Why Doesn't Contemporary Jazz Get Any Respect?

Smooth Jazz is to Jazz as Bubblegum is to Rock. Donny and Marie and the Rolling Stones can both be found in the Rock section but we all know who the real rockers are. Now there are real Jazz musicians creating comtemporary music who are legitimate jazz musicians i.e. Dave Douglas, Greg Osby-but they play sophisticated technically challenging music which is just the oppositie of what smooth jazz is. If you like smooth jazz however enjoy it and perhaps you will learn the difference and graduate to the real deal.

Krelldog, I can assure you that I am not a close minded idiot. You will note that in my previous post I did not insult anyone personally and I think in any meaningful discussion it is pointless to do so and is definately not a goo devate method.

As to your offer of burning me a cd of this smooth jazz, believe me I wouldn't have entered this discussion if I hadn't already been exposed to much of this dribble before.

I have spent my life studying, teaching and playing music. Mostly Jazz and the Saxophone. I come to this argument understing the history, structure andwonder of Jazz as an art form. When I was younger I heard some fusion-smooth bands, I had some albums like the Yellowjackets and Spyro Gyra etc... but they quickly fell by the wayside. Being a player and a teacher I am constantle exposed to a wide variety of music I'll hear things, Warren Hill, Dave Koz and more Kenny G than I think is healthy. I know this music and that is why my comments are so strong.

You enjoy this music and I don't have a problem with that. I am only hoping to show you that there is so much more and by liming your understanding of instrumental adn improvisational music to this genre of smooth that you are missing out.

Do I really sound closed minded to you?

This is not a debate over the merits of new Jazz and old Jazz, because smooth jazz does not in any way represent the evolution of Jazz in the modern era. Again our argument is one of classification and the disgust of real Jazz fans is this calling this instrumental pop music Jazz is incorrect and creates confusion as to what Jazz is.

As to your radio station playing a lot of smooth and not much Jazz. I would hate to think that we would judge the merits of music based on record sales and radio ratings. Commercial radio has never been a way to judge the merits of music as an art. Sure it's popular the radio station makes money selling commercials, McDonalds is unbelievably popular are we going to argue that they serve gourmet cuisine ? Smooth jazz and Big Macs are popular for the same reason, they are both bland, cheap and predictable.

I do not mean to insult you but rather I implore you to find the real depth in music. By putting this smooth instrumental pop on such a pedestal you are showing that you have not really gained an understanding of Jazz beyond the tip of your tongue. It's flavours are more complex, richer and different from what you are used to, some of it you may want spit right out.

Ultimately you will find real Jazz to have great depth and real feeling, not the cheap pulling of the heartstrings of a manipulative hollywood movie, but real soul that will slowly work it's way into you and enrich your life.

Now my friend I can make you a CD of some of the most wonderful music in the world and if you manage not to spit it out you will find yourself understanding and appreciating the art of music.

I like Kenny G.

It must be the lawyer in me, but can anyone define "contemporary jazz". I just thought any jazz recorded not long ago or as we speak was "contemporary jazz". I take the odd stab at recordings well received by Downbeat, depending on the comments made, not just the rating. Seldom do I buy newer stuff, however. Why? It just seems to me that jazz was more leading-edge in previous decades. I like the way the quality of performance and the quality of recording line bisected in the late fifties and in the sixties. The more recent stuff too often sounds like a hybrid to me. Yes more "product" than "music". When I want "rock", I go for rock, when I want "pop", I go for pop (thing is I never want pop, it seems)and how about "space music", is it jazz just because it sounds complex and phasy?. I have not listened to ECM stuff in a long while. Some I have enjoyed in the past Eberhard Weber, Kenny Wheeler, Jan Garbarek come to mind. I even listened to avant-garde stuff, and found it difficult to love (Art Ensemble of Chicago, Don Pullen). They get respect, as far as I know. Can anyone out there put names to those contemporary jazzers that have a Dangerfield complex? Are we dealing with fusion and other attempts at getting more people under the tent or at music that pushes the envelope without leaving emotional and spiritual content out?

Pbb. No ECM stuff in a long time? What can you mean? Charles LLoyd, Dave Holland (and more)... challenging and loveable. Charles Lloyd brings tears to my eyes.

Sincerely, I remain