4 ms·
For a more recent take on the subject (including opinions of some jazz musicians), see http://forums.allaboutjazz.com/showthread.php?t=42725 http://forums.allab
by hernan7 17y ago
For a more recent take on the subject (including opinions of some jazz musicians), see http://forums.allaboutjazz.com/showthread.php?t=42725 http://forums.allaboutjazz.com/showthread.php?t=42725
Personally, I don't have the foggiest idea of how one would go about marketing jazz. I got my taste for jazz from my parents, who were fans of "hot jazz" (a.k.a. traditional or Dixieland jazz). They were never into any modern (postwar) jazz styles, and accepted big band/swing only reluctantly. Glenn Miller was "too commercial" for them :-)
One problem that I see with jazz evangelists is that they tend to push the more abstract/ academic masterpieces in detriment of the more digestible stuff. I can see some kid like I was getting into Satch and Bix and Django, and then going on to discover Mingus, Parker, Weather Report, and so on, like I did. But I'm not sure if you can throw "Blue Trane" cold at somebody without giving them any context, and expect them to like it because "it's good for them".
- tjr 17y agoContext is very important for the more "masterpiece" recordings. The relatively short history of jazz music shows a continual building upon previous works, exploring new ideas and new sounds. Handing a jazz novice "Blue Trane" might be akin to handing a Star Trek novice "The Search for Spock"; it may or may not be superficially enjoyable, but to really understand it requires more background knowledge.
- Legion 17y agoFor an alternative point of view, Blue Train is probably what got me into jazz in the first place. But seeing as my tastes went on to become enamored with highly abstract, noisy, wall-of-sound, drone-for-40-minutes sort of stuff, I might not make a good data point. :)