You can Stilgoe out with a Blaize as long as you have Faith

**Serial_Apologist** · 07-05-22, 17:18

Bless Madeleine for choosing Bessie Smith's most raunchy song for part of her selection.

Apologies, by the way, for my overlooking that this programme has been broadcast before.

**Ian Thumwood** · 07-05-22, 18:26

Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post

Bless Madeleine for choosing Bessie Smith's most raunchy song for part of her selection.

Apologies, by the way, for my overlooking that this programme has been broadcast before.

I was listening to this whilst watching the cricket. I loved the guitar playing on the Bessie Smith track. I must admit that I find "suggestive lyrics" in music to be really tedious as best and crass at worst. That said, the Bessie Smith track was fantastic - almost as good as the Billie Holiday one before it .

**Quarky** · 08-05-22, 10:26

You might /might not add the first track of New Music Show::

Silvia Tarozzi Che cos'è una primavera

**Serial_Apologist** · 08-05-22, 10:41

Originally posted by Quarky View Post

You might /might not add the first track of New Music Show::

Silvia Tarozzi Che cos'è una primavera

OK - wasn't aware of this, since I go by the Radio Times write-up, in which there was no mention of this piece. Listening to it (the opening piece) I do see what you mean, however.

**Serial_Apologist** · 08-05-22, 21:11

Has anybody been listening to the relay from Cheltenham tonight (which you can click on the link I generously provided)? It made me wonder where they managed to get such a huge audience for this kind of Sunday Night at the London Palladium backing band, ca. 1958 stuff: it can't be the folks 10-15 years my senior who were always demographised for this which makes me want to weep whenever presented in the name of jazzzzzzzzzz. Especially celebrating 25 years presenting jazzzzzzzzzzzzzz. They must all be locked away in care homes by now. Who the Dickens are you all out there?? Starving??? Press-ganged into being there?????

Mister Barker your overblown bombastic scores are only matched by your hairstyle, you are trashing your one-time reputation for excellent trumpet playing

I'm sure YolandA really means it.........

**Serial_Apologist** · 09-05-22, 11:38

Jazz UK - Spitting Fire turned out to be much more interesting than I had expected, with some genuine innovation before Shabaka's harshness rounded the programme off - interesting rhythm ins and outs with the earlier vocalists, new names to me, making me want to go back and really listen out for the singular interplay at work there - it offers scope for development. A real relief following the earlier dross. The Scott documentary seemed to consist of familiar stuff, adding revelations about the "inner" man, and about his working relationship with Pete King.

**burning dog** · 09-05-22, 11:55

Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post

Has anybody been listening to the relay from Cheltenham tonight (which you can click on the link I generously provided)? It made me wonder where they managed to get such a huge audience for this kind of Sunday Night at the London Palladium backing band, ca. 1958 stuff: it can't be the folks 10-15 years my senior who were always demographised for this which makes me want to weep whenever presented in the name of jazzzzzzzzzz. Especially celebrating 25 years presenting jazzzzzzzzzzzzzz. They must all be locked away in care homes by now. Who the Dickens are you all out there?? Starving??? Press-ganged into being there?????

Mister Barker your overblown bombastic scores are only matched by your hairstyle, you are trashing your one-time reputation for excellent trumpet playing

I'm sure YolandA really means it.........

Mostly cringeworthy!

**Ian Thumwood** · 09-05-22, 19:44

The best gig at Cheltenham was Myra Melford with Mary Halvorson, Tomeak Reid, Ingrid Laubrock and and PH drummer Susie Ibarra. I would have loved to have heard this group but it is a 90 trek for me own to Gloucester and the gig was supposed;y a one hour set! It would have been worht a trip if the gig was longer as this band has some of my favourite jazz musicians in it.

I did not bother with the rest of the CJF. The same thing is happening at Vienne with a watering down of the hardcore jazz content. I was debating whether to go but decided to gice it a miss in ths end. Only names worth seeing were Herbie Hancock, Angleique Kidjo and Gregory Porter but the laege percentage of groups are unknown to me. No music that is really challenging even in the Club de Minuit which usually suits the more hardcore jazz fans.

**Stanfordian** · 09-05-22, 21:26

Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post

Has anybody been listening to the relay from Cheltenham tonight (which you can click on the link I generously provided)? It made me wonder where they managed to get such a huge audience for this kind of Sunday Night at the London Palladium backing band, ca. 1958 stuff: it can't be the folks 10-15 years my senior who were always demographised for this which makes me want to weep whenever presented in the name of jazzzzzzzzzz. Especially celebrating 25 years presenting jazzzzzzzzzzzzzz. They must all be locked away in care homes by now. Who the Dickens are you all out there?? Starving??? Press-ganged into being there?????

Mister Barker your overblown bombastic scores are only matched by your hairstyle, you are trashing your one-time reputation for excellent trumpet playing

I'm sure YolandA really means it.........

I watched this programme. Well I soon stopped watching it but it was on in the background. It was 'middle of the road' music which is ok, but I could not find much jazz in it.

