Who is advancing the music today?

[xricci]

Be sure to read AAJ's archived discussion topic: "Who do you feel is advancing jazz music and why?" at http://www.allaboutjazz.com/threads/advance.htm.

[Pharaohrock]

Steve Coleman! Greg Osby! Jason Moran! Myron Walden! Whyyyy? Because they are grounded in tradition but not slaves to it. There's so many cats today that are stuck like a deer in the middle of the road in pure awe of what came before, afraid to do anything really different with it and truly adapt it to their own expression for fear it would be sacreligious. These guys though aren't afraid to mix things up, to discombulate the jazz tradition, take just what they want and put it together in ways that are far from conventional....moreover though, most of the bolder musicians today happen to look beyond only jazz music for inspiration. Think of Moran taking on Bjork, etc.

[Coypu]

Fredrik Thordendal, He has brought Allan Holdsworth influnces into the more heavier side of experimental fusion and have created something unique and new with his album Sol Niger Within. I can't praise his work enough.

Spastic Ink (Ron Jarzombek) : Not 100% jazz exactly but more a combination of jazz, fusion prog rock/metal, cartoons (yes!) and everything inbetween. He has a very theoretical approach with very tight rhytmhs and solos, all unimprovised with no notes wasted and every song is unique. Everything is *very* technical and not for the avarage jazz fan but once you embrace his music you'll realise his genious.

Sean Malone, He is truly amazing. His ability to mix genres is amazing and his playing is among the best I have heard.

[LeMo]

Ken Vandermark, Pandelis Karayorgis, Eric Roth, Matt Bauder, Ellery Eskelin, Michael Moore, Theo Jörgensmann, Noah Rosen, Gerry Hemingway, François Corneloup, Rob Brown, Chris Burn, François Houle, Claude Tchamitchian, Mats Gustafsson, Raymond Strid, Marco Eneidi, Ramon Lopez, John Law, Steve Lehman, Kevin O'Neil, Marty Ehrlich, Jon Lloyd, Jeb Bishop, Ned Rothenberg, Veryan Weston, Denman Maroney, Scott Rosenberg, Georg Graewe, Phil Mosberg, Guillaume Orti, François Raulin, Ivo Perelman, Jacques Foschia to just name few musicians from a younger generation than Cecil Taylor, Anthony Braxton, Evan Parker, William Parker, Hamid Drake, David S. Ware, Derek Bailey, Peter Brôtzmann and cie who, all, are still the whole world of jazz and improvised music.

[D.D.]

Originally posted by LeMo
Ken Vandermark, Pandelis Karayorgis, Eric Roth, Matt Bauder, Ellery Eskelin, Michael Moore, Theo Jörgensmann, Noah Rosen, Gerry Hemingway, François Corneloup, Rob Brown, Chris Burn, François Houle, Claude Tchamitchian, Mats Gustafsson, Raymond Strid, Marco Eneidi, Ramon Lopez, John Law, Steve Lehman, Kevin O'Neil, Marty Ehrlich, Jon Lloyd, Jeb Bishop, Ned Rothenberg, Veryan Weston, Denman Maroney, Scott Rosenberg, Georg Graewe, Phil Mosberg, Guillaume Orti, François Raulin, Ivo Perelman, Jacques Foschia to just name few musicians from a younger generation than Cecil Taylor, Anthony Braxton, Evan Parker, William Parker, Hamid Drake, David S. Ware, Derek Bailey, Peter Brôtzmann and cie who, all, are still the whole world of jazz and improvised music.

Great list. I'll just add a couple more names.

