Print Page | Close Window

The Jazz Chrysalis

Printed From: JazzMusicArchives.com
Category: Jazz Music Lounges
Forum Name: Jazz Music Lounge
Forum Description: General jazz music discussions (no polls)
URL: http://www.JazzMusicArchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=771
Printed Date: 27 Apr 2024 at 1:27am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 10.16 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: The Jazz Chrysalis
Posted By: Atavachron
Subject: The Jazz Chrysalis
Date Posted: 09 Jul 2011 at 10:04pm
How did, or how do you think, Jazz developed.  Not talking first or most important artists or records, but the conditions and process under which musicians starting playing what became 'jazz'.  Was it inevitable?  Did social or economic factors play a role or simply musical ones?  Was improvisation a rebellious breaking away from traditional music or a quiet movement toward deeper self-expression; and was improv, as is most often professed, the deciding factor or was some other motivation involved?

  



Replies:
Posted By: js
Date Posted: 09 Jul 2011 at 10:10pm
Basically it grew out of marching bands in New Orleans who would accompany funerals, marches etc. The marches were so long and the tunes so repititious that the horn players would start to improvise, to relieve boreedom and probably just came natural after a while.
Later when jazz musicians moved north, they didn't march but sat and played, the rest is history.
All the same, improv was in music way before jazz.


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: 09 Jul 2011 at 10:15pm
Interesting, I didn't know about marching band connection.  Well I guess that answers my question .. thank you John for ending this thread with one fell swoop of your musicalogical prowess ..  goodnight folks !    LOL  Violin




Posted By: js
Date Posted: 09 Jul 2011 at 10:24pm
Sorry Embarrassed   ...but its in all the jazz history books. Geek


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: 09 Jul 2011 at 10:35pm
fair enough--  but how about some independent speculation, I mean there must be a little more to it .. make something up if you have to (you know, improvise Cool )



Posted By: js
Date Posted: 09 Jul 2011 at 10:42pm
Probably the most interesting speculation and discussion/arguments in jazz comes from how different genres develope, for instance take jazz rock or fusion.
Did somebody invent it, no way.
On the jazz side you have Larry Coryell, Tony Williams, Miles etc 
On the rock side you have Cream and Hendrix
In Britian you have people in between like McLaughlin, Soft Machine Brian Auger etc

I'm sure there are people who will argue about who was the first jazz rocker, or the first be-bopper etc and I am sure soeone would point out who is missing from the above mentioned names.


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: 09 Jul 2011 at 10:56pm
Well I certainly agree improvisation has always been a big part of all music, but that being the case, then what would distinguish the development of jazz as jazz (other than an American art form) ?




Posted By: js
Date Posted: 09 Jul 2011 at 11:05pm
It comes back to the marching horn bands in New Orleans at the turn of the century. they were playing rags and military marches and improvising on them in a sort of swing style. 
When those musicians moved north what we now call dixieland developed, basically similar to original new orleans jazz but now they are seated so you could include a drum set and a piano player and replace the tuba with a string bass. From there you get jazz.
I'm sure other types of improvisation came in as things rolled along, gypsy music for instance or later Indian music.




Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: 09 Jul 2011 at 11:23pm
and let's not forget smack


Posted By: js
Date Posted: 09 Jul 2011 at 11:27pm
Smack?     ..oh yeah, smack.  Thats probably how you got bop, cool, hard bop, post bop, avant-garde and lots of fusion too, basically a lot of modern jazz. Possibly part of the nu jazz scene too, I don't know.


Posted By: idlero
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 1:36am
One of the explanations for improvisation I've heard is that many musicians didn't know to read notes so that they were improvising

-------------
I think the problem with a lot of the fusion music is that it's extremely predictable, it's a rock rhythm and the solos all play the same stuff and they play it over and over again ...
Ken Burns


Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 1:44am
QUOTE=Atavachron]Well I certainly agree improvisation has always been a big part of all music, but that being the case, then what would distinguish the development of jazz as jazz (other than an American art form) ?


[/QUOTE]
 
sorry to barge in in your conversation, but generally improvisation is not part of classical music (not conting the contemporary and
 
Not sure I'm right about this, but outside Indian music, I don't think improvisation was common in music at all... It seems that this was a X Xth C thing
 
 
 
Originally posted by js js wrote:

Smack?     ..oh yeah, smack.  Thats probably how you got bop, cool, hard bop, post bop, avant-garde and lots of fusion too, basically a lot of modern jazz. Possibly part of the nu jazz scene too, I don't know.
 
