UK Jazz: why do the 1950s-70s attract more attention?

[A Lark Ascending]

All it takes is the ability to not confuse what you like with what is 'great'. Or not worry about what you like needing to be great.

I wallow endlessly in nostalgia - music I learnt to love when I first got the bug for music, music that evokes a nostalgic world that never was (my early 20thC English classical fixation, the appeal of the Faux-rural in folk music). I'm interested in well researched and carefully weighed theories about what was significant in musical history and that has often guided my explorations. But it only overlaps in some places with what I like.

I suspect our enjoyment of music is coloured by many things - times and places associated with where we heard it, the fact that we have been told something is marvellous so we are predisposed to like it. I wonder how reliable our memory is of those concerts we recall as crowning moments of listening - did we really hear it like that or were there longeurs we've excised from the authorised version we tell ourselves.

Most of my lifetime's listening has been through recorded music with the occasional concert so recorded music is my reality. I imagine for others that would be reversed.

Edited February 13, 2015 by A Lark Ascending

[A Lark Ascending]

There's an interesting editorial in this month's FRoots with Ian Anderson at his most waspish, denigrating the 'fawning' reviews of the new Dylan album and giving Sinatra a good kicking.

He declares himself an admirer of Dylan but points out how this was forged hearing the 60s albums emerge with the spaces in between (rather than buying the complete boxed set and becoming an instant aficionado (what I think of as Schnabel Syndrome).

I'd suggest the same thing is going on here. Those who heard 50s to 70s Jazz in real time had a very different experience from those who caught up retrospectively and probably grabbed a bunch of the recordings in one batch.

[BillF]

hearing the 60s albums emerge with the spaces in between (rather than buying the complete boxed set and becoming an instant aficionado

I'd suggest the same thing is going on here. Those who heard 50s to 70s Jazz in real time had a very different experience from those who caught up retrospectively and probably grabbed a bunch of the recordings in one batch.

There's a lot of truth there. Those I heard evolve, album by album, included Blakey and Miles from 1957, Coltrane, Ornette, Archie Shepp, Bill Evans, Oliver Nelson and Roland Kirk.

[A Lark Ascending]

Whereas with all of those I started picking up albums from around 1977 when they were already 'historic' - and with only the vaguest attention to chronology.

[sgcim]

There's an interesting editorial in this month's FRoots with Ian Anderson at his most waspish, denigrating the 'fawning' reviews of the new Dylan album and giving Sinatra a good kicking.

He declares himself an admirer of Dylan but points out how this was forged hearing the 60s albums emerge with the spaces in between (rather than buying the complete boxed set and becoming an instant aficionado (what I think of as Schnabel Syndrome).

I'd suggest the same thing is going on here. Those who heard 50s to 70s Jazz in real time had a very different experience from those who caught up retrospectively and probably grabbed a bunch of the recordings in one batch.

That last paragraph is quite true. I was posting about all the books I've been reading about UK jazz (and other music) of the 60s and 70s, and one UK musician from that period got very indignant. He said that these young authors of said books knew nothing about what those times were really about, and were just spouting hyperbole.

[Rabshakeh]

I stumbled across this old thread today. An interesting discussion.

One possibility that is not considered save for in one aspect* is the problem of a accessibility.

British jazz in the 1950s - 1970s is mapped. There is lots of information out there in books and on the internet (listicles etc.). People who are interested in finding out about the era can quickly find out who are the important artists and which are their canonical records, all of which have now been reissued and are mostly streamable.

In contrast, British jazz from the 1980s - 1990s is very much unmapped. There is a dearth of good information out there. Courtney Pine is one of the few names that is widely known, with a canonical album attached to his name. But even major groups like the Loose Tubes are rarely discussed, and hard to find and listen to. It is difficult for a younger person to find about their existence. It took me years as a British jazz listener to even hear about them.

This is quite a different situation to the US. Although US jazz after the 70s (a few years ago I would have said after the 60s) is less discussed than what went before, it is still comparatively easy to find out information about it. There are plenty of lists / guides etc out there to help you tell your David Murrays from your Terence Blanchards. There are odd gaps, but most of the information is there. 

Very different for the rest of the world, with some exceptions. 

* I think that the issue of fragmentation mentioned above is part of the accessibility issue.

[JSngry]

Based on my smallish sample size, UK-based jazz today is on the whole far more interesting than it has ever been. Seems more indigenous and less imitative and/or reactive.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. 

[Rabshakeh]

11 hours ago, JSngry said:

Based on my smallish sample size, UK-based jazz today is on the whole far more interesting than it has ever been. Seems more indigenous and less imitative and/or reactive.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. 

I don't think that the late 60s / 70s scene was any more or less indigenous (not a great word in this context) or imitative. Those records mentioned upthread are classic records that sound like their own thing, not like American models.

The current London scene is thriving in terms of sheer wealth of young and youngish talent (it's crazy how many players and groups there are suddenly, and how good they are), but I think it underperforms in terms of album quality so far. Leaving aside the avantgarde scenes, out of the London scene stand outs, only Shabaka Hutching's groups' records have so far struck me as "classics". There's a little too much eclecticism and cross-pollination for it's own sake, and possibly not enough cohesion or songwriting. Lots of pretty good records and very promising players, but maybe not a lot of really great records. Yet.

The Manchester musicians like Nat Birchall and Matthew Halsall seem to produce much stronger records but are much more imitative. Again, opinion only.

