So, before we even start this out, I have to tell you something – jazz is a really freaking big subject, and there's a lot out there that I probably won't get to. I have a fairly good knowledge on the subject, but there's a high probability I'm going to get some things wrong, especially when we start getting into anecdotes, stories, and perceived motivations behind the music.
There's also a fairly good chance that someone's going to step up and say that I'm "wrong". Which could be true. Let's just hope they're not a dick about it.
Anyway, jazz. There are a few stories about how it came to be, some which are more entertaining than others. One of my personal favorites is that by around the turn of the century (1900s), there were many blacks who had learned to play marching band instruments, as well as traditional marching band music (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1vPmC_CQQY). Note the time signature in that piece. It's what's called "6/8 time", where the pulse of the music is "1,2,3/4,5,6". Apocryphally, when they were learning the marches and got to a section they didn't know, they just made stuff up that sounded good. Now, if you mix that feel with the afro-Caribbean rhythms that developed during the slave trade, you get something like this, which is known as "Second Line" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SYooE6h2MM), and is downright funky. But that's a different story. We're talking about jazz.
The other tale about the birth of jazz is that it was music that developed in various "houses of ill repute" in and around New Orleans, as the house piano player would crank out selections of ragtime (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCRhdRO9EUE). When you listen to the rhythms on that piano, notice how it also has the same kind of "shuffle" feel as the second line, as well as a hint of the 6/8 from Sousa. Again, when the piano players would forget the parts (or more likely, when they got bored playing the same thing over and over), they'd start making stuff up.
Roll all of this together, and you get some sort of approximation of the "birth of jazz", and a nice kid from New Orleans (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIIZ3hQEsqs) became it's first star in the 1920s.
Is that the complete picture? Hell no. There was a lot of stuff going on back then. This is only a small part. More to come.
Jazz is probably my favorite form of music... I'd heard the house of ill-reputetheory, but not the first one - very interesting! I look forward to reading more!
Quote from: Hoopla on October 14, 2013, 06:17:27 PM
Jazz is probably my favorite form of music...
:cry:
Please, folks...Dig DEEP. Cough up some dough, so that underprivileged Canadians can have some real music. Given Celine Dion, Nickleback, and Rush, is it any wonder that they're turning to Jazz in desperation? Fuck those starving kids in Africa, this is SERIOUS.
Ok, the New Orleans sound (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BBgP0_cxQE) didn't last too long in the popular culture, although NOLA still keeps it alive, and that groove still finds it's way into songs to this day. What was coming out of Chicago was something that was being called "hot jazz" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84gOsjTac_U). While Louis Armstrong is often remembered more often, this guy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pj1ZEKz4Cw) actually did a lot more to steer the sound of jazz in the 20s. When you compare it to the NOLA sound, you can hear there's more of an "up and down" feel to it, even though you still have that swinging groove. And if you notice, the arrangements are getting tighter. Instead of a bunch of guys playing around a theme, or riffing on blues patterns, you've got some pretty tight songwriting going on. Instead of three or four guys soloing at once, you've got people taking turns over strict changes, highlighting the "solo" aspect of the song.
This style found its way into some of the swankier nightclubs, and Duke Ellington (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pK3lLB-M3Y) started playing the Cotton Club in the 30s. He was a pretty fantastic arranger, and his songs featured large-ensemble written parts, with a few key soloists. This ushered in the Big Band Swing era, which was basically a dance orchestra. This can sound pretty damn cheesy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_muFwwTSMs) when listening with today's ears, but hey, it was pretty much the pop music of its day.
In the mid 30s, that huge sound was getting a little tired, so some of the bandleaders started to put together smaller combos (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGphPCys1VI), and for some reason Kansas City was the center of the action (some have made a pretty good case it was because of the massive corruption and cronyism that allowed the clubs to stay open and stable enough to pay the musicians reasonably well). What we're getting now are stripped down arrangements, and an emphasis on soloing over written leads (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-xPlrhfY5w). The solos are also getting more complex, and you know where that's going to go, right?
More to come.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 14, 2013, 07:47:40 PM
More to come.
If you're interested in the music theory side of jazz, check out this
http://www.amazon.com/Jazz-Theory-Book-Mark-Levine/dp/1883217040
Combined with Slonimskys Thesaurus of Patterns and Melodic Scales, which was used by John Coltrane and Jaco Pastorius, its pretty formidable. :)
I graduated from Berklee College of Music, so I'm all good.