1. Gianni Gebbia (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=7:34:01|AM&sql=B25ri28vc05ja)

2. Salvo Amore (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=7:34:51|AM&sql=Aidu36j4271y0)

3. Paolo Fresu (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=7:35:36|AM&sql=B6ifqoarabijz)

4. Furio Di Castri (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=7:35:36|AM&sql=Bn2jlea104xs7)

5. Nguyen Le (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=7:35:36|AM&sql=Bzy5j8qcbbtn4)

6. Dominic Duval (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=7:38:27|AM&sql=Bwcdxlfgejcqp)

7. Jacques Pellen (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=7:39:36|AM&sql=B7e821vdozzma)

8. Nels Cline (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=7:40:29|AM&sql=B3tkku3i5an5k)

9. Elliott Sharp (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=8:36:19|AM&sql=B4unyxdgbjol7)

10. Mark Feldman (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=9:45:15|AM&sql=Bvl8ibk096ak9)

[vibes]

I can't believe no one has mentioned Norah Jones yet. :rolleyes:

[saintvitus]

:rolleyes: All it takes to "advance" music is a couple of critics thinking that you do. Anyway, I nominate Matthew Shipp.

[vibes]

Originally posted by saintvitus
:rolleyes: All it takes to "advance" music is a couple of critics thinking that you do.

Perhaps you didn't get my sarcasm. That's OK. I actually have the album, and I think it's a pretty good album. I just don't consider it jazz, as most people don't...And I don't recall her being nominated for any jazz-related Grammy's, so obviously many people agree on this point. ;)

[saintvitus]

No, I wasn't responding to you, vibes. (And I got your sarcasm all right).

[clandy44]

I'm listening to Minor Passions right now, so I'll vote for Ethan Iverson and Reid Anderson. Iverson's cover of Body and Soul is memorable on this cd and I will be checking out the new Bad Plus cd. These guys are good, to steal a phrase.

[thekid]

Quote:I will tell you who isn't. Wynton Marsalis, one of our greatest jazz trumpet players always bringing down anybody who plays "plugged in." Does this guy ever play with one electric instrument-even an organ. Wynton take your elitist, Miles hating, Stanley Crouch loving, New Orleans retro, Lincoln Center dictatorship, electric programmed hating, perfect trumpet playing, musically safe self back in time so you can play with pops himself!!!!!!:Quote

So sad but true about Wynton

[Hot Ptah]

Be sure to read AAJ's archived discussion topic: "Who do you feel is advancing jazz music and why?" at http://www.allaboutjazz.com/threads/advance.htm.




It's really interesting to see what was written back in 1998, and to see all of the posters who are no longer active here. I would like to see more archived discussion topics revived.

[Lonson]

Monday Michiru

[tpt1]

Quote:I will tell you who isn't. Wynton Marsalis...oh boy...here we go again... but let's stay on topic...

I love what Erik Tuffaz is doing. And I really like Tim Hagans (http://timhagans.com/) drum 'n bass stuff.

Charles Lloyd's Sangam group is taking things to a different place.

[thekid]

I didn't write that quote.
I like Wynton Marsalis a lot but it is true that he's not advancing the music.

[tpt1]

I didn't write that quote.
I like Wynton Marsalis a lot but it is true that he's not advancing the music.I know. I saw the original message. I'd just hate to see this thread turn into another Wynton thread. I agree about him not advancing the music.

[NewJazz4Mike]

I know. I saw the original message. I'd just hate to see this thread turn into another Wynton thread. I agree about him not advancing the music.

It usually seems to be started by someone who takes a (cheap) shot at Wynton. A lot of people have a hard time talking about jazz at all without knocking Wynton. I have a hard time understanding such negative enthusiasm. It seems any and all threads are fair game for Wynton bashing. If I reply though, it will turn into another Wynton thread, and then someone will accuse me of being fractious or something!

NJ4M = :angel

BTW, It depends on how one defines "advance". Change for the sake of change doesn't always guarantee an advance. I also qustion the premise that jazz MUST radically change to advance. There's a lot of great jazz being made today, Wynton included. I suppose if he plugged in and distorted his beautiful, well developed tone with electronics, he'd be recognized as an innovator. If only it were that simple, eh?

[Bluespicker]

How exactly can someone "advance" an art form? Picasso was revolutionary, but he didn't "advance" anything, people didn't think less of Goya once they saw what Picasso had to offer. You cannot move music forward in any way, shape or form, you can only put your own view point on it.