Don't think getting smashed out of your skull was reserved to jazz (and later to rock)
 
I understand that Chopin and the Russian composers were not exactly sober and straight  (and Mozart was getting stoned on O2 + N2)
 
the Impressionist painters used to soar on all types of sustances, most notably on absynth
 
 
 


-------------
my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicted musicians to crazy ones....



Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 2:07am
barge in all you want Hugues, that's what the thread's here for, the more the merrier .. and yes musicians have been getting bombed for centuries god bless 'em


Posted By: Matt
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 6:55pm
New Orleans was a real pot pourri with plenty of influences , Not only did we have Afro American with the blues influence but French with Cajun, in those times it was more formal and real French and even Cuba had influence but in the 19th century the music was very formal and geared towards Classical if anything. You also had our stuff as well with the old popular songs and folk and the lot got mixed gradually to become Jazz. Anyway thats my theory with no book or net, just me came up with that.
 
I would have loved to have the wagons the bands that they all piled on to and go around town playing. They do it on trucks now, well Kermit Ruffins still does. Would have also loveed to have seen the old Dancehalls or bars where they played. I can tell you one thing, they did not sit around politely clapping like today which I find pretentious personally, if people start jumping around and yellin' for the band watch the band play better and the night will be great fun.Beer Isn't that was Jazz is all about or music for that matter.  Buddy Bolden was the man they all said that his trumpet rang around New Orleans, bloody sad by the time they recorded him he had lost his teeth Confused Not much chop for a trumpet....no teeth
 
 


-------------
Matt


Posted By: js
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 7:06pm
Yep, jazz was not recorded until 1927, after it had already been around for 30 to 40 years. The earliest recordings were not by the innovators but copycats. It took awhile before they got the real jazzmen in the studio.


Posted By: Kazuhiro
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 7:16pm

When I had received the lesson of the drum before, the teacher said to me. It was said that the drum and fife band that performed the march to pull military forces was at the head. Is it correct though it was said it was very dangerous because the drum and fife band doesn't have arms?

It is that people actually listen live and it danced when the band that plays jazz holds the party at home or that I memorized it. It is a part of not the hall but familiar music. It was memorized I to was in the process of the development of jazz.



Posted By: Matt
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 7:20pm
Originally posted by js js wrote:

Yep, jazz was not recorded until 1927, after it had already been around for 30 to 40 years. The earliest recordings were not by the innovators but copycats. It took awhile before they got the real jazzmen in the studio.
Hey John, they would have been damn good, no amplification they had to be able to play loud. When I see a gig  Jazz or Latin mainly the good trumpet players walk past the mic and play with just the horn on its own. CoolCoolCoolCoolCool

-------------
Matt


Posted By: js
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 7:24pm
Jazz is best in a small club and no amps, especially avant-garde and/or larger ensembles.
I guess you've heard Buddy Rich's famous diatribes against his players who would move to close to the mic, ouch.


Posted By: js
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 7:29pm
Speaking of audience participation, my friend had this live Parker record from way back and they all must be loaded and are playing everything at break neck speed and people are yelling with the music. Very insane atmosphere, like a really good party.


Posted By: Matt
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 7:30pm
Lighting Techs gear pre 1900
 
 
 
Wink


-------------
Matt


Posted By: Matt
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 7:36pm
Originally posted by js js wrote:

Speaking of audience participation, my friend had this live Parker record from way back and they all must be loaded and are playing everything at break neck speed and people are yelling with the music. Very insane atmosphere, like a really good party.
We saw Joshua Redman about 10 years back and it was one of the normal Jazz audiences and were they pissed with us by the end of the night but the other half the place was rowdy too and they played great with people yellin' and cheering. Well anyway who did the band talk too at the end of the night Wink yep I have everyone of em's autograph and Aaron Goldberg the pianist sat at the bar with us drinking LOL

-------------
Matt


Posted By: Dylbean
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 8:15pm
Quote
sorry to barge in in your conversation, but generally improvisation is not part of classical music (not conting the contemporary and
 
Not sure I'm right about this, but outside Indian music, I don't think improvisation was common in music at all... It seems that this was a X Xth C thing
 
I'm not sure I'd agree with this. As far as I understand, it has only been the past couple hundred years where improvisation has been removed from classical music. I've only become aware of this recently, and it's really interesting to me as well. My source is a composer family member, so I'm not incredibly confident in this fact, but it seems to be corroborate-able on the internet.


