell the rock and metal fans this but they are among the most resistant to having their metal bands mocked for derivativity.
Why do people think art only moves in a forward direction?
Without form you are floating in endless space... Nothingness. All music comes from form. I have seen someone blow a saxophone into a bass drum in an attempt to challenge this reality and it was really quite embarrassing.
@@scenicdrums But that form could be created from outside aka space.
@@ColtraneTaylor You mean like, God? Space is form...
Andy you speak the soul of Jazz. This is the difference between muzak and art, fast food and fine cuisine, a lecture and religion . P.S. nicely un-cut video, few people can do this kind of stream of consciousness discourse so successfully.
This whole video was jazz. I think I was five minutes in when I realized that there aren't going to be cuts. It's just a very insightful guy with a live mic and a rolling camera, and what comes out is great. I think. What you say sounds really plausible. In metal we also had a virtuosity movement, when a million bedroom players were trying to play sweeps as fast as Yngwie Malmsteen. But metal didn't die to this, because though fans appreciated the virtuosity, they always rewarded great albums. Yngwie didn't make those. Bathory did. Metal fans always tend to push bands to go beyond the status quo, and often that leads to complete rubbish. But sometimes it works, and it enriches the whole genre. The fact that there are college jazz programs says a lot. They day colleges see fit to open metal programs, we'll know it's over.
There are institutions that include metal in their curricula, possibly even colleges with entire metal programs around Northern Europe.
As a person who sometimes tires of best-of lists, this type of monologue is the real reason I return. Even if I disagree (not about this topic), you always provide something thought provoking. It's fun.
I'm not a musician but yes a music lover, especially of guitar players. When very young I would focus on the Best of lists, who is the G.O.A.T. etc. Nowadays I avoid such lists like trying to avoid Covid. On rare occasion I will check out a list or on my way to such a list I will get it together and stop myself.
Love your jams Andy. Never stop!
I listened to a lot of fusion during the lockdown and loved the 70s stuff. I have found modern stuff I enjoy and I feel has some relevance to my life. The London jazz scene with Shabaka Hutchings , Moses Boyd, Nubiya Garcia etc is really good. Love The Comet is Coming , Ill Considered, Melt Yourself Down and all those fusion to other popular forms. Norwegian artists like Hedvig Mollestadt , Ola Kvernberg, Stale Sorlokken, groups like Krokofant, Elephant 9 Jagga Jazzist Bushman’s Revenge are wonderful too. I think sometimes I am trading the greats for something that sounds cool to my 2020’s ears. But I love both. I suppose the modern stuff is considerably less well known. But the London scene gets some recognition on the BBC
The London jazz scene is good.
@@TeeceeMoody except very few places to go. Was there in February and only found Oliver’s (Greenwich) along with the standard Ronnie’s and Pizza Express. 609 had almost nothing (and tricky to get to).
As a keyboard player, I have hung out with Jimmy Smith, Joe Sample, Les McCann. I have played with Pat M. in Kansas City in the early days, done concert dates with Mary Wells, O.C. Smith, Big Joe Turner and many others. I find that too many of today’s young artists are attempting to play over the heads of their audience. Some people may appreciate the forward approach, but, I get overwhelmed by the confusion. Go back to the basics when you can tap your toe, and groove to the melody in the tune. Don’t try too hard, listen. The feel of Jazz is easy to appreciate. Play with feeling. Thanks…
😎🎹
Finally someone has put into words what I myself have silently been feeling. Thank you sir!
Excellent summary..!!! It sounded like a Baptist sermon here with you as the preacher and me as the congregation shouting "Amen" , "Right On" and "Exactly" after every statement you made. The streams of consciousness you have are awesome but this was like you pulled my thoughts as well and explained them on the fly better than I can. The bits about drummers and piano players of course hit home especially. In this part of the world (Toronto) in the 80's and 90's there were a dozen pianists who emulated Oscar Peterson- all excellent but their careers plateaued over the years as they didn't have their own voice- now having OP's bag in your skill set is impressive but in the end you have to bring something of your own to the table...Brilliant .
