well known jazz artists

[Soul Stream]

Went down to a local jazz club tonight to hook up with a drummer I was needing to talk to. He was playing in a rhythm section backing up a little jazz jam. This is where it all starts, and not to knock people beginning or playing for fun, it was pretty hard to listen to.

It also made me think, often times we'll nit pick about who's the best, or even worthy of mention, on any particular instrument. But let's face it, 99% of the people we may be critical of are, in truth, monsters, relatively speaking.

Too hear Donald Byrd and say he's no Miles Davis is one thing. To hear Donald Byrd or Carmell Jones and then hear any number of local trumpet players attempt the changes is a whole nuther ballgame.

So, hats off to all these MF, old and new who we listen to....from Bobby Hackett to Eric Alexander....they's some bad cats no matter what you think about the individual styles of music they play....

[Rooster_Ties]

Yeah, several years ago (mid-90's) I remember going to a few afternoon jam sessions here in Kansas City, almost always at the insisting of a couple friends who somehow seemed to love that sort of thing. Yikes, it was like pulling teeth to hear anything more than about the same 25 tunes, and even those were butchered - to put it mildly. Every piano player also sang, in seemed, which only made it worse.

By comparison, even some national "smooth-jazz" acts are almost listenable, at least in the sense that they at least have some command of their instruments, on some level.

The sad thing is the vast number of people for whom the weekend-afternoon jam session is what jazz is all about. That's pretty much what they think jazz is. Then again, for most of these people, the afternoon jam session is more of a social scene too.

[Alexander Hawkins]

The sad thing is the vast number of people for whom the weekend-afternoon jam session is what jazz is all about. That's pretty much what they think jazz is. Then again, for most of these people, the afternoon jam session is more of a social scene too.

I agree with both of you in outline, but I would also say that by the same token, it is great that jazz is a music where you can 'have a go', participate, enjoy yourself, experience the rush of taking a 'good' chorus when all your others are mediocre, and the rest of it..! I think that's part of the strength of the music as an art-form: it will support the 'genius' and the schoolkid/Sunday afternoon-er, as well as foster the individual and the social group.

Oops. That sounded very pretentious, but you know what I mean!

[Soul Stream]

I'm not putting down jams at all. They're a vital part of the learning experience for most every jazz artist at some point. You have to learn how to play on the bandstand, and that's where it starts.

However, it does make you realize the accomplishments of a professional jazz musician are quite substantial whether you like the individual style or not.

Local, regional, national or international...it's all good.

[A Lark Ascending]

Could not agree more.

It's great to discuss why we like one recording by a player over another. Or why one player is more to our taste than another.

But when such debates degenerate into 'X is crap compared with Y' (sometimes the initial post starts with such a premis!) then we've lost sight of the big picture.

Keith Jarrett or Miles Davis or Mike Westbrook or whoever may have made some albums which don't affect particular listeners; all of their output might be irrelevant to some listeners. But we need to show respect for the overall outstanding musicianship. And the willingness to take risk in doing things which might not come off.

I've always felt that the difference between a good and a bad recording lies more within our own perceptions than within the music itself. But then I'm a Fundamentalist Relativist!

Edited May 27, 2003 by Bev Stapleton