Slonimsky's thesaurus is virtually inexhaustible though?
Oh, awesome! Thanks LMNO!
Can you clarify something for me? It's been about 9 years since I learned this: what separates blues from jazz?
Pretension? :lol:
Seriously though, a lot of old jazz (and the later stuff too, tbh) heavily cribbed from the blues forms, and they were trading back and forth for most of their lives.
Quote from: Kai on October 15, 2013, 12:56:22 AM
Oh, awesome! Thanks LMNO!
Can you clarify something for me? It's been about 9 years since I learned this: what separates blues from jazz?
Basic proficiency with a musical instrument?
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 15, 2013, 01:08:41 AM
Pretension? :lol:
Seriously though, a lot of old jazz (and the later stuff too, tbh) heavily cribbed from the blues forms, and they were trading back and forth for most of their lives.
I'm guessing that the obvious separation started when the big bands were on the way out, at the point you left off in your brief history.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 15, 2013, 01:14:38 AM
Quote from: Kai on October 15, 2013, 12:56:22 AM
Oh, awesome! Thanks LMNO!
Can you clarify something for me? It's been about 9 years since I learned this: what separates blues from jazz?
Basic proficiency with a musical instrument?
Says the man who plays his ass when on the toilet. :lol:
Quote from: Kai on October 15, 2013, 01:17:37 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 15, 2013, 01:14:38 AM
Quote from: Kai on October 15, 2013, 12:56:22 AM
Oh, awesome! Thanks LMNO!
Can you clarify something for me? It's been about 9 years since I learned this: what separates blues from jazz?
Basic proficiency with a musical instrument?
Says the man who plays his ass when on the toilet. :lol:
I've grown, musically, since then.
The toilet is no longer required.
Think of it as "improv".
I just flashed on the term "singing scat". :horrormirth:
1812 Overture going, here.
Da dada dada dada da da da BOOM :lulz:
Quote from: stelz on October 15, 2013, 01:24:11 AM
Da dada dada dada da da da BOOM :lulz:
What ya gotta do, see, is you gotta clamp that wax ring down TIGHT. That way the hydraulic effect blows the NEIGHBOR'S pipes out.
So, this is when things start to get a bit weird. The 40s are still seeing Ellington write and orchestrate some amazingly thought-out and arranged pieces (http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Concerto+for+Cootie+youtube&FORM=VIRE3#view=detail&mid=3E98BF94797B237144FB3E98BF94797B237144FB), you're starting to see some of the younger musicians pull away, and go back to smaller combos. While some of it is incredibly lovely and smooth (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sul_9BcgOOI), there is now a sense of "Art" in the air, and an apparent desire to move away from dance music, and get, you know, serious (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnhIrr4svqs). For them, this means speeding up the tempo, taking extended solos, shying away from the melodies as they are written, and all but abandoning arrangements. They even decided that they could just re-use older songs, and the idea of a "standard" was born. For example, there's this complex arrangement (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb2w2m1JmCY) that has a danceable groove and hummable melody, and then this happened to it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYpR4YPKsHQ). There's still complexity there, but of a much different kind.
The rise of the complex arrangements opened people's eyes to the breadth and depth of music theory, and the conceptual "availability" of notes expanded greatly. Long, looping glissandos and trills jump around the space, while the beat precariously holds onto the ride cymbal, letting the snare and kick drums stumble and scatter unexpected punctuation about. Meanwhile, the bass is "walking", creating its own line that weaves through the chord structure – which itself has blossomed new progressions and architecture due to the advanced music theory that was brought into jazz by the big band sound.
But then there's this guy, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mmm1dSWmmnc) who was so out there, it often sounds like he was confusing himself. Odd chord clusters on the piano, conflicting melodies, and an almost confrontational playing style. He's fighting to get those notes out there. There's this weird juxtaposition, because he's not going balls out with speed, and there's a bounce to the rhythm, and every once in a while you can here a really catchy melody. But then it all tumbles to the ground in a glorious mess, only to be caught through outstretched fingers, slipping, bobbling...
Needless to say, these guys are probably the ones who gave jazz a bad name in terms of epic wankery and pretension. They were no longer there to entertain, mind you. They were creating something. They were making ART™. And for a time, speed and agility (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oslMFOeFoLI) were the markers of that. But it wasn't all screeching and fluttering. When they slowed it down (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUwcDtCo0co), things could get really, really beautiful.
But things could get weirder. And they did.
More to come.
How is moving away from dance "getting serious"?
Ah. "Serious" as in "SRSBZNZ".
Where do you think the term Hipster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipster_(1940s_subculture)) originated, anyway?
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 15, 2013, 07:37:06 PM
Ah. "Serious" as in "SRSBZNZ".
Where do you think the term Hipster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipster_(1940s_subculture)) originated, anyway?
And see, that's my primary problem. Music, to me, is for stomping to, for dancing until you spit blood.
If I am expected to sit still and snap my fingers as applause, I'm going to get my stomp on by other means.
LMNO, I would pay money so I could take a course on the history of Jazz taught by you.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 15, 2013, 07:40:21 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 15, 2013, 07:37:06 PM
Ah. "Serious" as in "SRSBZNZ".
Where do you think the term Hipster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipster_(1940s_subculture)) originated, anyway?
And see, that's my primary problem. Music, to me, is for stomping to, for dancing until you spit blood.
If I am expected to sit still and snap my fingers as applause, I'm going to get my stomp on by other means.
Yeah, the next phase or two ain't gonna be pretty for you. Actually, most jazz from the 50's on up is made for listening, usually difficult listening.
Quote from: Don Coyote on October 15, 2013, 07:53:05 PM
LMNO, I would pay money so I could take a course on the history of Jazz taught by you.
:thanks:
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 15, 2013, 07:56:57 PM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 15, 2013, 07:40:21 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 15, 2013, 07:37:06 PM
Ah. "Serious" as in "SRSBZNZ".
Where do you think the term Hipster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipster_(1940s_subculture)) originated, anyway?
And see, that's my primary problem. Music, to me, is for stomping to, for dancing until you spit blood.
If I am expected to sit still and snap my fingers as applause, I'm going to get my stomp on by other means.
Yeah, the next phase or two ain't gonna be pretty for you. Actually, most jazz from the 50's on up is made for listening, usually difficult listening.
If I want difficult listening, I'd actually attend meetings.
I want something that makes me want to moonwalk on the ruins of my city, with a bottle of rum in my hand, and my horribly diseased genetalia hanging out. I don't get that from "listening", which is why I loathe jazz.
Every city should have someone like me. A hulking freak with 2 left feet that dances like an epileptic ox and DOESN'T CARE, because the MUSIC is what it's ALL ABOUT.
It's like you're a living embodiment of The Troggs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRXt2A7inIU).
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 15, 2013, 08:17:18 PM
It's like you're a living embodiment of The Troggs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRXt2A7inIU).
Youtube is locking up on me (nannywall is twitchy about ads), but I know that song. And that's not really it. I just wanna dance.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 15, 2013, 08:07:11 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 15, 2013, 07:56:57 PM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 15, 2013, 07:40:21 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 15, 2013, 07:37:06 PM
Ah. "Serious" as in "SRSBZNZ".
Where do you think the term Hipster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipster_(1940s_subculture)) originated, anyway?
And see, that's my primary problem. Music, to me, is for stomping to, for dancing until you spit blood.
If I am expected to sit still and snap my fingers as applause, I'm going to get my stomp on by other means.
Yeah, the next phase or two ain't gonna be pretty for you. Actually, most jazz from the 50's on up is made for listening, usually difficult listening.
If I want difficult listening, I'd actually attend meetings.
I want something that makes me want to moonwalk on the ruins of my city, with a bottle of rum in my hand, and my horribly diseased genetalia hanging out. I don't get that from "listening", which is why I loathe jazz.
Every city should have someone like me. A hulking freak with 2 left feet that dances like an epileptic ox and DOESN'T CARE, because the MUSIC is what it's ALL ABOUT.
Like how there is poetry and then there is Poetry
TM.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 15, 2013, 08:23:34 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 15, 2013, 08:17:18 PM
It's like you're a living embodiment of The Troggs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRXt2A7inIU).
Youtube is locking up on me (nannywall is twitchy about ads), but I know that song. And that's not really it. I just wanna dance.
Perhaps to this? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9a4W2FZnpc)
I like jazz because it is music that is open to exploring many different paths, often in the same song.
Submission of evidence: period testimony about the Gillespie-Parker gang.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxELzu-OtEQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxELzu-OtEQ)
In the late 40s, a bunch of players more or less gave the finger to the bebop guys, and went back to the roots. There was a "Dixieland Revival" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSM_gLiQfUE) that lasted through the 50s and 60s, selling more records than the other developing styles, though it wasn't critically recognized. Why not? Well, I'll tell you...
This started happening (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxbkUA5BiSw). The young hep cats who came up in bebop wanted to go further. And what happens when you want to further than Thelonius Monk? You get this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AFf8HpVFuw). The bop players were getting pretty far out (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuUkTmb5pYc), almost giving up on conventional songwriting, melody, harmony, and everything else. So how far could you push it?
Until the breaking point, apparently (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScME4cv2qXI). This guy put two quartets in a room, and pretty much told them to go for it. Half the band is in the left channel, half is in the right, and no one is on the same page. At all. There's no theme, no melody, no chord progression. It's eight guys playing eight different things in the same room at the same time. But wait! There is a tempo, a beat, the walking bass and some of the drums are trying to lend coherence. Oops, there it goes. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgrQhBTDfhk) Now even the beat has gone missing. How to justify this? Well, one way is to claim that you're from Saturn (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHn3tNpk5RE). Others went in a more spiritual route, calling free jazz a holy experience (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13L6sjk080c), while some got all Black Power on people's asses (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hT3-xXM83VM). More to the point, these guys were feeling something beyond music. They were trying to play pure emotion, not wanting to be restrained by anything. They were attempting to reach a transcendental moment, when it becomes more than music, more than itself.
I should say at this point that when I was a kid, I fucking loved this stuff. The more out, the more freaky, the more jarringly incoherent, the better. I'd put on some weird shit (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZQj6uBPK6c), lay back, and let all that harshness wash over me (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wgA9L5TN5M). In fact, just researching this post took me back, and I kind of fell in love with it all over again. But if any point in jazz was in a "your mileage may vary" moment, this was it.
This is officially my favorite thread.
Aw.
:oops:
It's helped me make sense of it. FINALLY.
I've had a lifetime of jazz being a big smear of stuff I liked, stuff that gave me a headache, and too-quiet stuff that made me feel like I was in a waiting room. Maybe I can start liking the second two a little, now that I know the reasons for it. Thanks. :)
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 17, 2013, 06:19:33 PM
In the late 40s, a bunch of players more or less gave the finger to the bebop guys, and went back to the roots. There was a "Dixieland Revival" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSM_gLiQfUE) that lasted through the 50s and 60s, selling more records than the other developing styles, though it wasn't critically recognized. Why not? Well, I'll tell you...
This started happening (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxbkUA5BiSw). The young hep cats who came up in bebop wanted to go further. And what happens when you want to further than Thelonius Monk? You get this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AFf8HpVFuw). The bop players were getting pretty far out (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuUkTmb5pYc), almost giving up on conventional songwriting, melody, harmony, and everything else. So how far could you push it?
Until the breaking point, apparently (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScME4cv2qXI). This guy put two quartets in a room, and pretty much told them to go for it. Half the band is in the left channel, half is in the right, and no one is on the same page. At all. There's no theme, no melody, no chord progression. It's eight guys playing eight different things in the same room at the same time. But wait! There is a tempo, a beat, the walking bass and some of the drums are trying to lend coherence. Oops, there it goes. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgrQhBTDfhk) Now even the beat has gone missing. How to justify this? Well, one way is to claim that you're from Saturn (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHn3tNpk5RE). Others went in a more spiritual route, calling free jazz a holy experience (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13L6sjk080c), while some got all Black Power on people's asses (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hT3-xXM83VM). More to the point, these guys were feeling something beyond music. They were trying to play pure emotion, not wanting to be restrained by anything. They were attempting to reach a transcendental moment, when it becomes more than music, more than itself.
I should say at this point that when I was a kid, I fucking loved this stuff. The more out, the more freaky, the more jarringly incoherent, the better. I'd put on some weird shit (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZQj6uBPK6c), lay back, and let all that harshness wash over me (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wgA9L5TN5M). In fact, just researching this post took me back, and I kind of fell in love with it all over again. But if any point in jazz was in a "your mileage may vary" moment, this was it.
Wow, that last one was utterly lost on me, LMNO. Where does modal jazz come in to all of this?
Oh, that's another story. At this point, jazz really splinters. Modal is joined at the hip with Cool, so I'll probably go there next.