Discussion on the Place of Jazz in America's Music Industry
In reference to: "The Place of Jazz in America's Music Industry" by Nathan Gold
I'm both a songwriter and a jazz musician (sax and flute)
who began writing songs to combine the harmonies of the Blue
Note era with interesting, meaty lyrics. But as a listener,
I think that both jazz and classical music have stagnated
due to factors intrinsic to the structure of the music
itself, as well as these other factors... once you go "on
beyond zebra" to 12-tone, microtonal and then atonal
music... what's left to provide the energy of innovation?
Most composers in both genres have picked their favorite
parking place on the continuum and stopped. They may create
interesting material, but the exploration aspect is no
longer present, there is no wilderness to discover, in the
way that playing 9ths and 11ths was new in both genres.
I've played free jazz too, and it is as good as the players
and serendipity intend at that moment, but conceptually it
is not new. As for the business, yes of course, but the 'Net
gives us a million new venues to taste new music. The
function of life of Earth is to be generative, so whenever
there is new and powerful creation, it pokes its beautiful
head through the dirt and fertilizer, maybe not in its
composer's lifetime, but it rises. I am not afraid.
I'm not sure what jazz and classical music you've listened
to. Penderecky, perhaps, in classical? G. F. Mlely in
jazz, his Jazz Inventions in the 8- Tone Quarto-Modes? As
to "their favorite parking places on the continuum and
stopped." Goodness, what does that mean?
As for the plethora of music available on the Net. Outside
the large crowd of eager imitators, what I've come across
offers little beyond extremities of tone manipulation, or
their electronic equivalents. Nearly all the "new" musics
striving for pop stardom are essentially folk musics, often
dressed up electrically.
Which is why musicians from different nations are able to
fit in so nicely with one another in the trend towards
"World" music, for instance. The harmony is at the lowest
common denominator. Nothing wrong in that. But there is
more to music than what they offer, more to music than
kitschy entertainment, more to music than words, and more to
music than sound alteration. Much more.
- Nathan Gold
While I can't claim to fully understand what >I< meant in my
post, I will clarify one point and then ask for some
suggestions on what to listen to that I may have missed
(forgive me, I have little ones these days, who oddly enough
prefer the Teletubbies theme song to Archie Shepp. Not that
I do, but it puts a crimp in my jazz listening.)
What I meant by artists stopping on the continuum, was those
who "stop" at a certain degree of tonality vs. atonality and
venture no further, i.e. major-minor, modal, atonal. For
example, I haven't heard Wynton Marsalis play "outside."
There was a time when going beyond the root, third and fifth
in both classical and jazz was as outrageous as the thought
of going to the moon, even diabolical. But it was a
frontier, with all the excitement and potency of a
wilderness to be explored. And I remember long
conversations with a classical music major when I was in
college (1976) who felt that jazz was, structurally, so 19th
century in the predominance of music in 4/4 and with
standard 32-bar structures (with some variations, of course,
but not as much as contemporary classical music at the time,
with odd time signatures and changes occurring as frequently
as every bar).
The Mlely music sounds very interesting. I'll try to get it.
Who else is writing and playing with concepts that fresh?
I played in a free jazz group when I was at Berklee, whose
bassist ran their library, where I worked, so we would
listen to every experimental music that came in. I was
interested in the multiple tones Bruno Bertolozzi's book
taught me to produce on my flute and sax, as well as Indian
music, and different scales gleaned from Slonimsky. I
listened SO broadly. Then I went on to study with a
wonderful classical composer and became interested in
Japanese classical composers like Takemitsu, and also
studied jazz at Jazzmobile and with Karl Berger, Anthony
Braxton, Ornette Coleman. Loved Sun Ra. Love Paul Bley,
Coltrane, Herbie Hancock, Eric Dolphy. Had a Saturday night
jazz radio show one year in college and spent other college
years' Saturday nights in jazz clubs. So maybe I'm a bit
different than your typical lady songwriter. I can hear a
lot of jazz on public stations here, WBGO-Newark and
WRTI-Philly, but I'm on the run a lot. So please enlighten
me. Who else is playing jazz that takes the same kind of
risks Bird and Coltrane did? That not only has a conceptual
base but sounds as good and moves heaven and earth in the
same way? Is not just a cerebral exercise, but comes from
But I have a question...unless I'm misreading your
article...are you are saying that the music industry is
giving far less exposure to deserving jazz artists than at
some other time? When has it ever, except to artists with
huge popular appeal? I used to live around the corner from
the Village Vanguard. This Mount Olympus, this ultimate
crowning nightspot of the Big Apple was a tiny, cramped,
low-ceilinged dive. I sat there watching Herbie Hancock and
band just crammed in there, earning some pittance compared
to the rock bands playing the Felt Forum, and realized that
jazz musicians struggle so much, even the very best. But
it's always been like that with jazz, especially postwar
jazz. One part racism, one part being too sophisticated for
the average ear. Jazz's popularity has waxed and waned more
than once over the past 4 decades, and perhaps gets more
attention now than say, 10 years ago.
