Ok, I'm gonna open a whole can of worms here and ask the Org one of the biggest questions in all of music - What is jazz?

Or what is jazz to you?

Is jazz merely a music form?

Or is jazz a lifestyle?

A state of mind, be that 'enhanced' by other substances or created by digging the music?

Something indesribeable you either 'feel' deeply or it means nothing to you?

The greatest innovation of American art?

The classical music of America?

A vibrant, ongoing, incredibly adaptable tradition?

A dead music form that belongs in the museum (as Miles Davis famously said in the 1980s), no longer relevant to modern times?

An old form of dancing.

What the listener says it is?

What the musician says it is?

What the music industry says it is?

What I say it is?

What the first poster says it is?

Or all of the above/ none of the above?

Jazz has been the musical background to events in brothels, ballrooms, nightclubs and latterly in winebars and 'smooth jazz' radio stations. It has been taught in universities ranging from 1920s Harlem lock-ins to 2010s Julliard.

In short, jazz has a history as massive, bizarre, contrary and varied as the infinite imaginations of its greatest practitioners .

Here's my distilled, catch-all description of the word and music form that we know as jazz, for what it's worth - For me, jazz is very hard to describe effectively in words, but I would suggest it is -

To improvise, listen and react in the moment to your musical surroundings in a group setting, using the blues scale (generally) and African American rhythms in a polished, sophisticated manner, often using experimental ideas and abstracted melodies in a way that strongly puts across your own musical personality, while generally seeking to both entertain and educate the open-eared listener in a new musical experience.

That is quite a mouthful, but then I am trying to describe/ sum up a music that supposedly contains everyone from Louis Armstrong to Sun Ra, George Gershwin to the Art Ensemble of Chicago, Billie Holiday to Norah Jones (apparently ), post Miles Davis Eurojazz electronica/ world music to Steely Dan.

Jazz is both awesome and preposterous in the range of artists bracketed within its 'genre'. How much more can it withstand before the term 'jazz' becomes meaningless to all but avid fans of its infinite sub-genres?

Jazz can be - traditional, to dance to (swing), latin, abstract bop, cool, modal, West Coast, soul, free, avant garde, noise, electronic, energy, pop, to most certainly NOT be danced to, funky, be/ hard/ post-bop, Indo jazz, hip hop, nu jazz, orchestral, High Life, Third Stream, jump blues, smooth, acid, jazzcore, punk, metal, movie noir, M Base, ethno ...

Maybe it's best to just call it 'cooool'

Any thoughts?

[Edited 1/25/13 15:03pm]

Srry Miles,

Orgers would rather gossip about Beyonce Lip synching

then engage in such intelligent discussion.

To me its simply just another form of musical statement. Its hard to add up to what you just articulated

But whenever I hear the word, I get reminded of Miles Davis who showed strong resentment toward it many times, although Duke Ellington was the one who really broke it down as to why he and his peers chose to disassociate from it.

TommorowNeverKnows said:

Srry Miles,

Orgers would rather gossip about Beyonce Lip synching

then engage in such intelligent discussion.

Perhaps, but there is another possibility -

Maybe, just maybe, Beyonce is a member of a top secret radical jazz performance group; and if she did 'perform' The Star Spangled Banner (obviously a song with huge cultural significance in America) lip synching to a pre-recorded backing track at the inaugeration, this could have been a deliberate act of cultural sabotage, a 'jazz statement', if you will, on the predicament of everyday America in the Obama era.

Indeed, Beyonce may have deliberately been making reference to Jimi Hendrix's legendary improvisational deconstruction/ destruction of the very same Star Spangled Banner at Woodstock in 1969 and in so doing, updating his concept for our 'virtual', desensitised, blanded out modern days.

Or maybe I'm smoking too much jazz weed while listening to Sun Ra, watching 24 hour news in the dark with the sound on mute.

Harlepolis said:

To me its simply just another form of musical statement. Its hard to add up to what you just articulated

But whenever I hear the word, I get reminded of Miles Davis who showed strong resentment toward it many times, although Duke Ellington was the one who really broke it down as to why he and his peers chose to disassociate from it.

It's interesting to see artists usually associated with "jazz" say they openly hated being referred to as such...

Here is Duke Ellington speaking on the very subject of 'jazz' in 1973, among other matters.

http://youtu.be/Q9F_hRpwL4M

[Edited 1/26/13 11:48am]

^ Interesting.

BTW, dig your signature. Marc was the man.

And here's Miles Davis in 1984 talking about his favourate modern classical music, jazz, synthesizers, race, Julliard and how much of a fan of himself he is!

http://youtu.be/51WOgwMmHcE

Apologies for the links, I can't seem to embed videos on this site.

Here is Charlie Parker talking about music, practicing 12-14 hours a day, the value of learning, oh and Einstein.