Coltrane, one of the greatest Jazz musicians ever, didn't move Jazz forward a single inch. Yes, he devised interesting ways to surmount the bounds of harmonic structure, but that was only a horizontal move not a leap forward, otherwise all Jazz musicians would be playing in the Coltrane style, and we know that isn't the case. Charlie Parker helped to bring Bebop to life, but at the same time Satchmo was still blowing his horn to huge crowds, and still was long after Bop's popularity died. Jazz, or any art, doesn't move forward because of some new thing, it just expands to encompass it. Sometimes to it is to Jazz's detriment, like in the cases of "Smooth" Jazz...

[tpt1]

I suppose if he plugged in and distorted his beautiful, well developed tone with electronics, he'd be recognized as an innovator. If only it were that simple, eh?Mike, that's exactly the point. It's not that simple. Cheers.

[jav]

My feeling also is that there is too much emphasis placed on change and coming up with the "new thing." Music evolves best when the changes are more organic and not forced. If an artist is playing what he or she feels and is passionate about it, the results will be positive whether or not it is "revolutionary." Everything is relative anyway and music appreciation is subjective. I cannot begin to count the times I have listened to a particular recording because some critic claimed it was all that, and have been left scratching my head trying to understand what impressed them so. Conversely, I have often been blown away by a recording only to find lukewarm reviews from others. Subjective!

[Saxman]

I don't care for Wynton or his music, but I am sick to death of people bashing him! :eek:

[joeyb]

Iam just wondering how wynton marsalis is not helping advance jazz? He raised 150 million for Rose Hall? Are you kidding me? As far as my artist, it would have to be Miss Leeann Ledgerwood! Her music is some of the best jazz I have ever heard!

[trpt2345]

Anyone who picks up an instrument and plays sincerely is advancing the music. I don't know what you mean by "advance". There's nothing new under the sun and every possible sound can be music-so what? It all depends what you put into it. Banging on the top of a piano or biting on a reed a squawking isn't anything "new" anymore, and the endless attempts epater le bourgeoisie are really old fashioned. Does music "advance" or might it go around in circles? Expand and contract? Or maybe jazz is over and something new will come along.

MM

"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter."
Mark Twain

[Bev Stapleton]

We need to be careful about distinguishing between advancing the 'quality' of the music on the one hand; and 'advancing' it technically (either in terms of what can be done on an instrument or expanding the musical vocabulary).

In the latter case you can talk about 'advancing' - Wagner 'advancing' what was harmonically possible (or permissible) , Beethoven 'advancing' the structure of a symphony, Evan Parker 'advancing' the way a saxophone could be played. All 'advanced' music in the sense that they increased the possibilities.

Whether those advances actually 'advanced' musical quality is another matter. Many a Sidney Bechet fan would not see Evan Parker's playing as any form of 'advance.' Personally, I agree with the posters above, that we are in a highly subjective area here.

I'm glad there are musicians prepared to push boundaries and play music in ways never performed before. But I don't like them any the more than other musicians who play inside an existing form but do so with a personal stamp, an engaging manner that has me captivated.

In fact, it is the latter I look for first in music; the fact that it might be groundbreaking is an added bonus.

[Bev Stapleton]

We need to be careful about distinguishing between advancing the 'quality' of the music on the one hand; and 'advancing' it technically (either in terms of what can be done on an instrument or expanding the musical vocabulary).

In the latter case you can talk about 'advancing' - Wagner 'advancing' what was harmonically possible (or permissible) , Beethoven 'advancing' the structure of a symphony, Evan Parker 'advancing' the way a saxophone could be played. All 'advanced' music in the sense that they increased the possibilities.

Whether those advances actually 'advanced' musical quality is another matter. Many a Sidney Bechet fan would not see Evan Parker's playing as any form of 'advance.' Personally, I agree with the posters above, that we are in a highly subjective area here.

I'm glad there are musicians prepared to push boundaries and play music in ways never performed before. But I don't like them any the more than other musicians who play inside an existing form but do so with a personal stamp, an engaging manner that has me captivated.

In fact, it is the latter I look for first in music; the fact that it might be groundbreaking is an added bonus.

[Bev Stapleton]

We need to be careful about distinguishing between advancing the 'quality' of the music on the one hand; and 'advancing' it technically (either in terms of what can be done on an instrument or expanding the musical vocabulary).

In the latter case you can talk about 'advancing' - Wagner 'advancing' what was harmonically possible (or permissible) , Beethoven 'advancing' the structure of a symphony, Evan Parker 'advancing' the way a saxophone could be played. All 'advanced' music in the sense that they increased the possibilities.

Whether those advances actually 'advanced' musical quality is another matter. Many a Sidney Bechet fan would not see Evan Parker's playing as any form of 'advance.' Personally, I agree with the posters above, that we are in a highly subjective area here.

I'm glad there are musicians prepared to push boundaries and play music in ways never performed before. But I don't like them any the more than other musicians who play inside an existing form but do so with a personal stamp, an engaging manner that has me captivated.

In fact, it is the latter I look for first in music; the fact that it might be groundbreaking is an added bonus.

[sounds212001]

I think Sam Rivers has advancned the music light years ahead of anyone and still is pushing it to the extreme. If you look at his entire body of work, it's quite mind blowing. I've heard that he has over 300 hours of masters in the can of sessions he's produced with top name musicians, that have not been released as of yet. But he's far from being finished, he's still pushing every day.

[Avant-Guardian]

How exactly can someone "advance" an art form? Picasso was revolutionary, but he didn't "advance" anything, people didn't think less of Goya once they saw what Picasso had to offer. You cannot move music forward in any way, shape or form, you can only put your own view point on it.

Coltrane, one of the greatest Jazz musicians ever, didn't move Jazz forward a single inch. Yes, he devised interesting ways to surmount the bounds of harmonic structure, but that was only a horizontal move not a leap forward, otherwise all Jazz musicians would be playing in the Coltrane style, and we know that isn't the case. Charlie Parker helped to bring Bebop to life, but at the same time Satchmo was still blowing his horn to huge crowds, and still was long after Bop's popularity died. Jazz, or any art, doesn't move forward because of some new thing, it just expands to encompass it. Sometimes to it is to Jazz's detriment, like in the cases of "Smooth" Jazz...

I don't understand how you can separate what you wrote from advancement.

It's just semantics... horizontal move, expansion, etc.... it's all advancement.

[Avant-Guardian]

How exactly can someone "advance" an art form? Picasso was revolutionary, but he didn't "advance" anything, people didn't think less of Goya once they saw what Picasso had to offer. You cannot move music forward in any way, shape or form, you can only put your own view point on it.

Coltrane, one of the greatest Jazz musicians ever, didn't move Jazz forward a single inch. Yes, he devised interesting ways to surmount the bounds of harmonic structure, but that was only a horizontal move not a leap forward, otherwise all Jazz musicians would be playing in the Coltrane style, and we know that isn't the case. Charlie Parker helped to bring Bebop to life, but at the same time Satchmo was still blowing his horn to huge crowds, and still was long after Bop's popularity died. Jazz, or any art, doesn't move forward because of some new thing, it just expands to encompass it. Sometimes to it is to Jazz's detriment, like in the cases of "Smooth" Jazz...

I don't understand how you can separate what you wrote from advancement.

It's just semantics... horizontal move, expansion, etc.... it's all advancement.

[Avant-Guardian]

How exactly can someone "advance" an art form? Picasso was revolutionary, but he didn't "advance" anything, people didn't think less of Goya once they saw what Picasso had to offer. You cannot move music forward in any way, shape or form, you can only put your own view point on it.

