Jazz for aficionados

Great to see new contributors/participants; welcome all and I look forward to your clips.

O-10, not sure I am necessarily looking for a debate, although, as you know, I don't shy away from one; and while Rok's silence is sometimes deafening, he makes up for it when he makes HIS noise :-) I also appreciate Acman3's economy of words (kind of like later Wayne Shorter), I like how he gets his point across with music clips only. I sense the thread is at a Milestone(s) of sorts (pun intended) and we should capitalize on that.

Rok, while I wouldn't call that list and commentary definitive I think the author makes some good points and his list of twenty is very very good imo. I appreciate your evenhandedness and candor in your own comments;but I disagree that the 70s/80's was a sterile period in jazz, in fact I think it was, as well as being transitional (isn't it always transitional? its the nature of the music, its always evolving), very exciting. I think you are mellowing :-) The author makes two points that I believe I made in recent posts:

****the predujices disappear the deeper one gets into something****

I wrote:

****We move way too quickly through an era and dont dig deep enough. I think that is why some of the stereotypes about genres hang us up****

I think that there may be, as the author points out, a misconception or stereotype about what music from that era (70s) is about. It is not simply the kind of fusion exemplified by Gato, Sanborn and others. This music was mostly very accesible in as much as it was tuneful or melodic in a traditional way and very pleasant to listen to, but not very adventurous harmonically or rhythmically. There was also a lot of music (like the Woody Shaw clips show) that is a more direct extension of the hard bop style that gets a lot of play in this thread; almost all acoustic and unquestionably Jazz. Then, there was the electric stuff that went to totally new places. Frankly, I am taken aback by the relegation of something like "Sly" by Herbie's "Headhunters" to a comparion to bellbottoms because of the "funk" stereotype. No problem with not liking something, but to not appreciate the incredible level of inventive improvisation and musical interaction (hallmarks of good jazz) that the band shows in that track leaves me almost speechless. Another favorite from the 70s. Sterile? Really?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1drMpkjM1DA

Now, Now, Frogman. You can't use the Masters that made LPs during the 70's (Joe Henderson), as being representative or typical of the music made during that era. Even I, have most of his stuff.

You must stay with the guys who need haircuts and forgot to get their suits out of the cleaners. That's how the 70's were different.

I agree on Hancock. But Lord, just compare them to MJQ in appearance. Why did they have to dress like that?

Joe Henderson: That is serious Jazz cover art. Compared to Miles with the cartoon people. The Miles cover was a sign of the times.

Cheers

The 70s saw the growth of a tenor saxophone style that was a direct extension of Coltrane's. Dave Liebman, Miles and Elvin alum, in many ways took over where Trane left off. This tenor style would also become a large part of the fusion-jazz tenor style that players like Michael Brecker would make practically ubiquitous. Not exactly Coleman Hawkins, but this is great tenor playing and beautiful ballad playing:

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=BrIfp7F6wR8

Oh yeah, and he did need a haircut.

[Fusion: in popular music: combining different styles ]

One of the definitions of FUSION. My question is, exactly what different styles or genres are being 'Fused' in Fusion-Jazz? And even more importantly, why?

And since there are many genres, does the phrase. Fusion-Jazz, always mean the same combination?

Cheers