Excellent posts all. nsp makes a key point:
**** I think where this discussion gets bogged down is in STYLISTIC differences. ****
**** that when jazz music changes stylistically that the listener may change how they listen to the music to be able to appreciate what the musicians are attempting to convey. Or to put it another way it takes a different set of ears to absorb and appreciate a new direction. Some people try and they get it , others try and the music does not resonate with them. ****
That point is so important and goes to what I am afraid is an old stereotype. That of young players and the whole “music school” myth.
**** I've also noticed how today's artists can excel at playing classical, but not jazz, or they can play jazz as long as it's written down. That tells me artists of today, are as good as artists of yesterday, when it comes to their instrument, but they haven't mastered the jazz vocabulary or feel. ****
O-10, I have to respectfully correct you on that point. I am not sure where or why you have this notion that good players today can play jazz only when it is written down or that they can’t excel at it. That suggests that they don’t improvise. It is simply not true and goes to nsp’s point. It also seems to contradict some of what you have said in your last few posts. If they are not improvising it is not jazz. THAT is a given. They most certainly can improvise; and some do it brilliantly. They play in a style that apparently does not resonate with you. That’s fine, but don’t short change them. If anything, many excellent young players today have absorbed a broader vocabulary than most of the old guard. It is the style (feel) that is a distillation of all the previous styles that perhaps does not resonate with you. Moreover, young players today still hone their craft in clubs and jam sessions as they always have. That is another stereotype. On a smaller scale than in the past, but on any given night in NYC you can find good jazz at several clubs. What is different is that in SOME cases they also have a more formal training as instrumentalists. They can do things on their instruments that many of the older players could not. That opens a lot of possibilities. Again, it is the style that is different.
**** I think where this discussion gets bogged down is in STYLISTIC differences. ****
**** that when jazz music changes stylistically that the listener may change how they listen to the music to be able to appreciate what the musicians are attempting to convey. Or to put it another way it takes a different set of ears to absorb and appreciate a new direction. Some people try and they get it , others try and the music does not resonate with them. ****
That point is so important and goes to what I am afraid is an old stereotype. That of young players and the whole “music school” myth.
**** I've also noticed how today's artists can excel at playing classical, but not jazz, or they can play jazz as long as it's written down. That tells me artists of today, are as good as artists of yesterday, when it comes to their instrument, but they haven't mastered the jazz vocabulary or feel. ****
O-10, I have to respectfully correct you on that point. I am not sure where or why you have this notion that good players today can play jazz only when it is written down or that they can’t excel at it. That suggests that they don’t improvise. It is simply not true and goes to nsp’s point. It also seems to contradict some of what you have said in your last few posts. If they are not improvising it is not jazz. THAT is a given. They most certainly can improvise; and some do it brilliantly. They play in a style that apparently does not resonate with you. That’s fine, but don’t short change them. If anything, many excellent young players today have absorbed a broader vocabulary than most of the old guard. It is the style (feel) that is a distillation of all the previous styles that perhaps does not resonate with you. Moreover, young players today still hone their craft in clubs and jam sessions as they always have. That is another stereotype. On a smaller scale than in the past, but on any given night in NYC you can find good jazz at several clubs. What is different is that in SOME cases they also have a more formal training as instrumentalists. They can do things on their instruments that many of the older players could not. That opens a lot of possibilities. Again, it is the style that is different.