Great insights! Love the spontaneous exposition!
Brilliant summing up , subscribed . cheer's
The answer is: Jazz Education in schools and universities. The rise of formal jazz education has resulted in the death of originality (I.e., genius) in service to the goal of churning out factory-issue pros. NOW, it’s all soulless technicians, all or most of whom have most--if not ALL--the original important jazz giants “out-chopped”--BUT SO WHAT?! Classical you have to study in school. Jazz-and all other “popular musics”-one learns in the street, as it were. Jazz programs are why Jazz hasn’t mattered since 1965.
correct answer here
Just a great history lesson, thanks for placing the Trad phenomenon in context during the flow, fascinating stuff.
What's interesting is a lot of the progressive drummers in the 70's started in that trad era and received their rudimentary training from it.
Not a jazz player, but really really love how you explain the mentality and passion with the history instead of just naming musicians besides for example. Very Helpful!
Excellent and very insightful analysis of the direction of jazz. I'll have to listen to more of him, and even look around for his drumming. Very Good.
This video is a 10/10 for me. Jazz was all about rebellion and forging a new path, and now it's pretty much just music-ish gymnastics
As a young jazz musician, it feels like there is so much tradition and ideology that you "must" learn. There is no energy and life today. All the musicians are old. All the cool stuff seems to be happening in other genres. Of course, there are a few young musicians who have a distinct sound and I admire them a lot. I think more of my generation would like jazz if they didn't perceive it as some stuffy, academic tradition as it has become in many ways. Gen Z is extremely creative and we have so many resources at our disposal. We could make amazing music.
🎉
I agree that the highly academic nature of jazz today is off-putting. But most of this heavy academic emphasis is still fairly recent. Don't blame us oldies! When I was young there was only one tertiary level jazz centre in the entire UK. Now we have Berklee franchises everywhere, even here in Spain. And every time some timid beginner jazz pianist asks for tips from the online community, several pianists will shout, "scales, scales, scales!" If the people shouting this are leathery old boppers, then you have a point, but I kind of think it's younger musicians.
When I turned pro on jazz trumpet, I had taught myself jazz, with minimal input from others. Then I went to a private jazz piano teacher for 18 months. Admittedly, it got me started on that difficult jazz instrument, but 90% of what I now know and can do on piano is from listening and brainstorming. My point is that some tuition helps, but we shouldn't be overly dependent on it. What is the biggest benefit of formalised jazz education? Networking! But there is a risk of becoming a replicant.
@@Zoco101 I agree. I learned a lot from taking Jazz Band (on trumpet) in highschool, but we only ever played swing tunes, so my bebop-influenced solos were unappreciated by the judges at contests. I just don't (and didn't) dig swing, but I had no choice but to play it. I'm a self-taught keys player mainly, and most of my ability is from listening and diligent practice. The internet is an amazing resource and that is why young musicians are so talented these days. You can learn almost anything if you have the drive to do so, and an internet connection.
Classical and now jazz are the the main genres which are largely academic, and it shows. People don't go to college to take classes in rock, metal, hip-hop, pop, etc. (Except maybe the production aspect). These are genres that are still "cool" to the general public. Classical of course has had contemporary movements to move the genre forward beyond the centuries-old standards, and I hope jazz will have a movement like that as well.
I think Gen Z would love jazz if most of us didn't perceive it as just some old, stuffy academic subject or unlistenable chaos. There is clearly a strong desire for fluid, unstructured music, and jazz could fill that perfectly. There has been a rise in electronic music (speedcore, D&B, jungle beat, etc.) that is like jazz in its freedom and lack of structure, but doesn't sound like what the average listener would perceive as "jazz." Many even use very "jazzy" chords and rhythms. This gets me to thinking that jazz artists could look to a slightly more electronic sound to renew interest in the genre. Many jazz standards would sound super cool and modern if you added a few synths and raised the tempo.
