Some thoughts on the subject of the “forgotten” or “undiscovered” musician:
I think that there is at least some truth in just about every comment so far re the reasons why some players remain obscure; but not every reason cited is relevant to what I think the core question here is. For example:
Yes, it is true that some players are “young and just getting known”; but the focus of this discussion is mostly musicians from the past who stopped being young a long time ago and had ample opportunity (years) to be better known.
Yes, it is also true that there are and have always been musicians who have wanted to stay home and not go to “the big city”. There are many fine players in towns other than the biggest cities. However, I think we are talking about musicians who make, or are capable of making, significant statements and not just musicians who are good or very good. Musicians are each other’s toughest critics. Just as they can be ruthless by keeping lesser players from playing during jam sessions, they are extremely committed to seeking out those players who, by reputation, are known to be truly great. The news of the young phenom in “small town, USA” who is truly “saying something” new and unique spreads like wildfire in the jazz world; consequently, it is highly unlikely that this player will remain obscure for long.
Yes, it is also true that because of the nature of this music, music in which interaction with other musicians is a more important component than most other genres, being around other players who will challenge and raise the bar is a vital ingredient for becoming a player that is truly great. Being the biggest fish in a small pond is unlikely to result in being one of the big fish in the ocean. Moreover, I think that a player’s willingness and emotional drive to be where the action is and put up with the difficulties that come along with that says something important about the ultimate potential of that player.
Now, let’s put all this in a certain perspective. A quick internet search of “the most underrated jazz musicians” resulted in several lists (opinion, of course) of the top ten most underrated:
http://www.jazz.org/blog/6-underappreciated-jazz-artists-you-should-check-out/https://www.learnjazzstandards.com/blog/top-ten-underrated-jazz-musicians/http://toobbox.com/blog/the-10-most-underrated-jazz-musicians/I am sure that it will be obvious that what is striking about the names on these lists is that with one or two exceptions all of the musicians mentioned have been well covered, or at least mentioned, on this thread. The point is that when assigning “Underrated” status we are digging pretty deep here. Johnny Griffin underrated? Really?!
For me the bottom line is that it is easy to be seduced by the romance of “the undiscovered/underappreciated artist”. Have there been players who are worth hearing and who didn’t get their due? Well, worth hearing, yes; and there have been several posted here thanks mostly to Alex. That didn’t get their due? That’s a little more complicated, imo. What does that mean, exactly? One of Alex’s recent posts was trumpeter Don Sleet. Probably my favorite of all of his “forgotten/undiscovered” players. I was glad to hear and learn about this player. Is Don Sleet a player that brought anything new to jazz or shaped it in any significant way? I don’t think so. Do I want to add Don Sleet recordings to my collection when there are still so many records by Blue Mitchell, Art Farmer, Fats Navarro and others that I still don’t have? Unlikely. Have there been musicians of the artistic caliber of a Satchmo, Bird, Miles, Sonny Rollins, Trane, Bill Evans and, yes, Ornette Coleman, or even the “tier” below (Johnny Griffin) that slipped through the cracks and were never discovered or have been forgotten? Not a chance in hell.