-------------
There is no god, but music is pretty cool.


Posted By: js
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2011 at 8:18pm
^ you're correct, Baroque performers used something similar to today's chord charts and were expected to improvise all the details. That was Europe, in Indian classical music improv is the essence of the music.
You could probably read more about how Baroque music notation worked by googling "ground bass baroque music" .
Ground bass was a notation similar to today's chord charts in that the performer was given a bass line and some interval symbols that were somewhat similar to spelling out chords. The performer was supposed to know how to improvise the music around that structure.


Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: 11 Jul 2011 at 3:10am
Originally posted by Dylbean Dylbean wrote:

Quote
sorry to barge in in your conversation, but generally improvisation is not part of classical music (not conting the contemporary and minimalists)
 
Not sure I'm right about this, but outside Indian music, I don't think improvisation was common in music at all... It seems that this was a XXth C thing
 
I'm not sure I'd agree with this. As far as I understand, it has only been the past couple hundred years where improvisation has been removed from classical music. I've only become aware of this recently, and it's really interesting to me as well. My source is a composer family member, so I'm not incredibly confident in this fact, but it seems to be corroborate-able on the internet.
 
 
Yeah, you're right: I'd forgotten about the Baroque period.... I did mean the classical classical and classical romantic periods ... Bach and later...  (though for me Baroque music did last until the 1700's) 
 
But from what I know of Marin Marais' music (I know Baroque is not just him, though, since even Bach and Vivaldi were considered baroque as well), it's very pompous and didn't really allow for improv
 
 
 
Elsewhere, in folk and medieval music, improv was common....


-------------
my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicted musicians to crazy ones....



Posted By: js
Date Posted: 11 Jul 2011 at 6:30am
Mozart, from the classical period, was known to be a master improviser. Romantic period pianists were known to improvise their cadenza's. 
Classical music became a purely written form later after the actual classical period passed. 
After classical music had faded from the public interest during the romantic period, preservationists sought to bring it back to the concert stage, once they brought it back to the stage, its popularity grew from there.



Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: 12 Jul 2011 at 9:41pm
Originally posted by js js wrote:

Speaking of audience participation, my friend had this live Parker record from way back and they all must be loaded and are playing everything at break neck speed and people are yelling with the music. Very insane atmosphere, like a really good party.

love those little peaks into the secret world of music, that record sounds like bootlegging at its best  Big smile




Posted By: js
Date Posted: 12 Jul 2011 at 9:46pm
Yeah, we lived near North Texas State, the big jazz school, and you got used to this kind of un-inspiring take on jazz from all the kids playing the clubs etc.
Then we hear this old Parker record and our jaws just dropped you know, so this is what be-bop was really like, it was wild and intense and the crowd was sort of joining in.


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: 12 Jul 2011 at 9:50pm
I have a buddy who saw Coltrane in NYC in the 60s and when I asked how he liked it he said, "I'm not sure, but it was quite a thing to see."



Posted By: js
Date Posted: 12 Jul 2011 at 9:57pm
I snuck a cassette deck into a Black Flag show when they were at their peak, two guitarists and Chuck Biscuits on drums, best rock band I have ever seen, incredibly intense. I have it on distorted cassette, they were extremely loud in a small club.


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: 12 Jul 2011 at 10:11pm
yes I snuck many a cassette deck into shows (down my pants generally); the key was a good stereo mic and a levels indicator/setting.   I had a very nice Sony reporter's deck that did a good job, and I found with Prog, the louder-the-better for a strong recording.   Smaller clubs were usually a bit easier than bigger arenas but you never knew when you'd get a full-body patdown or just a quick check.




Posted By: js
Date Posted: 12 Jul 2011 at 10:17pm
I can remember a big funk festival in dallas where the security had a bunch of big garbage cans lined up to throw all the things they were getting in the pat-downs, ha ha.  A lot of stuff.


Posted By: js
Date Posted: 12 Jul 2011 at 10:21pm
I need to split for a while, if you have a second, check kazu's thread about cover tunes. The next to last entry is Bowie keyboardist Mike Garson doing an improv on an old Bowie tune. The guy is an incredible pianist.


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: 12 Jul 2011 at 10:56pm
I'll do that



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.16 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2013 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk