[Dixielandjazz] Jazz Standards & more

[Charles Suhor]

There are apples and elephants in Jim's comparison, I think. Yes, when we play in most pre-avanat garde jazz styles, there's interaction with the audience on site, just as when they're there for a free form performance. But recordings of the form-based jazz can still carry wide appeal because of their accessibilty. (If it's badly played, of course, that won't apply.) My point was that in free/avant garde jazz or free from sessions like the ones I used to play at with Jeff McLeod, the excitement is "strictly" in the moment of creation, seeing it as it happens, and a recording isn't usually a very rewarding listening experience. You had to be there for a caught-in-the-act sense, for the ambience and the aromatics and the unfolding of it. At least, that's my sense of it. 

I still listen to my jazz records that have form-based improvisation, but few recordings of experimental meanderings hold my attention. But again, hearing musicians live as they stretch out to improvisational badlands can be fun. 

Charlie

> 
> 
> Charlie wrote:
>> The thing about such performances (and most avant garde jazz, to me) is
> that the enjoyment is strictly in being there when the living creative event
> is unfolding. 
> 

 Jim Kashishian wrote:
> 
> But, that is what we all get during a performance of our own kind of music,
> is it not?  The interreaction between musicians in the ensemble and during
> solos (between the soloist & the rhythm section) is a living creation even
> if the song is based on a standard setup.  If that creativity is not kept
> alive in a band, then it becomes boring for both the band & the audience,
> and just becomes "another gig".
> 
> Jim
>