[Dixielandjazz] Couple of thoughts about music.

[Marek Boym]

On 5 June 2012 06:37, Stephen G Barbone <barbonestreet at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Following is my 2 cent opinion about a couple of points.
>
> 1) King olivers Creole Jazz Band was the greatest "jazz  band" of that era.
>
> 2) It was also primarily a (horrors) DANCE BAND!
>
> So what, are dance bands bad?

No.  all swing bands, black and white, were "dance bands."  LISTENING
to many nowadays is boring (although it's still gread dance music);
listening to others is outright boring.
>
> 3) Armstrong played for Royalty in England way back when.
>
> 4) He was also roundly criticized in England for being an over the top clown.

Our sages say that there is no earlier and later in the Torah (the
first five book of the Scriptures).  That may well be, but everywhere
else there is.  Armstrong was criticized for clowning there at the
time he was criticized for it elsewhere.  Different period.

> So what, does that make him an artist?

>
> 5) Todays players are derivative.
>
> 6) The old dead guys were the originators.
>
> So what, does that mean derivative players are bad? I think not. All musicians are derivative. Armstrong listened to Clarke, Bechet to Caruso, etc., etc., etc. If we want to understand Armstrong, shouldn't we spend lots of time listening to those he listened and learned from?

Exactly.  Today's musicians simply have much more influences to absorb
than those of old, expecially before the advent of the radio and the
gramophone.
>
> 7) The dead guys were so good, we must listen to them over and over again.
>
> Hey, I'm almost 80, a cancer survivor, love all genres of music including (gasp) modern jazz, and still working about 100 gigs a year as I slow down. And yes, I am a relatively quick study. How many more times should I listen to those dual Armstrong / Oliver breaks in order to absorb their genius for collective improvisation? How much and how many times, should I listen to the same classical, OKOM in  all its genres,


As many as possible, not because you are a musician.  But that should
not exclude conteemporary players.  Besides, 30 years ago quite a few
of them were still alive, and the discussion had already been old.





> Folks of average musical intelligence who have been playing together with the same band personnel for a lot of years, learn how to do those devices by rote. Biggest problem today may well be that there are not a lot of bands working steadily together with the same personnel. Few have done in  the last 20 years, as many gigs with the same personnel as Armstrong and Oliver did together during 2 years in years in Chicago.

The Dutch Swing College Band seems to have made it.  They have
musicians who have been playing together for years, even decades, but
always also enough "young" blood to keep them interested (and
interesting).
>

> Bottom line is simple. Music and musicians evolve. It's  a series of begats. For example; Bolden begat Oliver who begat Armstrong who begat Eldridge, who begat Gillespie, who begat Navarro who begat Brown.


Oh, well ,I'll refrain from commenting - this issue has been discussed
here ad nauseam.


Cheers
>
> _______________________________________________
> To unsubscribe or change your e-mail preferences for the Dixieland Jazz Mailing list, or to find the online archives, please visit:
>
> http://ml.islandnet.com/mailman/listinfo/dixielandjazz
>
>
>
> Dixielandjazz mailing list
> Dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com