These are just my thoughts though.
@@lars1588 You may be right about the electronic possibilities, though that's not for me. I've rediscovered early New Orleans jazz (which I consider to be a kind of folk music) and this is still played by a lot of musicians, though the more commercial offshoot (Dixieland jazz) is more prevalent. Logically, there are overlaps and the two styles can be hard to distinguish. Together they make up what is loosely called Traditional jazz. I'm saying that it's still a huge sub culture, even if it is diminishing.
With the most interesting and artistic music, some people will always preserve it, and I want to be one of those persons. The concept of rip-roaring, crowd-pleasing Dixieland jazz will probably fade away as the real commercial opportunities disappear and the name Dixieland itself slips further into the un-PC dustbin, due to recent allegations that it alludes to a culture patronised by white supremacists. Notably very, very few black jazz musicians aspire or admit to playing "Dixieland jazz".
King Oliver used the name Dixie Syncopators for one of his bands, and it's the only concession I'm aware of. Confusingly, Louis Armstrong is credited with establishing the Dixieland line-up and system of individual solos, but I don't think he ever used the word. He wasn't fond of labels anyway, and when you're a star, there's no need to use them.
The rest of us may need labels so we can sell our music (expediently) to bookers, but like I said elsewhere, the pop culture concept of covers and tribute bands is seeping into jazz. So at a commercial level, it may already be more important to say "we play Dizzy Gillespie music", than to say "we play bebop jazz", or say "I play/sing Diana Krall music", more than say I play/sing swing standards and bossanovas". It's a shame. I regard a system of stylistic labels as less awful than dividing ourselves into tribute bands and little else.
@@Zoco101 I understand what you mean. I think the oldest jazz music should also be explored. I have great respect and appreciation for that music, despite not enjoying it personally. The history is rich and intertwined with greater events that still affect us today.
All my feels put into words. Thank you very much.
Thank you for this thought-provoking subject. Really enjoyed watching this.
"There are so many jazz snobs around, telling you what jazz should be. And as soon as that happens, the form is hobbled." This is really profound, especially given its stream-of-consciousness origin, and it reminds me of something John Scofield said back in the 80s, which is sort of the consumer-end corollary. "If you go around comparing one kind of music to another, you lose the beauty of listening to any of it."
That’s what you get when you slap a tittle of master on a person who followed the rules to the point, and graduated SC. They “did it right” so now they feel the need to correct everyone, to help them get on their “level”
That kinda proves the comment of the teaching process itself (as practices in higher education) is in direct conflict with what it tries to achieve.
I mean they tell you to go ahead and break all the rules and be unique when for the past 5 years you were punished for breaking the rules and rewarded for doing things exactly as you were taught
The gigging infrastructure, the test bed of ideas and forming style has been on its ar5e for the last 20 years. Pubs and venues have Sky Sports where there was once live music. As a young jazz musician coming up in the 90s early 2000s and presenting my own compositions I found that the old guys who came out and supported the 'jazz' scene wanted standard's and bebop and they had to be kept happy. We were also competing with DJs, techno, hip hop, house and briefly there was a fusion but it was shortlived. Then came the Internet and as you say the explosion of 'jazz degrees' creating an orthodoxy.
Jazzy Drum and Bass wasn't so bad - hardly anyone knows that happened too, which is kind of funny
Nu jazz is still going on in some places in Europe
Many thanks for this passionate and insightful video!
I love this. You hit every nail on the head.
Of course most keyboardists, most drummers and most vocalists of the 1950 sounded pretty much the same at that time. When saying that Dave Brubeck, Bill Evans, Chick Corea and Herbie Hancock are all different it is talking about musicians whose music has been popular for 60 years now.
They survive as known musicians with "different sounds" because the thousands of similar musicians at that time have faded away. The ones who didn't stand out enough - gone.