Coltrane, one of the greatest Jazz musicians ever, didn't move Jazz forward a single inch. Yes, he devised interesting ways to surmount the bounds of harmonic structure, but that was only a horizontal move not a leap forward, otherwise all Jazz musicians would be playing in the Coltrane style, and we know that isn't the case. Charlie Parker helped to bring Bebop to life, but at the same time Satchmo was still blowing his horn to huge crowds, and still was long after Bop's popularity died. Jazz, or any art, doesn't move forward because of some new thing, it just expands to encompass it. Sometimes to it is to Jazz's detriment, like in the cases of "Smooth" Jazz...

I don't understand how you can separate what you wrote from advancement.

It's just semantics... horizontal move, expansion, etc.... it's all advancement.

[Avant-Guardian]

How exactly can someone "advance" an art form? Picasso was revolutionary, but he didn't "advance" anything, people didn't think less of Goya once they saw what Picasso had to offer. You cannot move music forward in any way, shape or form, you can only put your own view point on it.

Coltrane, one of the greatest Jazz musicians ever, didn't move Jazz forward a single inch. Yes, he devised interesting ways to surmount the bounds of harmonic structure, but that was only a horizontal move not a leap forward, otherwise all Jazz musicians would be playing in the Coltrane style, and we know that isn't the case. Charlie Parker helped to bring Bebop to life, but at the same time Satchmo was still blowing his horn to huge crowds, and still was long after Bop's popularity died. Jazz, or any art, doesn't move forward because of some new thing, it just expands to encompass it. Sometimes to it is to Jazz's detriment, like in the cases of "Smooth" Jazz...

I don't understand how you can separate what you wrote from advancement.

It's just semantics... horizontal move, expansion, etc.... it's all advancement.

[Kreilly]

How exactly can someone "advance" an art form? Picasso was revolutionary, but he didn't "advance" anything, people didn't think less of Goya once they saw what Picasso had to offer. You cannot move music forward in any way, shape or form, you can only put your own view point on it.

Coltrane, one of the greatest Jazz musicians ever, didn't move Jazz forward a single inch. Yes, he devised interesting ways to surmount the bounds of harmonic structure, but that was only a horizontal move not a leap forward, otherwise all Jazz musicians would be playing in the Coltrane style, and we know that isn't the case. Charlie Parker helped to bring Bebop to life, but at the same time Satchmo was still blowing his horn to huge crowds, and still was long after Bop's popularity died. Jazz, or any art, doesn't move forward because of some new thing, it just expands to encompass it. Sometimes to it is to Jazz's detriment, like in the cases of "Smooth" Jazz...

I think Blues picker is being a nit picker. :duel The question was not posed literally. When someone talks about the "advances" of Cezanne they are talking about innovations from which there was no turning back. Suggesting that Coltrane moved jazz horizontally rather than forward is kind of silly. Just abandon spatial metaphors altogether if you're going to insist they be taken literally. The inexorable march of time always swallows up the new. Bop emerged as a subversive and challenging artform. 15 years later it was mainstream and Ornette was being dismissed as noise. Now Ornette plays to sold out crowds at Carnegie Hall. That certainly gives the illusion of progress or at least "development" of some kind even if it's just popular tastes catching up.

[Kreilly]

How exactly can someone "advance" an art form? Picasso was revolutionary, but he didn't "advance" anything, people didn't think less of Goya once they saw what Picasso had to offer. You cannot move music forward in any way, shape or form, you can only put your own view point on it.

Coltrane, one of the greatest Jazz musicians ever, didn't move Jazz forward a single inch. Yes, he devised interesting ways to surmount the bounds of harmonic structure, but that was only a horizontal move not a leap forward, otherwise all Jazz musicians would be playing in the Coltrane style, and we know that isn't the case. Charlie Parker helped to bring Bebop to life, but at the same time Satchmo was still blowing his horn to huge crowds, and still was long after Bop's popularity died. Jazz, or any art, doesn't move forward because of some new thing, it just expands to encompass it. Sometimes to it is to Jazz's detriment, like in the cases of "Smooth" Jazz...

