Off-topic: If you aren't listening to classical music...

[JimL]

Not only that, Mark, but without jazz, we wouldn't have scat singing.  And without scat singing, would My Bonnie Lass She Smelleth by P.D.Q. Bach be nearly as funny as it is?

[Mark Thomas]

I described much jazz as a self-indulgent art form because it always comes across to me as music making which is inward-looking, aimed primarily at satisfying the performers, rather than their listeners. I have been to so many mixed-style concerts (jazz, country, popular, folk, classical etc.) over the years where the jazz performers have stood out in their self-absorption and lack of connection with their audience. I'm not saying, of course, that many jazz players aren't brilliant, or that jazz is unpopular, merely that it does nothing for me and that one of the reasons is what comes across to me as the smug air of self-satisfaction at their own cleverness radiated by some jazz performers.

But it's only my opinion.

PDQ Bach is, on the other hand, a true unsung!

[JimL]

Did I mention Steely Dan?  Becker and Fagen forever!  (Or at least until all my dime dancin' is through...)

[Amphissa]

 
Well, Mark, maybe you've been listening to the wrong jazz musicians, or maybe we just have completely different perspectives on music. I listen primarily to classical music these days, have associated with orchestras and classical musicians in large cities as well as smaller regional orchestras, been involved in recruiting conductors and attended countless concerts (as have you).

I am also a former musician myself (in an earlier life). And my experience has been much different from yours.

For one thing, my opinion is that jazz musicians (not new age pop dudes, but real jazz musicians) have a far better command of their instrument and a far deeper understanding of music than most classical musicians. But I've never noticed them being disconnected from their audience. In fact, I would say that, in my experience, it is just the other way around. It is, more often than not, the classical musicians who are smug, distant and lacking in connection to their audience. They play lots of notes that were written down by somebody else, they are unable to invest much in the way of personal self into the playing, usually show no emotion and rarely even move in their chairs. And when soloists do invest much personality into their performances, they are criticized for it.

From my experience, classical musicians are often arrogant and condescending toward audiences -- they especially condemn audiences as ignorant for loving Rachmaninoff and disliking modern music. On the other hand, jazz musicians often talk with the audience, they listen to the music their companions are playing, they dig into it and enjoy playing.

After seeing your note, I thought immediately of George Gershwin and Wynton Marsalis and Edgar Meyer and Count Basie and Duke Ellington's band, as well as many contemporary jazz musicians that I've had the pleasure to meet. To the person, every jazz musician I've ever talked to thrives on the audience energy. (And by the way, I'd put the Duke's brass up against any classical orchestra brass section in the world.)

All that said, I don't really listen to the new age stuff and so-called "smooth jazz." If that is what you were referring to as jazz, I can sure agree with you on that.

[JimL]

It's been a while since I've been to the (hopefully only temporarily defunct) Jazz Bakery, but I'm in total agreement with you, Dave, although I must say that the classical musicians I've seen recently are much more personable and "audience friendly" than they were in the past.  The jazz musicians were much chattier and communicated directly with their audience during their sets.

[sdtom]

I listen to a lot of soundtrack material.  Within the genre I especially enjoy composers such as Rozsa, Korngold, RVW, and Previn who were involved with film and classical.
Thomas