**Serial_Apologist** · 09-05-22, 21:44

Originally posted by Stanfordian View Post

I watched this programme. Well I soon stopped watching it but it was on in the background. It was 'middle of the road' music which is ok, but I could not find much jazz in it.

I wonder how much audience members paid to see that!

**Ian Thumwood** · 10-05-22, 06:52

Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post

I wonder how much audience members paid to see that!

I would suggest probably more than if the programme has been more adventurous. I rememer seeing Ornette at Vienne and the venue was only 1/3 full. "Fringe" or pop acts will put bums on seats. I just feel that alot of people programming jazz are either not real jazz fans or are having external pressures placed on them to find acts from a broader prospective. The latter happened at Vienne where the French government invested heavily in developing and improving the city with the consequence that there was a trade-off insofar as the people who had been running the festival had to hand control over to other bodies. There was a marked change the next year in not only the acts booked but also indepedent traders driven out by the enhanced fees charged to set up stalls at the festival. For example. the music book stall vanished overnight.

I think that the other question that has not really been addressed in this thread is the popularity of jazz and who are the "big names" who could be booked to put bums on seats. Part of me thinks that we are now reaping what was sown in the 1990s/ 2000s where the media did not seem too interested in developing an audience for more traditional jazz. Instead, the media lapped up "Nu Jazz", a host of singers content to replicate the Broadway song book and a mass of dull piano trios which seemed to spread like Japanese Knotweed through jazz in the 2000s/ early 2010s. If you try to rattle off the "big names" in jazz now, you would be limited to the likes of Herbie Hancock (82), Pat Metheny, Wynton Marsalis, Gregory Porter, Diane Krall and maybe Brad Mehldau. There are no longer "big hitters" like Sonny Rollins, Oscar Peterson, Miles Davis, Ray Charles, etc who would have produced more "genuine" jazz and still attracted an audience. I think the situation can only get worse.

It is also quite interesting to read some of the comments in this room too. The more adventurous jazz does not get much attention. I feel that there is a hardcore of jazz fans in here who love the music in it's genuine sense such as Bluesnik, Jazzrook. Elmo, etc but alot of the chat in here is given to historical records. I can concur with the sentiments 100% because you need to appreciate the history to understand the new. However, I would question the appetitie for a lot of contemporary jazz even in this board. This board often illustrates tastes that have been cemented at around early-seventies at best. There even seems to be little interest in here for the likes of Kenny Garrett, Dave Douglas, John Scofield, Branford Marsalis whereas there is absolute radio silence regarding edgier players like James Brandon Lewis, Steve Lehman, William Parker, Henry Threadgill, etc. If there is an audience for more recent jazz in here, it is probably only Bruce and Joseph showing much interest and, in the case of the case, this is often for more softer,perhaps rock-orientated styles of jazz and inoffensive, FM friendly players like Kurt Rosenwinkel. The audience for "contemporary jazz" was broader and more informed in the 1960s than in 2020's where it is really niche.

**Serial_Apologist** · 10-05-22, 22:31

Originally posted by Ian Thumwood View Post

I would suggest probably more than if the programme has been more adventurous. I rememer seeing Ornette at Vienne and the venue was only 1/3 full. "Fringe" or pop acts will put bums on seats. I just feel that alot of people programming jazz are either not real jazz fans or are having external pressures placed on them to find acts from a broader prospective. The latter happened at Vienne where the French government invested heavily in developing and improving the city with the consequence that there was a trade-off insofar as the people who had been running the festival had to hand control over to other bodies. There was a marked change the next year in not only the acts booked but also indepedent traders driven out by the enhanced fees charged to set up stalls at the festival. For example. the music book stall vanished overnight.

I think that the other question that has not really been addressed in this thread is the popularity of jazz and who are the "big names" who could be booked to put bums on seats. Part of me thinks that we are now reaping what was sown in the 1990s/ 2000s where the media did not seem too interested in developing an audience for more traditional jazz. Instead, the media lapped up "Nu Jazz", a host of singers content to replicate the Broadway song book and a mass of dull piano trios which seemed to spread like Japanese Knotweed through jazz in the 2000s/ early 2010s. If you try to rattle off the "big names" in jazz now, you would be limited to the likes of Herbie Hancock (82), Pat Metheny, Wynton Marsalis, Gregory Porter, Diane Krall and maybe Brad Mehldau. There are no longer "big hitters" like Sonny Rollins, Oscar Peterson, Miles Davis, Ray Charles, etc who would have produced more "genuine" jazz and still attracted an audience. I think the situation can only get worse.

While holding some differences with you regarding "dull piano trios" you have mentioned - early EST, Phronesis and Robert Mitchell's 3io to my mind being more than just worthy follow-ups to Jarrett's or Corea's - broadly I am in agreement about the deleterious effects the corporatisation of festivals has had on both the music and its scheduling. As many of the contributers on the Scott documentary attested, clubs are the best places for nurturing the music's development.