I think Blues picker is being a nit picker. :duel The question was not posed literally. When someone talks about the "advances" of Cezanne they are talking about innovations from which there was no turning back. Suggesting that Coltrane moved jazz horizontally rather than forward is kind of silly. Just abandon spatial metaphors altogether if you're going to insist they be taken literally. The inexorable march of time always swallows up the new. Bop emerged as a subversive and challenging artform. 15 years later it was mainstream and Ornette was being dismissed as noise. Now Ornette plays to sold out crowds at Carnegie Hall. That certainly gives the illusion of progress or at least "development" of some kind even if it's just popular tastes catching up.

[Kreilly]

How exactly can someone "advance" an art form? Picasso was revolutionary, but he didn't "advance" anything, people didn't think less of Goya once they saw what Picasso had to offer. You cannot move music forward in any way, shape or form, you can only put your own view point on it.

Coltrane, one of the greatest Jazz musicians ever, didn't move Jazz forward a single inch. Yes, he devised interesting ways to surmount the bounds of harmonic structure, but that was only a horizontal move not a leap forward, otherwise all Jazz musicians would be playing in the Coltrane style, and we know that isn't the case. Charlie Parker helped to bring Bebop to life, but at the same time Satchmo was still blowing his horn to huge crowds, and still was long after Bop's popularity died. Jazz, or any art, doesn't move forward because of some new thing, it just expands to encompass it. Sometimes to it is to Jazz's detriment, like in the cases of "Smooth" Jazz...

I think Blues picker is being a nit picker. :duel The question was not posed literally. When someone talks about the "advances" of Cezanne they are talking about innovations from which there was no turning back. Suggesting that Coltrane moved jazz horizontally rather than forward is kind of silly. Just abandon spatial metaphors altogether if you're going to insist they be taken literally. The inexorable march of time always swallows up the new. Bop emerged as a subversive and challenging artform. 15 years later it was mainstream and Ornette was being dismissed as noise. Now Ornette plays to sold out crowds at Carnegie Hall. That certainly gives the illusion of progress or at least "development" of some kind even if it's just popular tastes catching up.

[NewJazz4Mike]

We need to be careful about distinguishing between advancing the 'quality' of the music on the one hand; and 'advancing' it technically (either in terms of what can be done on an instrument or expanding the musical vocabulary).

In the latter case you can talk about 'advancing' - Wagner 'advancing' what was harmonically possible (or permissible) , Beethoven 'advancing' the structure of a symphony, Evan Parker 'advancing' the way a saxophone could be played. All 'advanced' music in the sense that they increased the possibilities.

Whether those advances actually 'advanced' musical quality is another matter. Many a Sidney Bechet fan would not see Evan Parker's playing as any form of 'advance.' Personally, I agree with the posters above, that we are in a highly subjective area here.

I'm glad there are musicians prepared to push boundaries and play music in ways never performed before. But I don't like them any the more than other musicians who play inside an existing form but do so with a personal stamp, an engaging manner that has me captivated.

In fact, it is the latter I look for first in music; the fact that it might be groundbreaking is an added bonus.

All interesting concepts, and valid in the strictly musical sense. These could all applied to jazz and still, i suspect, be overlooked in terms of "advancing" jazz. Jazz holds advancement to higher standarsds. In jazz terms, people expect revolutionary changes. There's may be some validity to this view - jazz's everpresent embrace of freedom has led to the most revolutionary changes that defined styles and eras - swing, bop, free jazz, or fusion, for example. Within those sweeping changes though, there have always been (and still are) phenomenally gifted artists and performers who explored the possibilities with the styles. For example, did Freddie Hubbard or Lee Morgan advance hard bop? I'd emphatically say they did, despite the fact that they weren't pure innovators in their day. I sense that we are enjoying today, the same exploration and refinement, the same sort of limit stretching performance excellence. Such expansive stretching exists in such a wide variety of jazz forms today... Jazz advances not more like a balloon, (or the universe!) than like a straight line - an omnidirectional advance!

[Lucidarium]

Steve Coleman! Greg Osby! Jason Moran! Myron Walden! Whyyyy? Because they are grounded in tradition but not slaves to it. There's so many cats today that are stuck like a deer in the middle of the road in pure awe of what came before, afraid to do anything really different with it and truly adapt it to their own expression for fear it would be sacreligious. These guys though aren't afraid to mix things up, to discombulate the jazz tradition, take just what they want and put it together in ways that are far from conventional....moreover though, most of the bolder musicians today happen to look beyond only jazz music for inspiration. Think of Moran taking on Bjork, etc.

All right ! I absolutly agree.


P.S: Have you checked this yet http://stevecolemanarchives.cultureforum.net

[Lucidarium]

Steve Coleman! Greg Osby! Jason Moran! Myron Walden! Whyyyy? Because they are grounded in tradition but not slaves to it. There's so many cats today that are stuck like a deer in the middle of the road in pure awe of what came before, afraid to do anything really different with it and truly adapt it to their own expression for fear it would be sacreligious. These guys though aren't afraid to mix things up, to discombulate the jazz tradition, take just what they want and put it together in ways that are far from conventional....moreover though, most of the bolder musicians today happen to look beyond only jazz music for inspiration. Think of Moran taking on Bjork, etc.

All right ! I absolutly agree.


P.S: Have you checked this yet http://stevecolemanarchives.cultureforum.net

[Lucidarium]

Steve Coleman! Greg Osby! Jason Moran! Myron Walden! Whyyyy? Because they are grounded in tradition but not slaves to it. There's so many cats today that are stuck like a deer in the middle of the road in pure awe of what came before, afraid to do anything really different with it and truly adapt it to their own expression for fear it would be sacreligious. These guys though aren't afraid to mix things up, to discombulate the jazz tradition, take just what they want and put it together in ways that are far from conventional....moreover though, most of the bolder musicians today happen to look beyond only jazz music for inspiration. Think of Moran taking on Bjork, etc.

All right ! I absolutly agree.


P.S: Have you checked this yet http://stevecolemanarchives.cultureforum.net

[Lucidarium]

Steve Coleman! Greg Osby! Jason Moran! Myron Walden! Whyyyy? Because they are grounded in tradition but not slaves to it. There's so many cats today that are stuck like a deer in the middle of the road in pure awe of what came before, afraid to do anything really different with it and truly adapt it to their own expression for fear it would be sacreligious. These guys though aren't afraid to mix things up, to discombulate the jazz tradition, take just what they want and put it together in ways that are far from conventional....moreover though, most of the bolder musicians today happen to look beyond only jazz music for inspiration. Think of Moran taking on Bjork, etc.

All right ! I absolutly agree.


P.S: Have you checked this yet http://stevecolemanarchives.cultureforum.net

[trpt2345]

I think Sam Rivers has advancned the music light years ahead of anyone and still is pushing it to the extreme. If you look at his entire body of work, it's quite mind blowing. I've heard that he has over 300 hours of masters in the can of sessions he's produced with top name musicians, that have not been released as of yet. But he's far from being finished, he's still pushing every day.

I love Sam, he's my guy. I studied with him back in the late seventies. He's a truly unsung hero of the music. I hear he's really ill. He's got to be over 80, and he wakes up every day and writes new stuff. His idea was not to "advance the music" so much as to just be himself and play in a way only he could do. It's my paradigm for playing, be recognizable, be yourself, tell your own story and not anyone else's. I think that's a much more lofty goal than some abstract idea of "advancing" the music. If Evan Parker never existed the music would still be as advanced as it ever was, Parker cannot even carry Rahsaan's jockstrap.

MM

"I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury."
Groucho Marx

[John L]

For better or worse, I think that the people who are expanding jazz today may be the same people who are destroying it. They are breaking it apart and putting some of the pieces back together again. There is no new "jazz" anymore in the sense that there was 50 years ago.