-
Originally Posted by sunnysideup
Being from New Orleans, where jazz is still part of the dancing and entertainment culture, and having played pre-bop styles of jazz for dances, I certainly get why the large audience for swing music didn't particularly appreciate bop.
Actually, jazz was popular since the late teens - and it was also largely for dancing, as many of the early pieces of music referenced the then-current dance styles like the Charleston, Black Bottom, etc.
As soon as people couldn't dance to the music, they looked for other musical styles that were still suitable, leading to the rise of rock, honky tonk, R and B, Salsa, etc.
Frankly I'd still rather play a hot dance band swing gig than a bop set. Lots more fun!
-
05-31-2021 09:03 AM
-
Originally Posted by DavidKOS
Why do people love singers, even bad pop singers? It's the familiar human voice. The melody is easy to hear.
Most all those standards from 1920-60s have nice pretty melodies to accent the Broadway
performances and to provide a few orchestrated melody notes for opening a scene in a Hollywood film.
People who were not musicians would hum those "standard" melodies after seeing the films several times. (I saw this as
a kid with my father and his friends).
But honestly, but very few people want to hear a sax blaring 8th notes at 300 bpm over the Donna Lee changes.
That was a novel, radical style of playing in the late 1940s that was already getting tiresome by 1960 (or before).
If you enjoy more complex music, then you probably play an instrument and find the complexity interesting and also some sort of technical challenge.
But most people find it simply annoying, and I don't blame them.
They don't know about complex chords changes and don't want to know. Why should they?
A standard melody may have 30 notes. Now, you want them to hear 1000 improvised notes played at 300 bpm and "appreciate" it? Oh, and play 8 choruses of solos as well. People love that. NOT.
It's TEDIOUS NOISE to probably 99.8% of the human population.
I always loved this: "Is this still the same song?" Haha!!!
Jazz doesn't need to be popular.
-
Originally Posted by DavidKOS
-
Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
-
Jazz requires a listener who likes being challenged! Who would have thought Cole Porter, Gershwin, Duke Ellington would become challenging music to listen to!
-
Originally Posted by jads57
Which is fine and all, but I wish they would get off their high horse. It’s like listening to me drone on as a 20 something ....
-
I can't remember the source, but I do remember reading quite some time ago: "too much difference = sameness = boring"
-
I think a lot of jazz is self-indulgent listen to me blow and blow and blow. Of course there are masters of it. I think some of the best overall musicians on the planet are involved in writing really good film scores. Music that will stand the test of time. It never hurts to consider your audience.
-
Originally Posted by alpop
-
Originally Posted by PDeville
BTW, many histories of early bop make it clear that a lot of the characteristics of bop - burn tempos, unusual melodies as contrafacta, difficult keys, etc. were a deliberate attempt to limit the musical pool and keep the "average" swing musicians off the jam session bandstand.
-
Originally Posted by steve burchfield
According to Guthrie Govan, Hans Zimmer told him that his special niche was being able to operate the technology to give directors a clearer idea of what the music would sound like ahead of time; something Jerry Goldsmith couldn’t do during his era. Zimmer isn’t from a classical background at all btw, but he has profoundly altered the way film music is composed, and moved it much more towards sound design.
So extremely talented musicians abound in Tinsel Town (well it’s where the $$$’s are) it seems like modern film composers don’t come quite as much from that old school tradition.
But it sounds like a nightmare. For instance the Marvel movie’s scores are completely unmemorable; the reasons being AFAIK prevalence of temp tracks from other films to which the films are then cut and directors asking composers to write something just shy of plagiarism of material that is already very generic. Directors used to have conception of music as an artform.... I think that’s pretty sad tbh.
The big thing now is Video Game music; comparative creative freedom alongside big budgets. It’s bigger then Hollywood. I would expect most of the best and brightest are there now.
-
Originally Posted by alpop
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Not a big Zimmer fan here.
-
Originally Posted by DavidKOS
-
Originally Posted by DavidKOS
-
Anyway this came on the radio just now.
-
Originally Posted by DavidKOS
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Chops:
Finding herself outgrowing Yorkshire, Thackray attended to the Royal Welsh College Of Music And Drama, then heading out further, taking on a Master’s with Issie Barratt at Trinity. She soon found herself as an RBMA alumnus and in 2018, became artist-in-residence at the London Symphony Orchestra.
You need a Master's to do anything these days.
-
Originally Posted by Litterick
I know the Americans! My papers are in order!
-
Hard question to answer, since I don't know the correct definition of "jazz".
That said ...
If jazz is music with some complex chord changes, complex rhythm and a lot of improvisation, then one reason it isn't popular is that "jazz"
doesn't acknowledge that some some popular music is even "jazz".
The Grateful Dead used odd meters, long jams, spontaneous arrangement on stage and even some interesting harmony (compared to, say, So What) and somehow that isn't "jazz".
"Smooth Jazz"? Rejected by purists.
Rock with interesting harmony (think Steely Dan), funk, blues (with improv) etc, all somehow not jazz, although none of it would exist without jazz. How is big band jazz, with everybody reading an arrangement and a couple of solos, accepted as jazz, but Steely Dan isn't jazz?
Maybe if you put some ii V I's into the rock or blues music, it begins to get accepted as jazz, like Clarence Gatemouth Brown.
Somebody may say that, somehow, that "other" music isn't really in the jazz tradition, i.e. that it comes from somewhere else. Yet, Bitch's Brew is jazz and Grateful Dead jams aren't. Western Swing seems to be on the fence, but it contains similar harmony and great improv.
When I play a casual or jam with friends, if we call it jazz, it's a certain repertoire. Head, solos, head, typically. Not much spontaneity, except among the most skilled players. When I'm in NYC and I go to a club, that isn't what I hear. The music is typically at a significantly higher level, with more spontaneous arrangement, unfamiliar repertoire etc. And, those clubs are packed.
When I've gone to hear Strings Attached, it's a more traditional approach. Great players, great improv, great jazz of a certain type. I've gone on every trip to NYC when they were playing and I'll go again. But, the club, which is small, has never been full.
-
Originally Posted by Litterick
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Originally Posted by jads57
-
Like the old Duke said there are only two kinds of music : GOOD and BAD and then one could argue its all subjective....
Arrangements of Furniture
Yesterday, 09:59 PM in Improvisation