It is a bit like saying that a production car that was built 60 years ago is a fantastic car - when the hundreds of thousands of the same car were lemons, rusting away or being notoriously unreliable. The survivors are not representative of what either cars or musicians "on average" were at that time - there were thousands of them and most of them didn't differ much either.
Andy, thank you. You've thoroughly explained and articulated what I've felt for years.
yes he has done a great job.
Thanks for articulating so colourfully what’s needed to be expressed and what many of us think.
Thank you thank you thank you! I needed that so much!
I'm a well established self taught harmonica teacher, singer and guitarist. The one thing about my style is I never wanted to be like any other musician, I just wanted to make my own music. It's been a long haul for me but after several decades I've finally achieved that goal. From here on in it's only going to get better.
that sounds great! I'd love to hear your songs.
@@smideralessandro9124 thanks. Look up the channel Lord Stompy. Two of my best originals on it are "ouzo the clown" and "psychoward baby". Psychoward baby is my harmonica student playing. My albums are on Bandcamp. Cheers
I found your insight fascinating and completely true. In fact, you touched on something midway through your video that I wanted to highlight. This phenomenon is broader than the jazz genre. It has slowly permeated others like rock, country, and pop music. When you spoke of legacy artists in jazz, it made me think of all the unique rock bands from my youth. They all had their own sound. Yes, Zeppelin, Beatles, Skynyrd, Pink Floyd, Queen, Boston, Doors..... I could go in forever. It is why many of us from the older generation are tuning out new artists. It's so regurgitated it becomes boring to listen to.
A really informative video. Thanks again Andy
Really cool video! I really appreciate the easy way to follow your thoughts on this subject.
Having gone to one of those notable schools with the unwritten motto, "Higher, Faster, Louder" I have to say you've nailed it. However, it was not the teachers who drove that. We students drove each other that way. We played what we thought are peers wanted to hear. Peer pressure was the strongest driver and the players with the most "chops" ruled the playground. Players would string together lines they transcribed like taking great poetry and cutting up each line and throwing it on the floor to read it out of order - no where near the beauty or meaning. More posturing to impress than playing anything meaningful. Jazz and blues are story tellers' art forms and we forgot that stories are meant to be shared with a listener. If we had understood that, there would have been more variation on the band stand. What should have been was that our performances became like the story teller's gift to the listener - playing too someone rather than at them. My wife put it this way one day when listening to some jazz CD's in the car. "Sounds like some show off saying 'look at me! Look at what I can do!'" She wasn't impressed obviously and she's not a musician, but she picked that up right away. That was one of several experiences I had that changed the way I think about my music making. You were spot on with this.
Creative musicians are not valued in any genre today. In jazz, having everything handed to you complete with rules hinders real assimilation of the music. If you can't hear it and cop it yourself don't play it. Also, everything is a competition which inhibits the pursuit of originality.
As much as I enjoy a good Top 'X' list, these social and cultural discussions of the music forms we here tend to celebrate are far more interesting. You always seem to have thought provoking things to share. Good on ya, mate.
I really enjoyed this video Andy! Some really good points!!
Amazing Andy!!! Absolutely loved this post. It's your old mucker here from Kiddi - circa 92/93! Love hearing your thoughts on music, you had an encyclopedic knowledge back then! Would love you to do your top 10 albums from each decade! ... 👊
Love it. You point vague unease I've had for a long time that I'd never articulated - why I don't care for music that I theoretically should like and why so many virtuosos leave me cold.
This is a great commentary and applies to all kinds of musical expression. I live mostly in the "classical music" world and the exact same phenomenon happens as well.
Same with hip-hop. Same with movies. Same with electronic music. It's because conformity overall is encouraged and essentially enforced more than ever. There is a huge homogenization of thought that transcends music and it's just showing in music. Mechanical repetition respective to the genre or topic. I thought I'd escape that in hip-hop so I learned jazz. Realized the problem is widespread.
