The lack of great talent theory

[Pharaohrock]

What could be done, if anything, to make conditions ripe for incredibly talented people to come into the music who might not otherwise?

This relates to Branford Marsalis' theory- (see interview http://www.allaboutjazz.com/iviews/bmarsalis2002.htm)
and others that the reason there has been no Charlie Parker, Miles, Dizzy, is that the most talented people are being diverted into other realms, like rap/turntablism, computers, or high-paying professional occupations that weren't open to many people in this society until the last 30-40 years.)

How can you make jazz as a career option more attractive to talented young people? Do we need more money in the music?- are we fooling ourselves thinking that this shouldn't matter.....Or is it more of an issue of respect from the larger society? Is "becoming a jazz musician" despite Wynton , big concert hall gigs, and dignified-looking musicians in suits, still something that's kind of looked at as being rather marginal?? Or perhaps....it's all this and much much more??? Or less daunting than we think....? What do YOU think?

How can really talented people be attracted to the music in the future? And yes, this question necessarily presumes that to a certain extent, we're not currently seeing the best possible talent in jazz that could be culled from the larger society.

[Coypu]

Great talent will always emerge in the genres who have a tradition of great players, I don't that money should be a driving force for any musician in any genre and especially not jazz. It is important to show the young musicians the more modern form of music since any extremely talented young musician wants to be able to create something new and if you start and the 40's that becomes alot harder then if you showed them the most modern in the genre.

[Tali]

I can't agree with you more. I think that the days of jazz musicians has come and gone and needs to COME BACK!

The best music that i've heard in recent years has been in parks, bars, etc. It is a huge shame that these talented men and women are not sharing their sounds with a larger public.

I think that there are many, MANY reasons why there aren't more "big names" in Jazz today. Sadly, I think that money plays a large role. Unfortunatly, many record companies are focusing more on the "needs and wants" of the record buying public which at the moment seems to be the generation... what are we up to now..."Z".

There seems to be very little done to appeal to the serious music listener while everything done to appeal to the listeners that are more interested in the "look" of the band than the sound.

Maybe we're just getting too old...?

[jazzpianoteach]

There are tons of great players walking the streets all over the world. The problem is always the same...eating.
Few people regardless of talent level stick with it once they see how unbelievable impossible it can be to survive as an artist.
There is no lack of talent out there. Unfortunately, talent has less and less to do with the music business these days. It is mostly up to the jazz educators in the teaching trenches around the world to take responsibility for pointing out the greats of the past and pointing towards who they think the greats are today, this is how everything will be kept going.
In the short amount of time I've been teaching clinics and workshops about jazz, I've been amazed at the lack of survival skills taught to musicians on the University level. I am working on a book about it that I hope will be a valuable resource to younger talents people who have the courage to try and make a living being a musician.
The internet has changed everything around the world as far as jazz goes. You can buy anything and everything with a few clicks of the mouse. There is a ton of music out there. I'm sure a lot of great stuff will be getting recommended now that these forums are back up and rocking.

Rob Mullins

[ryanoceros]

although wynton's theory may hold some water considering how many more kids are expected to go through college and high school (most of the great players from the past made the decision to become musicians much earlier than most kids do today).... you're all missing the point.

the music business is so much different than it used to be. with the advent of digital recording technology, it has become much cheaper to record music.
globalization and the internet has made distribution and recognition much easier.
back then, the only way to really gain recognition in the music industry was to have one of the larger record labels backing you.
The market and media could only support (not necessarily financially) so many godheads in the jazz scene.

Niche markets!!!
Niche Markets!!!

There's no singular jazz scene anymore (although one can argue that there never was).
EVERY GENRE AND SUB-GENRE HAS ITS OWN BIG NAMES NOW.

and fuck this my generation nostalgia!

who says Dave Holland isn't a fantastic band leader and brilliant musician?

who says Anthony Braxton isn't one of the great jazz geniuses?

is Dave Douglas' compositional prowess (in so many idioms) not good enough for you guys?

and what about guys like Derek Bailey, Dave Liebman, and Robert Mazurek, who continue to play fantastic modern jazz in new contexts.

have you heard some of the incredible ways that electronic music is being combined with jazz?

virtuosity is all over the place! if you think that there's nothing important or revolutionary being done in jazz, then you are not looking hard enough!

[groovinhigher]

Originally posted by jazzpianoteach
There are tons of great players walking the streets all over the world. The problem is always the same...eating.
Few people regardless of talent level stick with it once they see how unbelievable impossible it can be to survive as an artist.
There is no lack of talent out there. Unfortunately, talent has less and less to do with the music business these days. It is mostly up to the jazz educators in the teaching trenches around the world to take responsibility for pointing out the greats of the past and pointing towards who they think the greats are today, this is how everything will be kept going.
In the short amount of time I've been teaching clinics and workshops about jazz, I've been amazed at the lack of survival skills taught to musicians on the University level. I am working on a book about it that I hope will be a valuable resource to younger talents people who have the courage to try and make a living being a musician.
The internet has changed everything around the world as far as jazz goes. You can buy anything and everything with a few clicks of the mouse. There is a ton of music out there. I'm sure a lot of great stuff will be getting recommended now that these forums are back up and rocking.

Rob Mullins

Amen brother... Direct, and dead on to the point... Excellent summation. I could not possibly agree more. I know, and I am sure most of us know some phenominal cats who fit this category.

[Bongo Boy]

Here's what I've seen in my very, very short exposure to jazz. All over LA there a scads of seasoned, good to extraordinary musicians playing in clubs (for 5-50 people) that don't even have a cover. That tells me everything I need to know about jazz as a career choice, unless I have a plan to build a brand.

Most jazz guitar players I've looked at that are considered 'good' have been playing for at least 20 years, and often closer to 30. And near as I can tell, only about 5 are actually making a living at it :).

Finally, the size of the displays for jazz at your record store, compared to almost any other genre also tells the story. It's gotta be tough out there--I think you can make more money as a 70s rock cover band. So...you gotta love jazz and like punishment.

[clifton]

Indeed, jazz is full of significant artists, Dave Douglas, James Carter, Matthew Shipp, Dave Holland, etc. But jazz no longer has leaders whose innovations reshape the entire body of the music, as Charlie Parker or Ornette Coleman once did. Jazz has been divided into many separate idioms for a long time now, and innovations in one idiom don't necessarily overlap into other idioms. Accordingly, when Dave Douglas or Chris Speed use Balkan rhythms and song forms, that will have little effect on, say, Matthew Shipp, who is seeking a jazz-hiphop fusion. When Dave Douglas seeks to challenge the improviser with non-traditional compositional forms (that is, not 12, 16, or 32 bars), that may translate differently to Ornette, who innovated spontaneous tempo changes forty years ago. In addition, the marginalization of jazz by American corporate media has put all but a very few jazz musicians below the cultural radar. The great talents are here. But jazz is an underground, Balkanized music these days, so if you want to hear today's giants, youve got to seek them out.

[markvi]

the best part of jazz today is the diversity of styles which clifton points out. just look at the diversity available in one night in a few of the n.y. clubs, mingus big band, sex mob, diana krall, paquito d'rivera, eric reed, and charles owens. if a jazz fan can't find something he likes in that group he's in trouble. 6 incredibly different styles. how could any single musician have the effect of a charlie parker with so many diverse styles? technology will continue to add diversity and the adoption of popular styles like rap and hip hop into the jazz realm will continue to send jazz into different directions. it's great to have so many directions to explore and there is more than enough talent to go around. there is some incredibly inventive music go on. it's just not where you are used to finding it.

[Bongo Boy]

support your local jazz clubI can't think of any bigger influence most of us can have than thru this.