[Dixielandjazz] EXCERPTS FROM MAY 2011 BLUE NOTE

[Marek Boym]

Hello folks,
Having read Larry Wright's article, I whoeheartedly agree.  Having
said that, I still prefer acoustic instruments (despite my admiration
of Charlie Christian), and as little amplification as possible - but
that has nothing to do with "purism."   Amplification is badly needed
in big halls, and often outdoors.  It is superfluous in small clubs,
bars, etc.  And it is too often abused.
Cheers
>
> OKOM-DEFINED -- A REBUTTAL
> by Larry Wright
>
>
>
> I will be respondingto Mr. Brodsky's article that appeared in theMay, 2011 issue of the Blue Note.  Now,I have a problem with trying to define OKOM (Our Kind Of Music) by the bands,instruments, and styles as the author has.  Thereis a Spirit involved that pervades the music of the 1920s, 1930s and yes, even later. This should be the defining aspect to OKOM, and what separates  it from other music.
>
>
> There is a YouTubevideo of a talentedkid playing a traditional Japanese string instrument along with the Bix recording of "Sorry."He nails the notes of every instrument as they come up. But more thancopying, he obviouslyhas a jazz feeling, or "spirit" of whatthe originators were doing. And it is very successful (except to hidebound purists).  Bottom line -- it doesn't matter whatinstrument is being played, in what combination, by what race, in what style -- as Ellington would say, "If it Ain't Got That Swing, It Don't Mean a Thing."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> That doesn't mean that any combination of instruments would beequally adept at playing the required ensembleparts -- obviously, a tuba isn't going to play a clarinet part without some inherent problems. But by intimatingthat an OKOM band MUSTuse certain instruments, the author misses the point entirely.  He specifically singles out the saxophone, and then backpedals regarding SydneyBechet. I must remind him that one of the most exciting players in Jelly RollMorton's classic band was Stump Evans, a very overlooked alto player. And I shouldremind him that "probably the greatest band of all time," (his words) King Oliver's Creole Jazz Band, used a bass sax in recordings! ("SouthernStomps," "Mabel's Dream").  It can't be both ways for "the dreaded honking saxophone," (his words again), eh?
>
>
> Another issue is that the author equates mainstream jazz witha modern version of small band swing. I would point outthat mainstream jazz is based on bebop, and that its primary force, Charlie Parker, developed his style to specifically getawayfrom the arpeggio-based playing so common to swing! In other words, swing ain't mainstream jazz
>
>
> The comment that none of the so-called "OKOM"instruments should be attached to an amplifier by an electriccordneeds exploring. An amplifiersimply amplifies sounds-- makes them louder. True, in their classicform, all theinstruments aren't connected by a wire. But they almostalways depend on microphones these days to be heard bylarge crowds. So is the concern about the means that an instrument is amplified, or the amplification itself? A! confusing remark atbest. And, I must point out that most of us listen to reissued 78s via...that's right, electric amplification .
>
> The author's definitionof what the tromboneand clarinet duties are is woefullyignorant. Granted,this ignorance isshared by many hobbyists currently playing today. But they both have clearly defined parts to play to obtain optimum adlibensemble success. Withoutgetting too technical, thetrombone has its roots in the marching bands. It is supposed to play what is termed a "tenor line." Essentially, that is a counterpoint to the melody that leads, or pushes, the ensemble into the next chord.! The clarinet is not supposed to "noodle around," (his words) although, sadly, this iswhat the vast majority of weekend warriors end up doing. Agood clarinet line covers the important harmonies to themelody, interspersed with just enough ornamentation to addvariety and flavor
>
>
>
>
> Naturally,  there are  many exceptions  to  this ensemble approach, but their success depends on brilliance and talent tobeable to get the overall effect with alternative instruments.! It is much more difficult this way,  but can be done.!  Good players appear to be doing effortlessly!what the author has misinterpreted (among many  more misstatements which  I won't addresshere)
> .
> I say, OKOM is a feeling,a state-of-mind pertainingto music.! Itmeans OUR KINDof music.! If ourpeople dig someoneplaying "Jazz Me Blues" on a pipe organ, then it's OKOM. If a clarinet players wings a Beatlestune and folkslikeit --  again, it's Our Kind of Music.! By limiting a definition, as the author does, it fosters an US vs.THEM! mentality andcloses minds to the possibilities of a living, changing art  form.
>
> However, in fairness,      at the end of his article the author      "grudgingly" acknowledges that a purist can enjoy non-pure allowances. He calls the whistles"corny," and yet Jelly's Red Hot Peppers didexactly the samething with horns and whistles ("Sidewalk Blues").! Then the author proclaims, "Yes, they're all OKOM!" Well, what was the point of this articlethe point of this article?   All I can say is, someone owes meforhaving to write a rebuttalfor no good reason    .
>
>