Too many people learn to copy notes and licks, they don't understand that notes are just a vehicle to express individual artistic feeling.
Very insightful! Much appreciated!
A couple of great lines in there for sure - ‘jazz is like a nuclear reactor’ and ‘the influences on jazz always come from outside of jazz’ 🔥🔥🔥
Excellent vid
Fantastic - I learned so much!!!
I've been listening to and playing jazz since 1957 or so. I find Andy's exposition very interesting. I don't agree with everything he says, but it all well worth listening to. He has obviously thought a lot about jazz and listened a lot.
It boils down to being an individual character, having individual real experiences, thinking indvidual thoughts, feeling individual feelings and being and expressing what you want and need to express when you play. A recognisable timbre and tone can also play a role of course, but it’s who you ARE. Play something FROM YOUR LIFE!
Truth my friend. Respect
Man a lot of this describes what is currently happening to hip hop in today, just in its own form.
Thnx for your video. Keep more coming
HI Andy! I couldn't agree more! Great video!
TRUTH TRUTH TRUTH TRUTH…. And nothing but TRUTH. You’re absolutely right. And as a drummer, haven’t you noticed most “Jazz” drummers emulating Chris Dave and using similar dark cymbals and layered cymbals, rattles on the hi-hat, etc.?
Being a jazz novice, this was a great history lesson. Thanks.
Great points. I stumbled onto this video. Couldn't agree more with the major points!!
Thank you Andy! This is the best commentary on jazz and music today I’ve heard for a long time. At the same time it is a great advice for anyone who wants to become a musician or an artist. This is the way we should learn jazz, music, art and it reflects not only the music world but our life in general these days. There is too much of everything available and we should reduce ourselves to one thing and focus on one subject, our inner voice.
I've been learning the trumpet for three years and I really love it. I play every day for two or three hours. I have absolutely nothing to say but I love playing along with my favourite players and I've transcribed well over a hundred tunes. I hope that one day I may find my own "voice", but there's no sign of that happening yet!
Fascinating stuff, Andy. Insert 'Prog' here, I think. I keep coming across what I'd call 'apprenticeship' albums, where the bands are emulating their heroes. You then hope they'll go on to find their own voice.
This is a really interesting video, thank you 🙏
I'm a trumpeter and an ardent listener of jazz and I am not surprised that some asked this question. When I see new guys, with the exception of a few you find that the MO is to see how many notes you can play in different ways in a phrase. Musicality seems to not be focus.
as a Gen Z jazz player i had this exact conversation topic with my girlfriend the other week. i’m strongly against the idea of “all music that’s old is always superior to new” but it’s caused some problems, the attention span reduction and the culture that rewards being flashy, the “clout” era. i think it’s way easier to grab attention with some fast or technical playing than it is to hold attention with someone slowing down and focusing on and listening to how the rhythmic, harmonic, and melodic choices create a collage of emotion. a lot of people say they won’t even connect to music without lyrics. but when i sit someone down and have them just close their eyes and listen to blue in green, they connect. it’s just a rarer activity in this day and age i guess. giving something your undivided attention, unless it’s fast, snappy with how it holds you.
i’m someone who listens to the same few albums front to back, for months or years. not to absorb the music per se, but to see how the music was used to express the individual personality of the artist behind it. but it’s much easier to take a flashy technique than it is to admire and break down and resynthesize the bold nature of being oneself in an uncompromising way. these days you don’t have to sit with yourself and understand who you are if you don’t want to. you can just nearly effortlessly, mindlessly, fill your time and your head with anything and everything to gain temporary placation, but in sacrifice of really understanding WHY we consume what we consume and why we actually like it. it’s so important to be intentional and understanding with what drives us.
people in my age group do so many things and post online to feel good when they get approval from others who are equally as ignorant of their authentic self. it’s an unhealthy cycle. but i beg the generational finger pointers and critics to understand humanity is not a monolith, and that while it may be a larger group of people swept up by these times, there are still some of us who value the true approval of our authentic selves over the shallow approval of the inauthentic, or disconnected masses.
