The Future of Jazz

matzentrpt · Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 5:50 pm Post subject: The Future of Jazz

Hey all, brace your self, loaded question

I wanted to see what some of you guys thought about the direction of Jazz.

-Do you believe that it is going to seriously change anytime soon? Like a person to the likes of Bird or something is going to come around and change the music for good and be super influential in it's direction? If so who will it possibly be?

-Which way do you think, or would like to see it go? Should it merge/expand with other types of music? Like Roy, and his many predecessors?

-Or, do you think it's sweet just the way it is?

I know this question is pretty large, but I would really love to read peoples opinion about this. Thanks in advace! -Max-
_________________
Max Matzen, DMA
Associate Professor of Trumpet
Utah State University

thatleadguy · Veteran Member Joined: 16 Nov 2004 Posts: 293

I can only speak from my experiences.

What I've noticed is that there are many young people involved and interested (sometimes mystified) by jazz music and it's rich heritage of musicians. I truely believe that jazz has a place in our future. There is a growing awareness of jazz - Chris Botti has done amazing things for jazz. Some who may not have been exposed to it might have heard something they liked. He was on Oprah and QVC doing concerts. Queen Latifa, even though she's not singing "jazz" music, now works with an actual big band. Check our her newest album. Harry Connick Jr. has a huge number of fans, and might I say, one of the FINEST jazz ensembles of all time.

I believe jazz has a very secure future. There are so many young musicians who are really taking time to study the past, learn their horns, going to jam sessions, trascribing, etc...

Jazz has a future.

Gurukid · Veteran Member Joined: 26 Dec 2004 Posts: 124

Jazz has a future, as long as there are good teachers that explain the history of the Jazz, and expain the meaning of jazz in his own words -- and encourage the students to seek for their own meaning of Jazz.

That is only the start.

bophead · Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:38 pm Post subject:

wow this IS a loaded question. There are teachers who seem to be working hard to keep the music in the museum, under glass. There are others who are screaming from the rafters about what jazz is and who is playing it. There are standard bearers like Horace Silver who are continuing to make the music new and fresh. There are those like the Marsalis brothers who push the envelope in every direction. Fantastic players like Roy Hargrove and Nick Payton who are trying new things and pushing new idea forward. Players like Christian McBride being involved in programs like the Philadelphia Experiment and bringing those arrangements forward. The whole time all of this new music is happening, there are the nay sayers who scream from the bellfry that players like Hargrove and Payton are doing the music a disservice, that Wallace Rooney is insignificant, that Pat Methany hasn't written anything worth listening to ...
Jazz music is alive and well and will continue to be alive and significant so long as it is honored and kept out of the museum.
_________________
Earl
CG Benge

Sooner · Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 8:46 pm Post subject:

http://www.deepdiscountdvd.com/dvd.cfm?itemid=MVD098659&promotion=y

This was a feature that was filmed in 1959 about the future of jazz. It's a very interesting film even if its message is a bit outdated.

Jazz parallels classical music more than popular music at this point in time. Most of what gets played is a standard repetiore from a large sampling of different styles. Sure you still have new and fresh jazz compositions, but they are about as far from mainstream as the modern classical music scene is.

Jazz combo's function now in the same way that a string quartet does. They play from a set repetiore that has changed very little recently and they only play in limited situations. Mostly at parties, in bars or at the few remaining jass clubs, as well as in the concert hall (mostly academic). This is similar to the way that a string quartet will play mostly at weddings and receptions.
_________________
N.Y. Bach 31 bell S-bore (.440) 50XX, Bob Reeves 41sv-692s, Bach MV 1.5C/warburton 9 BB for legit.

Proffessional poker dealer/player (helps support my music habit) and trumpet player of the Octopi.

Now a synth junkie as well

cjdjazztpt · Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 9:08 pm Post subject: Re: The Future of Jazz

Yamahaguy · Heavyweight Member Joined: 09 Dec 2004 Posts: 3992

I agree, there are many fine players out there. Matter of fact, was out in Long Beach for the jazz convention and saw a bunch of very talented young guys. Even the famous cats like Bobby Shew, Wayne Bergeron, Chase Sanborn, and Terell Stafford are great players in their own right. But the question of doing something "new" isn't fair because I think its all been done already. Fast, high, out, you name it- what do you define as new?

surfhorn · Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:26 am Post subject:

I agree with Bophead: keep jazz out of the museum. Groups, especially big bands, just can't keep playing the old chestnuts; there has to be new compositions that incorporate new directions to keep that format alive. I've seen this happen with college big bands.
_________________
Pleasure Point Brass Band
Bach 180S 37 ML, 1970
Kanstul WB1600 (silver)
Olds Super, 1964 w/ C.M. Purviance 5*K4
Marcinkiewicz: E8.4 Shew 1.75
Schilke Flugel; Kanstul Flugel
Kanstul Valve Bone
Surfboard quiver: 15

urbie watrous · Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:24 am Post subject: Re: The Future of Jazz

redface · Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 9:05 am Post subject:

jazz_trpt · Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:30 pm Post subject: Re: The Future of Jazz

Simply Swingin' · Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:49 pm Post subject:

Mine's a short answer.