In the songwriting field, to which I have returned after a
hiatus for my kids, I notice a huge change to independently
managed performance and recording that cuts across
genres...country, pop, rock, r&b, folk, jazz artists are
able to record their own CDs, book their own gigs, break
free of the servitude to record labels and I think the major
labels are feeling big bites from both the Internet and from
the boom in independent artists. It's just beginning, but
any artist can buy a barebones "studio" for under $1000 and
press their own CDs. If the record labels and NARAS are
increasingly constricted, perhaps it will allow new channels
But does Miely imply that the reason why American teens
aren't grooving to his microtonal etudes is because Miely's
music hasn't been marketed to them? The boyz in my 'hood
aren't exactly sitting on the curb listening to Harry
Partch, and I don't know if they would even if it was
marketed by the leading ad agencies. Does Miely want to
be recognized as an artist at the pinnacle of his craft
(given a jazz Grammy) and to be marketed as if he were Nike
sneakers? Oy vey. Maybe jazz should be regarded more like
classical music...subsidized, studied, full of virtuosi, not
for everyone, appealing to those of refined taste, with big
ears and a lot of patience, the kind of people who don't
need stimulation on both sides of their brains as song
Anyway, if you have the time, tell me who to listen to, who
will blow my socks off, make me weep, edge my IQ up a couple
of points. It's on the Internet that I'll find them, that I
can buy their CD or listen to them on streaming audio. This
is where the best music stores are, and where people devote
a lot of time to the arts without recompense, because they
want to share their enthusiasm for their favorite. Radio's
always been limited, TV even more so. But there's a little
of that frontier feeling here...
Ruth, I'm motivated to address some matters you bring up in
your re-response. You ask "Who else is playing jazz ... moves
heaven and earth ... but comes from black roots?"
Jazz has black and white roots. There are many who could move
you, given the opportunity. Nowhere else did jazz evolve except
in America's black and white society - where Africa and Euro-
America met. It's as racist to ignore white (or yellow or red)
contributions as it is to ignore other's. Taste does not always
come naturally. Sometimes it's acquired. And, with modern-
style marketing and education, it's often impressed.
You reference "those who "stop" at a certain degree of tonality
vs. atonality and venture no further, i.e. major-minor, modal,
And you might also add pantonality. Adventurous music, though,
doesn't always need to be "outside" prevailing modes, or
offbeat. It doesn't always need to keep moving on.
Rachmaninoff, for instance, was a retro composer, writing
freshly in a style nearly 75 years out of date at the time he
wrote. On the other hand, Marsalis offers little new to his
retro style. But, have you heard Piazzolla's work? Not
"outside," at all, but o so original and fresh.
Yes, most jazz getting out there (getting major media support),
as with virtually all pop, is still harmonically retro. But,
that's due to the totalitarianism of the commercial music
industry, as discussed earlier in my article.
It should also be noted that while advances in classical music
have their institutional forums to get heard, there is little or
nothing like that for jazz. You ask what's out there in jazz
that's new and can inspire you. Well, it's because the only
outlet for jazz is via the commercial music industry. Music
there must be instantly marketable. New music that is truly
new often needs time to be accepted. That's not possible in the
music industry is presently constituted. There should be forums
for new jazz as there are for the classical arts.
Okay, the net. But, consider the sound quality. And there's still
the need for live performing. Besides, the major media are so
dominant, that they continue to be, and for some time to come I
think, where most people look for information. People
stumbling across new music on the web relies on happenstance.
I've gotten a lot from G. F. Mlely's essays, which is why I often
quote him. He suggests the need of forums to be established,
for the reasons I mention above. Neither of us agrees that
"free" jazz can offer anything lasting. It is, by its nature,
music by chance. Art requires form. Stravinsky notes, in words
to the effect, that the greatest work comes about through the
narrowest confines. There needs to be barriers to be overcome.
Check out "Freeform Jazz - Politics Versus Excellence" by G. F.
Mlely online at http://home1.gte.net/jazcraft/freeform.htm.
