Jazz for aficionados

Music has to change, art has to change. It wouldn't make any sense for someone today to write like Haydn or maybe less so, like Art Tatum. Uri Caine seems interesting to me now. It's rewarding to listen to musicians playing Stan Kenton, Mozart, Billie Holiday but these are old ideas in terms of composition.

I'm not suggesting that musicians like Sonny Rollins write in the way that Cecil Taylor might. We should savor and respect what these musician/composers naturally developed into within the span of their careers, but all artists need to grow. Most accomplished jazz musicians write their own pieces. Musicians who make a living playing the music of Monk, Ellington, etc... are a different matter, as they can choose to invest in the works of their contemporaries or limit their repertoire to music of the past.

Composers, with exceptions being in rare cases, will try to avoid repeating what another composer has already written and since the rules of harmony have been stretched beyond all boundaries, the possibilities are endless. Since everyone is wired differently, every composer will create differently. Nevertheless Picasso said 'good artists borrow from other artists but great artists steal from other artists'.

As with most, not so well thought out rants, the point gets lost on the side issues.

Rok, the usage of Lee Morgan's " Live at the Lighthouse" was only used as an example of how he and his music had changed, not a recommendation for the music. Also, I only have a double album, and not the CD which has more music added as usual, so YMMV.

Orpheus10, I have mainly commented in the past through a lens of what you were trying to say/learn on this thread. I lost that perspective on my last post, which was written only to say Jazz is in good hands, although different. I agree with your wise earlier statement that once we start arguing ''What is Jazz',' the thread will disintegrate into chaos and I don't want any part of that.

I do not feel qualified to lead any comment on newer jazz styles, as I like most of you, listen mostly to older music, especially since going mostly vinyl about 5 years back. Some of my newer Jazz favorites are now 10 years old, and the musician's are not young anymore. Also for the same reason you have chosen not to identify your mystery musician friend, I will respectfully have to keep some good, but controversial musicians off any list. It is easy to tear down.

I listen while I travel around town to the local college station KNTU, and hear great straight ahead music all day. Some new, some old. I will get some names for you if I think they have possibilities.

Ken Schaphorst- anything, but "Over the Rainbow " is an overlooked GEM.

William Parker- A virtuoso bass player known more for his group interplay and writing than his bass playing. ( sound like any one you know) Some of his music is harder to get, but most is surprisingly accessible. Never boring.

Earl Harvin- "Live at the Gypsy Tea Room" has been a regular on my system since around 2000. Earl plays a lot of styles and plays in Jazz to Funk to Rock bands. A monster on the drums. UNT professor Fred Hamilton on bass and guitar, and Dave Palmer on electric piano.

Benny Green
Kurt Elling
Kurt Rosenwinkle
Marchel Ivery
Dennis Gonzalez- Great trumpet player, getting a little more Avant-garde, but worth hearing.

What about John Abercrombie? I have left off about 1,000.

Pnmyer, I listened to some Roy Hargrove recordings a few years back. He had a bright future , but had IMHO not matured as a musician at that time. I will certainly check him out. I will also check out Eric Alexander as I have, not to my knowledge, actually heard him play.

Charles Lloyd has turned into one of my favorites. His music with BoBo Stenson was magical. If you like Enrico Rava you might like Tomas Stanko. Both are very good.

Thanks,

Acman3
I took the Lee Morgan thingy the way you meant it.

The tragedy that has befallen Jazz, is not limited to Jazz. You can substitute Jazz, with Rock & Roll or R&B or POP or Country or folk / protest or Gospel.

They have all suffered. The problem is, no one sees or hears the decline, except the people who are familiar with and / or grew up with the previous stuff. This is true of most things in society.

Think about it, Lee Morgan died over 41 years ago!!. I find myself waiting for his next Cd. We just said he was 19 a few posts ago, didn't we?

Jazz has the added problem or being an improvised music. That creates major problems.

How does a current player, play the great Jazz music? A current classical player can play Mozart today because it's written down on paper. How do you play Charlie Parker?

The next big problem is that because it is not a written down on paper music, and it is improvised, ANYONE, can play ANYTHING, and call it Jazz. And, I guess it is. Today.

So, the soloution is this. As a fan, or aficionado, You pick your stop on the railroad and get off. Just like the classical people did. you say, when this era,(fill in the blank) ended, that was the end of MY Jazz. The same goes for all the other genres. I will henceforth, live off compilations, reissues and remasters. And the odd surprise or discovery.

So there should not be any argument. Music does change. The public changes. Just pick the stuff you like and live with it. Just like the people that watch Verdi and Mozart operas year after year after year.

The Jazz stuff that I like most, was coming to an end, almost before I became aware of it's existence. Wow!!

Cheers

Rok2id, there's still a lot of great music being made but there needs to be a willingness and an open mindedness in order to invest in it. Jazz is more of an art form than most other popular styles of music and so it takes a little work but it's well worth the trouble. I still plan to buy a 78 turntable however so that I can listen to a friends donated Charlie Parker recordings. Personally, I have more trouble with listening to music that is outside of the realm of legitimate or what we call in the vernacular, 'classical' but I listen to jazz because there is some of it that I find interesting or entertaining and that's about the only reason.