I feel it's getting stonger, but I hate the fact that people are acting all artsy fartsy with it.
_________________
"Behold, I make all things new."- Jesus Christ, God Almighty
------------------------
Zeus Guarnerius ZTR 900
5C
------------------------
Keep swingin'...

Yamahaguy · Heavyweight Member Joined: 09 Dec 2004 Posts: 3992

"Artsy fartsy?" Whatever that means, I know it's reaching younger people which I believe is one of the most important things in keeping jazz strong. Saw a bunch of kids (HS,MS,even elementary) playing and listening to jazz at IAJE this past weekend. Kudos to all educators and players who are passionate about this music and enjoy teaching and/or playing jazz!

Simply Swingin' · Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 3:29 pm Post subject:

The fact that it is, most definitely, getting out to the younger culture is great. But, I'm not going to take time to explain what I mean, 'cause it's not important anyway.
_________________
"Behold, I make all things new."- Jesus Christ, God Almighty
------------------------
Zeus Guarnerius ZTR 900
5C
------------------------
Keep swingin'...

matzentrpt · Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:05 pm Post subject:

I know Ive delt a few seriously unnecessary blows to the whole academia thing and how people should really learn jazz (what the hell do I know??

) about a year ago on the TH, and I still think about how dumb all of the stuff I was saying was!!

I agree, it's (school) a great thing that it exists because it is something that stimulates interest, and sustains this art to a large extent.
_________________
Max Matzen, DMA
Associate Professor of Trumpet
Utah State University

Xenoman · Heavyweight Member Joined: 19 Nov 2001 Posts: 1209

Today I heard a group called "The Deep Blue Organ Trio" on my Sirius jazz radio. They did a remake of the Earth Wind and Fire tune -- "Can't Hide Love" and it was tight. TIGHT. I think I recall another group (The Bad Plus?) tackling songs like Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit." What do you think of that? Miles used to take popular songs of the day and play them in a jazz format. Perhaps this is the way to keep jazz modern and more approachable. I think folks tend to warm up to the music more if it is something they are familiar with. Sure you slip in some standards but why not a tune of the time as well?

I for one don't think jazz is about innovation. I think it is like any other music with a trend to go in one direction or another with time. I hear too many musicians being innovative for sake of innovation. In those cases it sounds like the musical equivalent of dumping a tray of spoons on the floor. The BEST innovation is usually a natural progression and I think the history of music shows this. I also don't like the fact that a bunch of musicians are dismissed simply because they are not innovative. Play something that the crowd enjoys. Mission accomplished in my book.

_________________
Eric M. Brewington
http://www.jazzbrew.com

mulligan stew · Heavyweight Member Joined: 02 Jul 2003 Posts: 1846

mulligan stew · Heavyweight Member Joined: 02 Jul 2003 Posts: 1846

Please explain, then, how "smooth jazz" is an evolutionary step in the history of jazz.
_________________
Scott
My trio:

https://vectortrio.bandcamp.com/

Xenoman · Heavyweight Member Joined: 19 Nov 2001 Posts: 1209

From my dog earred dictionary at work...

Evolution: a gradual process of change or development...

I think smooth jazz would fall into that category. I think it is designed to make the music more approachable to the general public... an evolution away from some avant guard stuff perhaps?

For the record, I'm not a fan of that style of music but I think it is a matter of choice. If some people choose to listen to it (my wife loves it), more power to them.

Is it possible that smooth jazz can occupy one of the many SUB jazz categories? Latin, Big Band, Fusion, etc...
_________________
Eric M. Brewington
http://www.jazzbrew.com

mulligan stew · Heavyweight Member Joined: 02 Jul 2003 Posts: 1846

Hi Eric--

You'll note that nowhere did I disparage the genre known as smooth jazz. I just pointed out that it's not part of the evolution of jazz. It was commented that "many jazz musicians are snobs and do not embrace evolution of the idiom." In all my years as a serious working musician all I have been about is the evolution of jazz.

Let's note now that evolution doesn't just mean change, it means change for the better:

evolution

n 1: a process in which something passes by degrees to a different stage (especially a more advanced or mature stage); "the development of his ideas took many years"; "the evolution of Greek civilization"; "the slow development of her skill as a writer" [syn: development] [ant: degeneration]
Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University

So, of course it's all a matter of choice. I wasn't disparaging a music that probably is better labelled easy listening or light instrumental. But equally I won't be labelled as some kind of reactionary jazz snob who can't stand change...that's ludicrous. Especially when talking about "smooth jazz"....
_________________
Scott
My trio:

https://vectortrio.bandcamp.com/