I can't speak to what Mlely wants for himself. He probably
wants what any human wants, appreciation and reward for his
work. He's a bit of an idealist, one of the reasons he quite
NARAS and other organizations that were not what they make
themselves out to be, and are, in his opinion, counterproductive
to the artistic process.
I guess some people might consider him odd. And, if I'm going
to write that about him, I must also add that he's something of
a genius, too. Strange how those two things always seem to go
together. You identify yourself as a songwriter. Mlely is also a
songwriter, whose "commerical" work has been recorded and
produced by such as Freddie Hubbard and George Harrison - talk
You asked "Who else is playing jazz that takes the same kind of
risks Bird and Coltrane did?"
Mlely, for one. But, he's a pianist. His are not "microtonal
etudes," by the way. And there's more to music, including jazz,
Note how the only "major innovators" regarded as such these
recent days are mostly the surface voices, horn players,
particularly the saxophone. Single-note instruments, often
straining to get inharmoniously beyond their natural
limitations. The piano is naturally capable of multi-voicings.
It has the most potential for innovation. Besides the melodic,
it has the percussion, and it has the harmony.
I can't address everything you've written, except to say that
it's possible to get jaded from hearing so much music. So much
music constantly available, especially unasked-for-music
coming at us from overheads, phone holds, supermarkets,
elevators, offices, restrooms, passing cars, portable audio
boxes - absolutely everywhere. And who needs it?
I was once told that "You do, sir," when I asked and was told
that some opinion poll had been held. We become deadened to
music, and, as Mlely writes, we begin to train to shut out the
sound from our consciousness in order to get on with the
business of our lives. First we train to shut out the ugly, which
ultimately results in our shutting out the beautiful.
I've been assuming all along that you are writing and performing
for what pleases you aesthetically, not doing it just for what it
can get. What you write of your studies, you've experienced a
broad spectrum of music. It's not possible, of course - and you
probably knows this - to incorporate all of it. Many try; a rare
few partially succeed in some degree. But, I believe that a
musician who makes music needs to find a personal voice. It
can be simple or complex. A musical personality.
Sometimes, after hearing so much for so long of other's music,
this takes getting away from them. Once you've absorbed so
much, this might take shutting oneself off into a private,
undisturbed place, sometimes for extended periods. I realize
that your a mother with kids. But, where possible, write what
pleases one's self, not for an idea of what someone else wants.
Knock your own socks off, don't be in a spin for others to do it
- Nathan Gold
Great piece! One point I'd like to make, though, concerns
your focusing on extended harmony as the primary element of
jazz. For much of jazz history the fairly simple harmonic
and formal structures of blues defined the medium. Rhythm,
too, has been no small part of the mix. Disowning free jazz
and electric jazz reveals a personal prejudice that dilutes
the power of the argument your piece intends to make. I
think the reactionary rantings of Wynton Marsalis and
Stanley Crouch have hurt jazz as much as the
narrow-mindedness of NARAS and the elevation of teenagers as
the ultimate arbiters of culture.
Until the 50's jazz was America's pop music. "A Tisket A
Tasket," Basie's riff-based swing, Louis Armstrong's entire
body of work and Ellington's kitchy jungle music did not
aspire to be great "art." And young people loved it. It was
pretty accessible to their unschooled ears. Jazz adopting
textures of rock and funk in the 70's (fusion) and now hip
hop did what jazz always did -- trading freely with the
culture it existed in. Those forms of jazz (with exception
of smoooothJazz) are no more dumbed down than bebop and
"Kinda Blue" and were never formulated to win Grammys.
Harmonic complexity aside, "Kinda Blue" has become the
Number One With A Bullet Muzak of musically clueless Yuppie
America. So much for high culture. Mahavishnu Orchestra and
Ornette Coleman belong at the same table as the old school
and phat harmony icons.
- Polar Levine, Editor, popCULTmedia.com
You're close to the mark with your witticism about "Kind of
Blue" ("Kinda Blue"). Yes, certainly it was mostly jazz
musicians who supplied America's pop music until the 50s. And,
yes, Marsalis and Crouch (certainly Crouch) are reactionary as
well as bigoted voices. And, yes, rhythm of course is essential
to jazz, though "pulse" might be a better way to put it.
I cannot understand, though, your assertion that "For much of
jazz history the fairly simple harmonic and formal structures
of blues defined the medium." When do you begin jazz's
history? For one thing, the only Blues form to survive in jazz
was the 12-bar.
I don't want to get off into technicalities that only certain
people will understand. Suffice it to say, that Blues is not
jazz. But, jazz would not be the jazz we know if not for the
emotional influence of Blues.
