Jazz for aficionados

Ghosthouse, we have had that discussion more than once here , I am not sure have we made any mutual conclusions.
As far as I am concerned, if you ask, I have my preferences and most of them are from 50's and early 60's.

Honestly, even if such opinion may seemed limited, sometimes I feel that there is so much great music from that period, that often I am worried that I would not be able to hear all what I would like.

Perhaps, if you further develop your affinity toward some specific 'sound' of that era, you may find that your options and choices in music will become even more wider. 

However, I am fully aware that all art once was 'modern', and maybe in some considerable future I might listen and like some of the stuff that today I find less appealing.

Furthermore, insisting than only some specific music can be called as 'jazz' I find amusing, but I can understand it. Maybe we should be more precise and name it as 'swing', 'bop'  'cool' or whatever.

Question for Frogman...as we all know, above mentioned (old) styles are quite recognasible and all have their names and meanings.
Why that is not (or is it?) the case with some new music that Rok so eloquently describe as 'noise making' ?

@alexatpos
Hello alex -
Apologies to all the "aficionados" for bringing up yet again an already discussed topic.  

I certainly wasn’t taking issue with anything you had said. If your tastes lead you to sort of "specialize" in a certain period of jazz music, by all means, continue - I am not criticizing that choice. I also don’t think you are one of those closing the door to calling music "jazz" that was created outside some "golden era" (which truly might have been a zenith for the music form). I understand such is not your preference and that is fine.  I do enjoy posting things to exercise Rok because his replies are entertaining AND informative (even when I don’t agree which seems to be often).

Jumping onto your question to Frogman, the term that links most of those groups I listed is "fusion" - a mix of jazz and rock elements. I’m sure you knew that so perhaps you are looking for finer definitions as you suggested for more traditional, golden era jazz.  

I do find Rok's use of the word "noise" a little extreme; no doubt he exaggerates to make a point.  To my ear, "free jazz" - part of the orthodox jazz canon - has much stronger claims on being "noise".  By contrast much of the stuff performed by those groups I listed has pretty strong melodic content and would hardly serve as an example of "noise". 

As far as me developing "a further affinity towards some specific sound of that [golden] era" (well put, by the way) - the process is underway and has been aided by many of the suggestions posted here. So, thank you for your input so far. It’s appreciated.

...since yr talkin' 'Soul Jazz'.  Came across an interesting recording last week.  Leo Gandelman is a Brazilian Jazz Sax virtuoso who I'm a huge fan of.  I searched iTunes to see if he had anything in the pipeline and up popped this recording which he participated in.  Brazilian Groove Band - Anatomy Of A Groove.  Apparently he came to NYC in '99 and recorded alongside some studio aces.  For whatever reason, the record company sat on the record for TEN years, releasing it in '09.  It took me seven years to stumble across it, and it's really a smoka!  Basically a instrumental Jazz/Funk session with Brazilian percussion sprinkled throughout, right up my alley!
https://youtu.be/YRCnVBRykxQ

George Benson.

I like White Rabbit best...

some criticize him for being too pop-music oriented, but I say... let them play the guitar instead