Plus there’s so much music and the accessibility is so flippant that it’s taken for granted, in having so many choices there you end up not really taking the effort to try to deeply connect with an artist and an album. consumer habits are way different than before.
the average listener is often going to be impressed by fast playing. those that want to be “in“ on it and will see something kind of flashy and not necessarily understand or connect to why it’s cool. but they’ll see that a lot of other people like it so they will just act like they do too. The social effect of “well everybody else likes it so I guess” is very real.
as well, from the creator perspective, since Jazz is no longer pop it’s almost become a bit of a counterculture thing where If the music is not likely to be appreciated by a proportionally large crowd of people, jazz musicians want to gain affirmation to feel superior in another way so they focus on making music with this heady technical refinement as the goal. instead of the technical refinement being a part of the path to get to the goal of emotional expression.
he kinda covered it in the videos but imo, playing a wild series of scale patterns or pulling for wild chord substitutions or extensions is only cool if you’re doing it because it’s given emotion ideally fits the situation in the music. fabricating the situation just to show off a crazy chord just because knowing the technique is cool is like using a new fancy big word you learned in every circumstance even it’s not ideal or practical. only a small in group is gonna appreciate that. anyone can feel when that new harmony comes in at just the right moment with just the right feeling if they’re listening.
pardon the long story, but it was validating to hear someone who has your generational experience mirror the attitude i was sharing so recently. the more these ideas are shared the more this common human spirit will be nourished and emerge in unique ways to continue to exude the “stand alone complex” we chase after, seeing that same reason why we love Jazz show up from anywhere, in anyone.
we gotta all equally hear what’s working and not working. Seeing the new gen like or play jazz for or in the “wrong” ways like discussed in this video is a reason to cry out because that ability to be bold and confident and go through the arduous process to have your own voice is a long road but is inspiring to not only oneself but those that witness it within you. If so many of y’all say “we’ve seen this all before” then there’s clearly credence and it inspires me to take grand risks and push myself in how I can get a truer understanding of myself and what I want to see, why I don’t like some things of what I’m seeing, and how to translate those feelings into music.
There truly is something deeper and more beautiful that this genre allows and I believe I’m gaining more of a developed conception of that and what to look for.
i guess my point is generationally lots of external things change and those have influence on people and trends but they don’t entirely change them. i don’t think im some special, different person for loving jazz as an expression of an individuals spirit. there will always be people like us, in every generation.
thanks for the great vid. hope someone can understand where i’m coming from :) please, if you have some advice you feel you need to share to a young person who wants to listen, i would be grateful to hear from those who are experienced, considerate and deeply connection to their passions, one being this art. Please recommend me an album!!
Thank-you for your thoughts. I am trying to develop my playing and I believe I have found my voice (Trumpet). Our trio plays every week for over 3 years. I attempt to improv as uniquely each night. Lots of people tell me to to make longer runs and increase speed and range, but I believe my true voice is lyrical lines and thoughtful spaces in between. Love my instrument and really starting to find security and grace in my playing (not tooting my own 'horn') Pun intended. Thanks again.
".....I believe my true voice is lyrical lines and thoughtful spaces in between....."
Now what you've got to do is start turning your back on the audience, scowl constantly, and develop a vocabulary consisting entirely of one word: "m - - - - - f - - - - - ". Joking aside, there's certainly a history of that - Miles in particular, of course - but your note choice will not be his, or anyone else's. And that's the real point. Having your own note choice and rhythm.
so much vindication for me in what is being said here. thank you. glad i took the road i took to get here.
Thanks for the video, I agree completely. I've subscribed, not just because I agree with you, but because, as a musician myself, this is a familiar subject for me. I look forward to more.