As things are today and have been for quite some time, jazz,
unlike the Blues, is not just another form of pop music, at least
what I dare to classify as "higher" forms of jazz. Political
correctness will make that out to be elitist, but so be it.
I did not say that extended harmony was "the" primary element
of jazz. It is, at least in its higher levels, an essential
element. This is not just a later development, either. It's a
major stream from very early on, Ellington, Hines, Strayhorn,
Gershwin, even Parker, his endless roster of imitators and
Yes, some of them made some kitschy forays towards reaching
the lowest common denominator, to put some bread on the table.
But, that was not their main concentration.
Jazz musicians did not "adopt textures of rock and funk." Rock
and funk musicians were the ones who did the adopting, what
they were capable of adopting from jazz. Such music is not a
form of jazz. It is a form of pop music, as is Hip Hop.
Pop music has given little or nothing to jazz; it's quite the
other way around. The established jazz musicians, who
sometimes featured on certain pop albums, did not play the pop
music, they played jazz while those in the group around them
played the pop. It's a political gesture you make, not a musical
one, when you equate Hip Hop with bebop and "Kinda Blue."
It's interesting the attitude that if music involves harmonic
complexity, it deserves a kind of censure, as though it was
arrogantly defying demands from the majority. Jazz has its
popular levels. It also has its evolved levels. To each their
Music does not need to satisfy mass appeal to be good music.
It's a matter of taste, as with food. Is a gourmet to be
disdained, while a Mac burger eater is an okay kind of guy?
I do not "disown electric jazz." I've heard some that has moved
me, created usually by expert jazz musicians and composers.
The electric revolution, however, has mostly resulted in music
being cheaply gained, which opens up a whole other matter that
is inappropriate for this forum. As for "free jazz," it is a form
for undisciplined performers - music by accident.
- Nathan Gold
» CISAC 2018 Annual Report
» Pop Artist Ava King Releases New Single
» Puma Unveils Drum Machine Inspired Sneaker
» Is Podcasting the New Radio?
» Streaming & Listening Diversity - Spotify Case Study
Insider Scoop Directory
» [2018-06-23] The 2018 MIDEM Silk Road International Music Alliance Signing; International Music Industries Signing Of A Mutual Resource Sharing Agreement With Shanghai Conservatory Of Music & The China Records Group
» [2018-06-06] Screen Music Connect To Explore The Music Of Film, Television And Interactive Media; Created By James Hannigan, Award-winning Composer And Game Music Connect Co-founder, Screen Music Connect Builds On The Success Of The Sold-out Game Music Conferences
» [2018-06-05] Fred Casimir To Develop BMG's Global Recordings Business; As Well As Building BMG's European Infrastructure, Casimir Was Instrumental In Developing BMG's Recordings Business
» [2018-06-03] 13 Music Label Sold To MTN; DSN Music Spins Off Record Label To Albuquerque Music Entrepreneur's New Group
» [2018-06-02] CISAC 2018 Annual Report; A Comprehensive Overview Of The Confederation's Work To Serve 4 Million Creators And 239 Authors Societies Across The World
» [2018-06-02] MusicDish Announces A Love Electric 2018 China Tour; The Tour Will Crisscross Through China With 12 Shows In 8 Cities, Including Guangzhou, Dongguan, Zhuhai, Shenzhen, Kunming, Jiaxin, Wuhan And Beijing
» [2018-06-02] Darcus Beese Named President Of Island Records; Renowned U.K. Music Executive To Join Universal Music Group's U.S. Label Leadership
» [2018-05-17] Avant-Garde Label Maybe Noise Launches In Beijing; The Official Launch Will Be On May 26 At Magnet Theater With A Performance Supporting Its First Vinyl Release: Píng Zè
» [2018-05-04] Award-Winning Lithuanian Rock Band Colours Of Bubbles "She Is The Darkness" 2018 China Tour; The Tour Will Kickoff In Shanghai Where The Band Will Represent Lithuania During The Country's Signing To The Silk Road Music Alliance
» [2018-05-01] Hollywood Heavyweights Launch New Christian Music Label; Their Debut Release, Firma Collective - Songs For Every Soul, Was Produced By Mgrdichian And Mixed By The Legendary Brian Reeves
» [2018-04-30] Pop Artist Ava King Releases New Single; Paris-born Ava King Decided To Move To Beijing Where She Wrote For One Of The Biggest Chinese Movie Production Companies, HuaYi Brothers
» [2018-04-27] NetEase Cloud Music Sign Distribution Partnership With B2 Music; Chinese Music Streaming Service To Release Billboard "Best Of Asia" Album Series
follow MusicDish on