From what I've heard and read, Parker had such a quick and incredible mind, musically, but he was also very interested in modern classical music (he venerated composers such as Stravinsky, Bartok, Ravel, Prokofiev and others) and particle physics (which makes him even cooler in my eyes:-) ) .

The main interviewer is Paul Desmond, who went on to play alto sax on the classic Dave Brubeck/ Paul Desmond tune Take 5.

http://youtu.be/QExic3uc934

And here is an interesting article on the sheer range of tastes Bird had in classical music.

http://www.jkchang.com/20...ovisation/

Had he lived another 20 years and had the resources, I think we would have heard some VERY different sounds coming from his horn and his pen. I certainly think the careers and reputations of Miles Davis and John Coltrane would have worked out a little differently with fully creative Bird still in the equation in the '60s and beyond.

[Edited 1/26/13 12:35pm]

And here's a very useful attempt at a description of jazz from Ken Burns 'Jazz' series.

http://youtu.be/dhiSgi_9Yvo

The background music is Duke Ellington and Billy Strayhorn's 'Take the A Train'.

Miles said:

And here's a very useful attempt at a description of jazz from Ken Burns 'Jazz' series.

http://youtu.be/dhiSgi_9Yvo

The background music is Duke Ellington and Billy Strayhorn's 'Take the A Train'.

So many conflicting thoughts roam through my mind whenever I watch that series(and I've watched it many times since its one of my fave) and not all of them is positive.

For one thing, I never could get over them shortchanging the fusion era of the 70s that gave birth to great and as influential musicians. I guess its a matter of journalist sticking their purist thoughts down the audience' throats, the same as Rolling Stones' writers and their revisionist history tactics.

There should've been a vice to folks Stanely Crouch and Wayne, but unfortunately, there weren't, and it gave the series a one-dimensional tone.

Jazz is so much more than just music, it's a lifestyle but most people don't see it as a lifestyle, it's rebellious and ambitious in its purest form to me. It makes the musician a very creative person because you have to improvise, if you want to feel the freedom of it. It's an african-american gift to the world with its mixed roots and its history. I dont need any substances to enjoy jazz music, because since I was in my mothers womb I've been hearing it, so when I picked the trumpet at 5- 6 years old - it was a natural choice because it's one of the purest instruments in jazz music (you can't play false because it sounds horrible) lol.

I do believe it's a music form that should be considerate as classical music of the USA, it's like opera and classical western music is to Europe. I don't think people should make the word jazz into this big thing, but rather let the music and the people explain itself because it has transformed itself during the different periods of time since it started. I think the real form of jazz is when their is authenticy and a sense of not wanting to be all the way accepted with the establishment, kinda like Miles Davis did when he came on the scene or how John Coltrane & Charlie Parker and the 60s brought free jazz and a type of intellectualism that many people didn't quite understand. That to me is real jazz, when you don't believe what the establishment tells you what jazz is or how it should sound, I've never been a fan of jazz a la Norah Jones because somehow it feels watered down and lost (but I do love Amy Winehouse and her love for jazz because the spirit of that rebellious side of jazz could be heard with her music). I love when hip-hop and jazz is combined, because you feel that rawness of the early decades when jazz was a form of "urban music/strange sound"(that then eventually came to the exclusive dance halls of the 40s with swing music) . Quincy Jones talked how he loved the creativeness of rappers in the year 1999 ( I dont remember the interview tho) and how it reminded him of creative jazz musicians.

I def think you can call jazz a "cool" music form, because it has the power to change and transform into so many different things and still remain healthy and vibrant.

This is just my 2 cents lol

[Edited 1/26/13 13:06pm]

I am totally new to jazz. what albums should i check out? how should i listen to jazz? with classical music, i like the sounds of it. I understand some meter. But mostly i listen to it depending on my mood i'll listen to relax, when i am walking, when i'm feeling dark. I want to listen to jazz, but i don't want to feel like i am missing somehing. I also don't want to come off as stupid when discussing jazz with people who are truly fans of Jazz.

Rococo said:

I am totally new to jazz. what albums should i check out? how should i listen to jazz? with classical music, i like the sounds of it. I understand some meter. But mostly i listen to it depending on my mood i'll listen to relax, when i am walking, when i'm feeling dark. I want to listen to jazz, but i don't want to feel like i am missing somehing. I also don't want to come off as stupid when discussing jazz with people who are truly fans of Jazz.

Digging jazz, like getting into any music, should most of all be fun . There is a lot of fake intellectualism in the jazz world, which can alienate the new listener.

If you dig the sounds, or it makes you feel good, or gets you into a certain mood and you find the music interesting and entertaining, I would say that's all that matters.