[mjazzg]

13 hours ago, JSngry said:

Based on my smallish sample size, UK-based jazz today is on the whole far more interesting than it has ever been. Seems more indigenous and less imitative and/or reactive.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. 

I'd say at least as interesting as the late 60s scene with the SA and Jamaican musicians interacting with the locals 

Today's London scene is less imitative than the 80s "Jazz revival" that I lived through here as a keen new Jazz listener, I agree.

The scene now is drawing from a deep well of musics from a number of diasporas and from the dance scene. It's the influence of those musics that make a minority decry the music made as "not Jazz enough", absolute nonsense. Just listen to Ezra Collective.

Interestingly tomorrow I'm off to see Nubya Garcia and the Nu Civilisation Orchestra play Getz's 'Focus'. So that's a major name of the scene looking backwards. I'm intrigued to hear what they make of it. The Nu Civilisation Orchestra has done a number of takes on classic albums recently.

.

1 hour ago, Rabshakeh said:

I don't think that the late 60s / 70s scene was any more or less indigenous (not a great word in this context) or imitative. Those records mentioned upthread are classic records that sound like their own thing, not like American models.

The current London scene is thriving in terms of sheer wealth of young and youngish talent (it's crazy how many players and groups there are suddenly, and how good they are), but I think it underperforms in terms of album quality so far. Leaving aside the avantgarde scenes, out of the London scene stand outs, only Shabaka Hutching's groups' records have so far struck me as "classics". There's a little too much eclecticism and cross-pollination for it's own sake, and possibly not enough cohesion or songwriting. Lots of pretty good records and very promising players, but maybe not a lot of really great records. Yet.

The Manchester musicians like Nat Birchall and Matthew Halsall seem to produce much stronger records but are much more imitative. Again, opinion only.

As for albums not being "classics" yet we'll give them a chance, even the most established artists are only on their second or third recording. I'd put a vote in for Theon Cross's 'Fyah' being an overlooked classic from the current batch, more so than the Kemet albums.

Halsall and Birchall are on about their tenth album each. They're consistent and I own most of them but wouldn't make a claim for any to be classics I don't think 

I have lots of observations about the 80s scene with Pine, Loose Tubes, Sheppard etc but not really the time. What I would say is it was a lot smaller than the current scene, focussed on fewer artists and mostly in response to the Young Lions in the US (obviously not Loose Tubes who were from a long tradition of UK big bands, see Tippett et al). The scene was fun and had some very good players but didn't feel nearly as originally British or even London as the current crop do

Edited September 14, 2023 by mjazzg

[Rabshakeh]

14 minutes ago, mjazzg said:

As for albums not being "classics" yet we'll give them a chance, even the most established artists are only on their second or third recording. I'd put a vote in for Theon Cross's 'Fyah' being an overlooked classic from the current batch, more so than the Kemet albums.

Agreed on this. Fyah is my favourite non-Shabaka record that the current crop have produced so far. I think it does the best job of assimilating what's going on, has the best songwriting and strongest ideas. Plus it's got that tuba sound. For the rest, I enjoy their playing and look forward to at least a handful more major albums coming out of the scene. 

16 minutes ago, mjazzg said:

I have lots of observations about the 80s scene with Pine, Loose Tubes, Sheppard etc but not really the time. What I would say is it was a lot smaller than the current scene, focussed on fewer artists and mostly in response to the Young Lions in the US (obviously not Loose Tubes who were from a long tradition of UK big bands, see Tippett et al). The scene was fun and had some very good players but didn't feel nearly as originally British or even London as the current crop do

If you're ever tempted, I am very interested.

There's a whole crop of musicians there who are assumed to be well known enough to need no introduction, but who both predated the Internet and have yet to be rediscovered or have serious reissues, meaning that they are effectively invisible. That goes for the Loose Tubes as much as the Jazz Warriors sets.

[mjazzg]

2 minutes ago, Rabshakeh said:

Agreed on this. Fyah is my favourite non-Shabaka record that the current crop have produced so far. I think it does the best job of assimilating what's going on, has the best songwriting and strongest ideas. Plus it's got that tuba sound. For the rest, I enjoy their playing and look forward to at least a handful more major albums coming out of the scene. 

Rosie Turton is my hot tip for a good album next time. Her last ep was very interesting.

[Rabshakeh]

Just now, mjazzg said:

Rosie Turton is my hot tip for a good album next time. Her last ep was very interesting.

Boyd is the one who surprises me the most. Great drummer, good interviews, scene leader. But the records just aren't great. Journey To The Mountain with Bunker Golding was okay, but had Evan Parker on blowing everyone else away.

I'll keep a look out for Rosie Turton.

[mjazzg]

I'm also really enjoying Yusef Dayes' 'Black Classical Music', I can hear the Milford connections 

Just now, Rabshakeh said:

Boyd is the one who surprises me the most. Great drummer, good interviews, scene leader. But the records just aren't great. Journey To The Mountain with Bunker Golding was okay, but had Evan Parker on blowing everyone else away.

I'll keep a look out for Rosie Turton.

I have the Boyd/Binker duo albums. The live one has something to it I thought and the last one with some electronics showed a possible route forward.

I saw Boyd drum with Garcia and he was terrific. Cross was on tuba, Armon-Jones on keys. Hell of a night, made me feel very old with the young crowd really getting into it, no chin stroking in evidence.