[Dixielandjazz] Dixieland Re-Creations

[mmckay]

 But is this "re-creation" any better or any worse than modern groups who do
more-or-less the same set with more-or-less the same solos "re-creating
their best stuff" performance after performance?

We go to festivals and see/hear that all the time and think it is wonderful!

Actually, I have very little real difficulty with either one, but if we are
going to go past the spontaneous performance/solos level at all, you have to
consider all of them.

Martin D. McKay

-----Original Message-----
From: dixielandjazz-bounces at ml.islandnet.com
[mailto:dixielandjazz-bounces at ml.islandnet.com] On Behalf Of Steve Barbone
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 4:27 PM
To: dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com
Subject: [Dixielandjazz] Dixieland Re-Creations

"Fr M J (Mike) Logsdon" <mjl at ix.netcom.com>

>> Steve Wrote: 
>> To me, at least, a note for note re-creation is not really jazz

> Mike answered:
> A wee bit overly hair-splitting, eh, Steve?  If what's being preserved 
> is a jazz performance or style, surely it can be called jazz, just not 
> deliberately impromptu/innovative jazz?

Yes, perhaps, but then I am a hair splitter. Just my opinion, but I don't
think they are preserving anything since the originals are already
preserved. They are re-preserving perhaps? :-) VBG.

For me, (again an opinion) note for note reading and/or re-creations, while
they may be art because they are done by humans and do not occur in nature,
they are not jazz, but rather music.

Jazz for me contains creative, on the spot, improvisation by the musos.
Music composed in here and now real time.

Cheers,
Steve






_______________________________________________
Dixielandjazz mailing list
Dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com
http://ml.islandnet.com/mailman/listinfo/dixielandjazz