This can also be said about pop, rock and country. That's Yes. That's Creedence. That's the Allman Brothers. Can't say that very often anymore.
Totally agree. There's a saying: the best thing you can do is try and sound like your hero. The worst thing you can do is succeed...social media rewards the unoriginal.
LOVE this! thank you!!🙏🙏🙏🙏
Thank you so much sir. I appreciate your thoughts and analysis.
The proliferation of tribute bands seems to fit into this conversation. It’s like Cosplay music. But at the same time, it draws an audience. It makes gigs.
I don’t know much about Jazz - but this is so true for the musical genres that move me. I believe that Internet / UA-cam etc. have accelerated this trend way beyond recordings. What I believe has happened is that there has been a move towards democratization- so that more folks are able to possess the tools to “create music”. The problem is that that creative spark - the impulse to speak with one’s own voice, has lessened. People end up slavishly copying whatever is in vogue.
Very well said! So succinct!
I'm 69 yrs old and listening to jazz since I was 13 and I have to agree with this point .
Every molecule opened to the jazz dimension by your reflections.
Great video. Thank you, lots of good ideas. I wonder if the difference between the huge growth in jazz during the 40s and late 60s/70s and the present day doesn't just come down to where the music was learned? Those players experimented on the bandstand, and most of their learning was there. Also, the balance of their live playing vs their education/practice was greatly weighted towards playing, where now the education and practice seems to greatly outweigh live playing for most players, or at least those that I'm familiar with. For a period of time, Miles would painstakingly critique what his players had played after every performance, similar to what he was subjected to when he played with Monk who told him that he'd played a song wrong until about the 60th performance (from his autobiography). There's another story where he reportedly whispered to Mike Stern, just as they were going on, to play completely differently from what he'd played the previous night. Maybe it was a head game, but he wanted the exploration on the bandstand, not in the practice room. Another trend that I've been told about is players playing long passages from the solos of earlier players -- in live performances. All of the knowledge, but none of the exploration! Thanks again.
Part of the problem is there are far fewer bandstands these days than there used to be. People consume their music via streaming services and not by going to clubs with live music. When they go out they just want to hear familiar recordings of songs they already know
This is really eye opening as a country/surf musician who's been trying to break into jazz for 10 years.
I've always seen it as this monolithic thing full of strict enforcers of unspoken specific theory.
I always struggled with exploring the theory and it felt like there were unspoken rules that everyone knew. It definitely helps contextualize jazz in the history of music and the modern era.
I like a lot of what you said here resonates with me, Andy, and this feels like the start of an exploration of where we’re at and where to go from here…I am not a Jazz musician or player, but have been hugely influenced by Jazz in its many forms, and by the creativity, artistry and sometimes virtuosity of the musicians that composed and played. That spark is still alive but seems harder to find, whether that’s “true” or not, I think the root of the dearth of individual voices starts with the vehicle, ie the compositions or the arrangements/interpretations of covers, the same syndrome as found in pop music, you’ve got to start with something you can really express yourself with. Life experience is also a part of one’s voice- when I was young in the early days of the band, for sure, a part of what drove us was emulating our heroes and showing off to our peers, but fortunately we had a double apprenticeship of a five album record contract to learn how to write and record songs and loads of gigs to learn how to sing, to play and structure a show and interact with different audiences. I’m waiting to hear how some of the young talent might evolve - but they need to find or create fresh vehicles that challenge them and us as listeners, in order to play the new.
VERY well presented and MUCH needed for ALL to hear !! a5 STAR JPB !!
Very thought provoking. Most of this applies to other music, and clarifies a lot of my recent internal musings on, in my case, traditional fiddle playing. I know, I know, but I was a big Charlie Parker fan at one time. Still am really.
I specially feel that most new Jazz piano players for the past 30 years or so, sounds like Keith Jarrett.
Absolutely brilliant you are one of the few people that seems to actually know what he’s talking about.
One of the best videos i have ever watched on youtube. subscribed.