I don't really like to recommend albums or artists too much, as everyone's tastes vary, but for the best in post-bop/ hard-bop acoustic jazz, you can't go wrong by starting with one of the best jazz albums in history, Kind of Blue (1959), by Miles Davis. A beautiful and enormously influential album in jazz with a wonderful mood all its own. It starts off with the track So What, one of the most famous and grooviest jazz tracks in history and the whole album is pretty easy to listen to and enjoy.

For slightly more modern, electric Miles Davis, I would recommend A Tribute to Jack Johnson (1970), which is great, rockin' and funky session. If you like that, get Miles' albums In a Silent Way (1969), then Bitches' Brew (1970) (one of the most iconic jazz albums ever released). It took me a few years of listening on and off to really dig Bitches' Brew, but it's well worth it in the end and again is very influential on later music.

Of course, there's plenty more to jazz than Miles Davis, but for me, he is an excellent ambassador for jazz in general and the sheer artistic range jazz has explored over the years.

There are so many classsic and important jazz albums, and I would be remiss if I didn't mention A Love Supreme (1964), by John Coltrane.

Coltrane is one of the most influential saxophone players of all time and a true master of the instrument, as well as a real explorer of new sounds in the acoustic jazz of his era. He was also in Miles' band on Kind of Blue, but in a different context to how he plays on A Love Supreme.

A Love Supreme is seen as a great example of spiritual seeking in jazz and Coltrane himself was on a constant spiritual and musical search in the last 10 years of his life.

For the funkier side of things, a much loved album is Head Hunters (1973), by the great keyboard player Herbie Hancock.

Perhaps the real launchpad for the jazz-funk movement, this has four enjoyable tracks with lots of funky grooves, African percussion and Herbie's cool, jazzy improvs on top. One of the biggest selling albums in jazz history.

No introduction to jazz is imo complete without at least listening to a good 'best of' compilation of legends like trumpeter/ singer Louis Armstrong and bandleader/ composer/ piano player Duke Ellington. For a beginner, I would recommend their post 1955-ish recordings if you are put off by scratchy, 'historical' sound quality and these two are good starters for Armstrong and Ellington-

Louis Armstrong and Ella Fitzgerald - Porgy and Bess (1957)

You get three jazz icons for the price of one here, with the music being by George Gershwin, from his famous 'jazz opera' Porgy and Bess, including the all time classic song Summertime; and the singers are Louis Armstrong and Ella Fitzgeraldm two of the most revered jazz artists of all time. Great stuff.

Duke Ellington and His Orchestra - The Popular Duke Ellington (1967)

This isn't actually a compilation but a proper album, but the material is mostly a collection of some of Ellington's most popular tunes like Mood Indigo, Take the A Train, I Got It Bad (And That Ain't Good) and Caravan.

The above are just the tip of the iceberg of the records by those artists and the range of sounds jazz has covered on record in the last 90+ years. There's something for everyone.

I would like to recommend some more recent albums, as good jazz certainly didn't die around 1970, as some conservative critics would have it, but jazz history seems to fragment after the late '60s into a range of ever-evolving sub-genres rather than being a more or less continuous thread as mainstream jazz had been before that.

The important thing is do not try to 'force' yourself to enjoy any form of music. If after a few plays, you really do not like it for whatever reason, it just may not be for you. For instance, I really respect John Coltrane as an artist, but I find he plays far too much horn on his records and while his his later work (1965-67) is interesting, I find it too intense and earnest for my personal tastes.

Never feel 'stupid' for not understanding something about music or any form of art. We are all at different stages of our lives, development and knowledge of things and imo it is often those who are elitist or put others down for not knowing things they consider 'easy' or 'obvious' who have the most to learn

Come on in to jazz. It's one hell of a musical kingdom. If you dig some of the records, try and catch a local live performance from a jazz group, because there's no substitute for the 'live' experience.

[Edited 1/27/13 12:14pm]

Timmy84 said:

^ Interesting.

BTW, dig your signature. Marc was the man.

Thanks. One has got to have a good ole' strut to the likes of Get It On and 20th Century Boy from time to time .

Esperanza Spalding might be the safest introduction to jazz.

I bought this album about a month ago and can't get enough of it. It's addictive.

Christian Scott

as you said

Miles said:

In short, jazz has a history as massive, bizarre, contrary and varied as the infinite imaginations of its greatest practitioners .

so for me jazz is an apogean form of stream of consciousness

where a musician expresses their emotions/individuality/social issues/attitudes etc.

through a musical language and style where others, both musicians and listeners

can react and elaborate from their perspective

as long as you dig the sounds or it makes you feel good it's all that matters as you said

thank you for the recommendations

Good question. As much as I love music Jazz has never moved me.

I find it almost boring which is counter intuitive 2 what I think it should be 4 me.

T

hat said, the few jazz artists that bring the funk I dig.

Marcus Miller, Victor Wooten, Meshell, Brian Culbertson, and a few others.

not entirely sure, just something i frequent when my favorite performer does it