It is also quite interesting to read some of the comments in this room too. The more adventurous jazz does not get much attention. I feel that there is a hardcore of jazz fans in here who love the music in it's genuine sense such as Bluesnik, Jazzrook. Elmo, etc but a lot of the chat in here is given to historical records. I can concur with the sentiments 100% because you need to appreciate the history to understand the new. However, I would question the appetitie for a lot of contemporary jazz even in this board. This board often illustrates tastes that have been cemented at around early-seventies at best. There even seems to be little interest in here for the likes of Kenny Garrett, Dave Douglas, John Scofield, Branford Marsalis whereas there is absolute radio silence regarding edgier players like James Brandon Lewis, Steve Lehman, William Parker, Henry Threadgill, etc. If there is an audience for more recent jazz in here, it is probably only Bruce and Joseph showing much interest and, in the case of the case, this is often for more softer,perhaps rock-orientated styles of jazz and inoffensive, FM friendly players like Kurt Rosenwinkel. The audience for "contemporary jazz" was broader and more informed in the 1960s than in 2020's where it is really niche.

A lot had to do with the status of jazz as innately trangressive by way of its activising function as situated in 20th century American history and its universally exemplary power for unification promoted by forefronting the improvisatory drive that powers the music's forward, progressive momentum. Through jazz's recorded archives one is able to gauge stages in emancipation as well as consolidations and reversals against its means at any juncture one chooses to focus on. Issues of innovation versus capitulation to commercialist values accordingly underlay much what was "more informed" in jazz criticism the 1960s, although there were always those who preferred to examine the music forensically to contextual inclusivity.

**Joseph K** · 11-05-22, 06:39

Originally posted by Ian Thumwood View Post

inoffensive, FM friendly players like Kurt Rosenwinkel.

What offensive attributes should Rosenwinkel adopt, do you think?

You're obviously not familiar with his free project, Bandit 65 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57ZpLlpJS8g

**Ian Thumwood** · 11-05-22, 07:16

SA

I grew up listening to jazz in the 1980s which I think was an exciting time to get in to the music. Regardless of how you feel about the artists, the media did focus a lot of attention on players like Wynton Marsalis and Courtnet Pine as well issues such as Miles Davis switching from Columbia to Warner. I think that the media back then made people interested in jazz and this incorporated other musicians who might not have enjoyed the same degree of attention. I don't really see that happening too much these days. The fact that people no longer access their music through CDs also means new material does not neessarily get the attention it might have done. You just have to think about the coverage new alums by Marsalis, Jarrett, Joe Henderson, Kenny Wheeler, etc used to get. I just feel that there are too many differences between how the media can respond to jazz in 2022 to what it had available in , say , 1985. You now have a situation where pop / rock acts of the 1970s and 80s seem to be given the same creedance and analysis was jazz was afforded thirty- forty years ago. If jazz coverage exists in the broadsheets, it must be pretty small . I cannot recall seeing much in the Telegraph of late but the Morning Star had a good column about Mingus yesterday.

I concur about commercial issues but this is only one element with the way jazz has to struggle these days. If the media is failing to encourage an audience for jazz, it is hardly surprising that festivals like Cheltenham have to put on a programme like that. It was sponsored by Radio 2 whose commitment to jazz it hardly serious and little more than a token gesture. Go and listen to local BBC stations such as Radio Solent down here and you will discover that jazz is totally absent from it's coverage. Somewhen around the turn of the century, the media really dropped the ball with jazz with the consequence that very few musicians from the 21st century have managed to acquire the kind of following that the generation immediately before them enjoyed.

I would also add that the kind of "non-jazz" prograaming at Jazz Festivals is a self-fulfilling prophecy which will alienate true jazz fans. It does not helpt that many jazz fans do not go to gigs at all (i think Trevor Cooper, late of this board, was not atypical in this respect.) When #i go to gigs, it is usually with a friend who is much older than me and with whom I used to go with my Dad too. I have not friends of my own generation who listen to jazz. Interestingly, when I speak to "younger" fans at Vienne, it is quite interesting to see what kind of jazz they listen to and what they consider to be "innovative" and this is a million miles away what you and I might consider to be progressive.

I get the point about listening to jazz in clubs. This disadvantage with this is that they open late and tend to feature gigs during weekdays. Ignoring the fact that the nearest clubs are in London, I tend not to go out socialising during the week if it means getting in after 11pm. I will go to watch football but staying up in to the early hours during a weeknight is not an option for me. Jazz festivals are great. You get to be in with a population of people who share the same interest and who are generallyreally sociable. I love the experience. In my opinion, it has changed massively since myfirst festival in 2001 in Vienne to the last ine in 2019 and not for the better. The local Southampton Jazz Festival never got beyond three or four years and Winchester's festival is a much smaller affair - oddily Yolanda Brown was a recent visitor here.

You can Stilgoe out with a Blaize as long as you have Faith

You can Stilgoe out with a Blaize as long as you have Faith

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment