Somebody has to...so I'll defend Kenny G
Tim Berens
What really doesn't make sense to me is this: why we are so quick to
attack Kenny G, yet we completely ignore many other pop musicians
whose pretenses are in the same vein as Kenny G's?
Kenny G is making a living -- a great living -- playing music. A part
of making a great living playing music is publicity, hype, PR,
bullshit, whatever you want to call it.
For some reason, we jazz musicians don't bristle at all when country
star X, or rapper Y or rock singer Z puts out some ridiculously smarmy
song or absurd statement in the press, but let Kenny G do it and we
get our panties in a terrible wad.
To tell the truth, I find that I am really quite jealous of the living
Kenny G makes. I wonder if much of the open hatred for him isn't at
least partially rooted in jealousy of the success he has had.
It seems to me that all this anger is counter productive for us, as it
distracts us from the more important things in life. Why don't we all
just give Kenny G the same treatment we give to other musicians we
don't like -- an indifferent yawn -- and then get back to practicing.
Tim
http://timberens.com
A Website for Guitarists
Learn something...Have some fun
Doug Boucher
> It seems to me that all this anger is counter productive for us, as it
> distracts us from the more important things in life. Why don't we all
> just give Kenny G the same treatment we give to other musicians we
> don't like -- an indifferent yawn -- and then get back to practicing.
Sounds like a good idea to me. I would have forgotten he even exists if
people wouldn't keep bringing his name up. I couldn't care less about him
and his latte-sipping soundtracks. Now excuse me while I go listen to some
Cannonball Adderley.
Dougie
Mike C.
"Tim Berens" <ti...@erinet.com> wrote in message
news:3dd3bfa9$0$17645$4c5e...@news.erinet.com...
Mainly because people hold him as some type of icon in jazz, when it's
apparent that he's not. He's listed as a jazz player, and he's apparently
not. When one reads an interview like this one, it's pretty apparent that he
doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. The other people you cite are
1) not trying to pretend that they are jazzers, 2) not granting interviews
that are as asinine as this one was, and 3) can at least do what they do
half decently and aren't just along for the ride. I mean, come on, a jazzer
who would rather play golf than practice?
Mark Kleinhaut
Tim, I agree with you. Here's the acid test in my book. If G-man called
any of us up today and said he was putting a tour together and offering you
$200K annual salary plus benifits, what would you say?
If you would turn him down based on artistic/ethics or whatever, fine, then
rant and diss him till the cows come home. OTOH, if you'd take that gig
then STFU! (that's shut the fuck up).
Notice, I'm not dissing G. I play for artistic purposes, I'm not a guitar
mercenary and I pursue very high standards. Yet, I'd take the gig with little
hesitation.
--------------------Mark Kleinhaut
markkl...@hotmail.com
Info and soundclips about:
"Chasing Tales":
http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/Chasing%20Tales.html
"Amphora":
http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/Amphora.html
"Secrets of Three": http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/SO3.html
Mike C.
"Mark Kleinhaut" <markkl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3dd3...@spamkiller.newsgroups.com...
That's not quite the best litmus test. I've certainly turned down lucrative
gigs because they aren't creatively interesting nor any good for my music
career. I've *got* a job, I don't want to get into a gig that has me pissing
and moaning every time I've finished the gig. However, you can't convince me
that all of his sidemen are making $200K annually, either.
Let's put it another way: many of us are trying to pursue a jazz guitarist
career. If any of us was offered a decent salary to be in a Tiny Tim tribute
band, what would you say? How about the consideration that such a move could
potentially *damage* a career in playing real music?
tomw
says...
> It's just too easy for jazz musicians to hate Kenny G.
>
> What really doesn't make sense to me is this: why we are so quick to
> attack Kenny G, yet we completely ignore many other pop musicians
> whose pretenses are in the same vein as Kenny G's?
>
> Kenny G is making a living -- a great living -- playing music. A part
> of making a great living playing music is publicity, hype, PR,
> bullshit, whatever you want to call it.
>
> For some reason, we jazz musicians don't bristle at all when country
> star X, or rapper Y or rock singer Z puts out some ridiculously smarmy
> song or absurd statement in the press, but let Kenny G do it and we
> get our panties in a terrible wad.
>
But he wasn't making a dumb statement about politics, or show biz, or
the weather, he was talking about jazz. It piques one's interest.
> To tell the truth, I find that I am really quite jealous of the living
> Kenny G makes. I wonder if much of the open hatred for him isn't at
> least partially rooted in jealousy of the success he has had.
I would like to take all the money he makes and send it to Afghanistan
or Bengladesh or my dear old mother, but I really don't give a monkey's
-- it's his inane crapola that works my nerves.
>
> It seems to me that all this anger is counter productive for us, as it
> distracts us from the more important things in life. Why don't we all
> just give Kenny G the same treatment we give to other musicians we
> don't like -- an indifferent yawn -- and then get back to practicing.
>
> Tim
A harmless outlet IMHO.
--
Tom Walls
the guy at the Temple of Zeus
tomw
Funki...@MSN.com says...
snip
ride. I mean, come on, a jazzer
> who would rather play golf than practice?
>
>
>
Actually, I'll bet a lot of guys are in this boat. Especially those who
have already logged a zillion hours performing.
Phineas Fogg
core jazz people, and selling forty million records,
well, I don't think the choice would be hard to make, regardless of
whether or not I was being true to my own musical integrity.
Patrick L.
"Tim Berens" <ti...@erinet.com> wrote in message
news:3dd3bfa9$0$17645$4c5e...@news.erinet.com...
tomw
markkl...@hotmail.com says...
> Tim, I agree with you. Here's the acid test in my book. If G-man called
> any of us up today and said he was putting a tour together and offering you
> $200K annual salary plus benifits, what would you say?
>
> If you would turn him down based on artistic/ethics or whatever, fine, then
> rant and diss him till the cows come home. OTOH, if you'd take that gig
> then STFU! (that's shut the fuck up).
>
> Notice, I'm not dissing G. I play for artistic purposes, I'm not a guitar
> mercenary and I pursue very high standards. Yet, I'd take the gig with little
> hesitation.
>
>
First of all: don't hold your breath -- maybe $40,000 with benefits.
Secondly what this all has to do with Kenny talking trash about jazz
escapes me. Maybe I could get a government job -- better not criticize
the government!
Joe Finn
news:fuPA9.21021$II.1...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
representative of the theft of the term "jazz" by the marketeers who promote
modern instrumental R&B music [the smooth variety]. There is an inherent
dishonesty in this that many jazz players and listeners react to very
strongly. Kenny takes a lot of this criticism because he has become
prominent in that style.
I don't care for his playing and his fatuous self important statements are
pretty silly. Other than himself I don't know anyone who takes him
seriously.
I don't begrudge him the money he's made. ....joe
--
Visit me on the web. www.JoeFinn.net
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Max Leggett
managed to develop an astounding career. Good for him - it's not an
easy thing to do. The only thing that cheeses me off about him is his
asinine comments about Bird and jazz in general. I've played with
worse musicians than Kenny G in the past, and probably will again.
Mike C.
"Joe Finn" <J...@joefinn.net> wrote in message
news:3dd3c...@corp.newsgroups.com...
Very succinct and very true. Nice post, Joe.
> I don't care for his playing and his fatuous self important statements are
> pretty silly. Other than himself I don't know anyone who takes him
> seriously.
Unfortunately, someone must take him seriously, as he keeps selling CDs. I
guess that's what burns my ass. People who think that they have equal taste
to my own because the like "jazz", meaning Spyro Gyra and Kenny G. At least
SG can play, but this hack has shown how ignorant he really is.
> I don't begrudge him the money he's made. ....joe
I don't begrudge him the money he's made. I'd like to make that kind of
money, but I certainly wouldn't bastardize my creative outlet in order to
make that money. At least not bastardize it to the degree that he has. I've
certainly taken some questionable gigs for money/exposure, but to base my
whole career on it? I'd rather play in my living room. I think that the
people who admit that they're jealous of the money he's made should take a
step back and see what else there is in life to enjoy other than money.
Jay Carlson
Hi Mark,
I'd take the gig- I'd do it for $100,000. (my cut-off point for a tour with
him). And I'd do my best to tactfully open his eyes to what jazz is about,
and try to make whatever music we played together more meaningful, lasting,
important, or whatever the right word is. Maybe he could help me with
marketing...
To any Seinfeld fans out there: Remember when George Costanza first
interviewed for the job with the Yankees? And he bumped into Steinbrenner?,
and let loose that spiel on him? Then Steinbrenner said, "Hire this man!"..
Coincidentally, tonight's gig will sort of be one of those gigs for me..
600 people, and myself and another guitarist will be playing his (the other
guitarists) bag, which is basically new agey stuff, and lots of Spanish
sounding bullshit with phrygianish blowing all over it on classical
guitars... I probably won't go home feeling especially great about the
music that happened (comparatively speaking), but it pays great... And I
still learn things from any gig.
One thing I won't be doing is ignorantly dissing real Flamenco players
on the set breaks.
your friend and whore,
Jay
http://artists2.iuma.com/IUMA/Bands/Jay_Carlson/
Mark Guest
lightning rod/whipping boy. It's the pack instinct. When a runt (musical or
otherwise) draws attention to himself, the pack attempts to cull the weak
member. Smooth jazz is such a different animal from modern/traditional jazz
that all attempts by smooth jazzers to further hijack the "jazz" moniker
raises hackles among the "genetically pure" jazzers. It is appropriate to
want to drive the (G)-runt man out of the pack...he's not part of the jazz
flock, and he doesn't get it.
If smooth jazz went by another name (smooth dental office music? smooth
elevator tunes? smooth schlock?) I doubt that jazzers would take any more
note of Mr. Gorelick than we do Garth Brooks. As it is, I'm looking for
another name for my whirled yogurt breakfast drink. Smoothies just don't
sound appetizing anymore.
Are we really losing practice time over Kenny G? Not much, if any. Is
engaging in the G-runt controversy counterproductive? Only as much as
listening to any other joke at the office. Sorry about the rant. Maybe I
need some more time on the greens to smooth me out.
--
Mark Guest
Mark at MarkGuest.net
"Tim Berens" <ti...@erinet.com> wrote in message
news:3dd3bfa9$0$17645$4c5e...@news.erinet.com...
Jurupari
of humor and irony than some other granfalloon.
Also we have our icons. If somebody put out an album called 'I Am Just As Good
As, and In All Probability, Much Better Than Charlie Parker' and came up as
crummy sounding as this guy does all the time, then he's pretty much sent out
an engraved invitation.
That's what that Louis Armstrong grave robbing episode seemed to have done to
Metheny and others who knew about it.
I appreciated the thread here, though, for the same reason Sat. Nite Live loves
dubya - you couldn't write shit like that - only a moron or a publicist could
come up with that dialogue!
Good hearty laughs like that don't come by every day, and since he can cry all
the way to the bank and I can't, I could givashit about offending him. He can
always find solace in his beloved differential equations
Clif
BRIAN55298
invitation actually came.
Professionals in any field, find themselves considering or taking jobs that
aren't what they dreamed of, when they first dedicated themselves. However,
each of us has to draw a line for our professional integrity, and decide what
is or isn't acceptable.
thom_j.
"tomw" <tw...@cornell.edu> wrote in message
news:MPG.183d97b1c...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu...
> In article <fuPA9.21021$II.1...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>,
> Funki...@MSN.com says...
> snip
>
> ride. I mean, come on, a jazzer
> > who would rather play golf than practice?
> >
> >
> >
>
> Actually, I'll bet a lot of guys are in this boat. Especially those who
> have already logged a zillion hours performing.
Yea, Yea, I heard the Gee'ster golfs with Mr T. a lot... :^)
thom_j.
Ahmm? Ahh? Which government Tom W? :)
thom_j.
"Mark Guest" <jazzerw...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ar0m9b$d57m6$1...@ID-100641.news.dfncis.de...
> I don't think that it's jealousy that makes jazzers treat the G-man as a
> lightning rod/whipping boy. It's the pack instinct. When a runt (musical
or
> otherwise) draws attention to himself, the pack attempts to cull the weak
> member. Smooth jazz is such a different animal from modern/traditional
jazz
> that all attempts by smooth jazzers to further hijack the "jazz" moniker
> raises hackles among the "genetically pure" jazzers. It is appropriate to
> want to drive the (G)-runt man out of the pack...he's not part of the jazz
> flock, and he doesn't get it.
>
> If smooth jazz went by another name (smooth dental office music? smooth
> elevator tunes? smooth schlock?) I doubt that jazzers would take any more
> note of Mr. Gorelick than we do Garth Brooks. As it is, I'm looking for
> another name for my whirled yogurt breakfast drink. Smoothies just don't
> sound appetizing anymore.
>
> Are we really losing practice time over Kenny G? Not much, if any. Is
> engaging in the G-runt controversy counterproductive? Only as much as
> listening to any other joke at the office. Sorry about the rant. Maybe I
> need some more time on the greens to smooth me out.
Makes sense to me Mark G. but if you're gonna' green it dont
forget to say 4!!!!!!!!! & not A 1 & A 2 & A 3 & A 4.. :^) t.j.
sf...@lanset.com
listen to Kenny G. BTW, I'm a terrible golfer.
Stan
thom_j.
ever play Golf.. yuk.. :^)... t.j.
<sf...@lanset.com> wrote in message news:3dd3...@monitor.lanset.com...
albrecht wallenstein
I think Metheny's rant is the root of a lot of it, like if PM can take
childish pot-shots at the G-man it must be acceptable. It bothers me a lot
more that people call Brittany Spears an "artist" than music stores choose
to put Kenny G's disc's in the Jazz section.
"Tim Berens" <ti...@erinet.com> wrote in message
news:3dd3bfa9$0$17645$4c5e...@news.erinet.com...
albrecht wallenstein
"Joe Finn" <J...@joefinn.net> wrote in message
news:3dd3c...@corp.newsgroups.com...
Joe, with all due respect. . .
If you want to talk about "theft" you pretty much have to talk about the
entire catalog of Jazz music since it's first recording. People are spending
a lot of money today on recordings that the original artists never got a
nickel for, that's my definition of theft. Think of how Wes ended up, think
how Barney Kessel ended up on and on. That's the definition of theft and the
greatest tragedy. Here is how I see KG: maybe someone starts listening to
him and reads him talking about Parker or Stitt so they get curious about
the genre and pick up a copy of the penguin guide or the rough guide to
jazz. Leafing through the pages between the Adderly and Teagarden there are
a lot of living Jazz musicians that maybe they will develop an interest in
and even buy some of their music.
Music, including Jazz is not just for the musicians and discerning listeners
will find their way. Kenny G sort of reminds me of that guy from the 60's
Acker Bilk? I've probably insulted the memory of Acker Bilk but imagine
combining that music he did and a Barnes & Noble culture, presto: a Kenny G
phenomena.
Jurupari
>> need some more time on the greens to smooth me out.
>
Both collard and turnip can work wonders. Watch the Texas Pete, though...
hm - then Mr. Gazz would think you were Mark Gassed with the smooth
moves...better not! :o)
....sorry, very bored today.....
Spencer Seidel
> It seems to me that all this anger is counter productive for us, as it
> distracts us from the more important things in life. Why don't we all
> just give Kenny G the same treatment we give to other musicians we
> don't like -- an indifferent yawn -- and then get back to practicing.
>
I agree that anger directed at Kenny G is counter-productive. I can't
stand his music, but I don't really care what the guy does because I
don't buy it.
What does bother me a little, however, is when someone tells me how
great Kenny G is, without having been exposed to other (better) guys
doing similar things making a lot less money! Now, that sort of
argument almost has nothing to do with Kenny G at all and reflects other
things that may or may not be wrong with our society, but that's too
much to get into here. :-)
$0.02,
thom_j.
"albrecht wallenstein" <spamb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ut8339s...@corp.supernews.com...
> I'm totally with you on this. What the hell is the big deal?
>
> I think Metheny's rant is the root of a lot of it, like if PM can take
> childish pot-shots at the G-man it must be acceptable. It bothers me a lot
> more that people call Brittany Spears an "artist" than music stores choose
> to put Kenny G's disc's in the Jazz section.
Oh! No! No! albrecht w, "Brittney Spears" is a fantastic vamp
and a hottie too! YummmmY!!! hahaha :^)~
thom_j.
"Jurupari" <juru...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021114161634...@mb-fr.aol.com...
LoL.. I am most days anymore Clif... :) t.j.
Kevin Van Sant
<spamb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
<ut8339s...@corp.supernews.com> :
>I think Metheny's rant is the root of a lot of it, like if PM can take
>childish pot-shots at the G-man it must be acceptable. It bothers me a lot
>more that people call Brittany Spears an "artist" than music stores choose
>to put Kenny G's disc's in the Jazz section.
Actually I think Britney is probably much more talented than the G.
Anyway, you shouldn't get worked up over either one of them, unless
one says something about your mom or something. People here are just
having fun with it.
_________________________________________
Kevin Van Sant
jazz guitar
http://www.onestopjazz.com/kvansant
to buy my CDs, listen to sound clips, and get more info.
Alternate site for recent soundclips
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/kevinvansant_music.htm
Dan Adler
> any of us up today and said he was putting a tour together and offering you
> $200K annual salary plus benifits, what would you say?
Isn't that the same as the joke "Now that we've established your
profession, lets negotiate the price"? :-)
Mark Kleinhaut
d...@danadler.com (Dan Adler) wrote:
>"Mark Kleinhaut" <markkl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3dd3...@spamkiller.newsgroups.com>...
>> Tim, I agree with you. Here's the acid test in my book. If G-man called
>> any of us up today and said he was putting a tour together and offering
you
>> $200K annual salary plus benifits, what would you say?
>
>Isn't that the same as the joke "Now that we've established your
>profession, lets negotiate the price"? :-)
>
From the "Happy Hooker":)
--------------------Mark Kleinhaut
markkl...@hotmail.com
Info and soundclips about:
"Chasing Tales":
http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/Chasing%20Tales.html
"Amphora":
http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/Amphora.html
"Secrets of Three": http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/SO3.html
David Moss
makes, or jealousy, or anything like that.
Britney Spears, for example, also makes
plenty of money with unsophisticated music,
but that doesn't bother me. She's doing what
the kids like, and she's doing it well. I don't
exactly go out of my way to hear her stuff,
but I don't switch off the radio either.
The essential difference to me: Britney doesn't
claim to be following and improving on the
work of Bird and Coltrane. If she did, I'd
despise her just as much as I despise Kenny G.
He's crapping on my idols.
"Tim Berens" wrote...
David Moss
Kenny G, and people ask "Why did you tour with
him - do you admire his music?" and you answer
"No, of course not - I did it for the $200K, you
schmuck!"
How about if it was Jim Hall offering you the
gig - how much dough would it take to get you
to accept? $20? $2?
"Mark Kleinhaut" wrote...
> Tim, I agree with you. Here's the acid test in my book. If G-man called
> any of us up today and said he was putting a tour together and offering
you
> $200K annual salary plus benifits, what would you say?
>
> If you would turn him down based on artistic/ethics or whatever, fine,
then
> rant and diss him till the cows come home. OTOH, if you'd take that gig
> then STFU! (that's shut the fuck up).
>
> Notice, I'm not dissing G. I play for artistic purposes, I'm not a guitar
> mercenary and I pursue very high standards. Yet, I'd take the gig with
little
> hesitation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
Max Leggett
<david.no...@fgs.fzk.de> wrote:
>What kind of an acid test is that? - you tour with
>Kenny G, and people ask "Why did you tour with
>him - do you admire his music?" and you answer
>"No, of course not - I did it for the $200K, you
>schmuck!"
For 200 grand a year I'd play banjo in an oom-pah Dixie band. For that
money, I'd smile while I did it.
Mr.Will
>core jazz people, and selling forty million records,
>well, I don't think the choice would be hard to make, regardless of
>whether or not I was being true to my own musical integrity.
Didn't Benson do this too?
I must agree its odd - I haven't really heard Kenny G, and don't really think I
will ever check it out, but I do believe music is for everyone so he can do
what he likes.
I hear enough ignorance and intolerance for all sorts of things from all sorts
of people. There is no need for me to add my own into any pot.
Mr.Will
Guitar and Vocal duo
www.sarahandwill.co.uk
Mike C.
"Max Leggett" <mleg...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:3dd43dcc....@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
Yeah, if there was *anyone* who's going to offer $200K a year. Let's not
overdo it. He ain't makin' that much money. Generally, he's a joke, and many
people realize this.
Joe Finn
>
> Very succinct and very true. Nice post, Joe.
>
> > I don't care for his playing and his fatuous self important statements
are
> > pretty silly. Other than himself I don't know anyone who takes him
> > seriously.
>
> Unfortunately, someone must take him seriously, as he keeps selling CDs. I
> guess that's what burns my ass. People who think that they have equal
taste
> to my own because the like "jazz", meaning Spyro Gyra and Kenny G. At
least
> SG can play, but this hack has shown how ignorant he really is.
>
I hear you. Kenny has helped to lower the bar, so to speak. He has indeed
connected with a wide audience demographic. Those who purchase his cds may
or may not take him seriously. I can only speculate. What I've heard of it
is over produced pop schmaltz. Pretty awful stuff. Don't let your sense of
your own taste be threatened by those who actively seek out and listen to
this stuff for the sake of some imaginary elevated social status they may
think it brings them. Kenny is the antithesis of sophistication.
> > I don't begrudge him the money he's made. ....joe
>
> I don't begrudge him the money he's made. I'd like to make that kind of
> money, but I certainly wouldn't bastardize my creative outlet in order to
> make that money. At least not bastardize it to the degree that he has.
You are giving him too much credit. His creativity, such as it is, traces
it's genesis to a band called Jeff Lorber Fusion that was active in the
1980's. They were pretty lame too.
.......joe
--
Visit me on the web. www.JoeFinn.net
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
thom_j.
your hired!! :)
Mark Kleinhaut
"David Moss" <david.no...@fgs.fzk.de> wrote:
>What kind of an acid test is that? - you tour with
>Kenny G, and people ask "Why did you tour with
>him - do you admire his music?" and you answer
>"No, of course not - I did it for the $200K, you
>schmuck!"
>
What about playing for huge audiences and being on records that sell millions
of copies? I guess that's all part of selling out too. I'm not saying that's
my dream come true, and admire his music? .....nah, I don't think so. The
problem is one of finding some way to break out of this obscurity and to
have a real career playing jazz. Being good just doesn't seem to get very
far, so how does one win over thousands of sheep?
Joe Finn
>
> Joe, with all due respect. . .
>
> If you want to talk about "theft" you pretty much have to talk about the
> entire catalog of Jazz music since it's first recording. People are
spending
> a lot of money today on recordings that the original artists never got a
> nickel for, that's my definition of theft. Think of how Wes ended up,
think
> how Barney Kessel ended up on and on. That's the definition of theft and
the
> greatest tragedy.
Point taken. Really, I was referring only to the corruption of the term
"jazz". This word has been co-opted for the sake of it's marketing cache.
The term "Jazz" smacks of sophistication, urbanity and dollar signs. As you
point out many of us have paid dues, made sacrifices and endured suffering
for what is represented by this term. To call what Kenny or Boney James or
any of the rest of them does "jazz" is a joke. Many people take great
offense at the use of the term in this way. Kenny's comments in the recent
interview betray a real insensitivity to this issue. He has no jazz
credentials that I know of. After reading the interview in question his
credibility is at issue as well. He seems to be living in a dream world.
......joe
--
Visit me on the web. www.JoeFinn.net
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
Tim Berens
<markkl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>
>Tim, I agree with you. Here's the acid test in my book. If G-man called
>any of us up today and said he was putting a tour together and offering you
>$200K annual salary plus benifits, what would you say?
>
>If you would turn him down based on artistic/ethics or whatever, fine, then
>rant and diss him till the cows come home. OTOH, if you'd take that gig
>then STFU! (that's shut the fuck up).
>
I truly laughed out loud at that comment!
I would also take the gig without hesitation.
Greger Hoel
<david.no...@fgs.fzk.de> wrote:
>How about if it was Jim Hall offering you the
>gig - how much dough would it take to get you
>to accept? $20? $2?
I'd go along for free room and board. Seriously. Not as a hired
musician though, more like a guitar tech or sumpin. I wouldn't even
think of playing a guitar up on stage with him.
I went to a concert with him and Charlie Haden a forthnight ago, and I
was blown away. They played a set of about six songs. It felt like 1/2
hour, but was in fact 1 1/2 hours. They played All the Things That You
Are and Lonely Woman, plus some songs I can't remember the name of,
mostly from Haden's last CD, American Dreams. They were at the
beginning of their tour together, but that was only evident in two or
three bum notes in the beginning. *Everything* else was sublime, pure
and simple.
Greger
__________________________________________________
"When you hear sweet syncopation
and the music softly moans
T'ain't no sin to take off your skin
and dance around in your bones"
--Burroughs/Waits
To email me, replace everything after @ with softhome.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JuJu Voodoo
> Kenny G is making a living -- a great living -- playing music. A part
> of making a great living playing music is publicity, hype, PR,
> bullshit, whatever you want to call it.
Yes, he has established the Kenny G mind control cult.
Actually, I could not care less about KG, or his appropriation of the
term, "jazz." I can't get fired up, and I can't get nasty.
I didn't get bent when people were saying they were playing rock and
roll, who had obviously left out the, "roll."
Somewhere there has to be a Dixieland fella' who rankles when people
refer to bop as jazz.
Potential inclusion on my list of things to do:
Develop vanilla cinnamon Jazzsick. Make a million or three. Get dissed
on this newsgroup. Post as JuJu, saying, "tsk tsk, I know what you
mean, what a putz, can you believe he's getting away with it..."
icarusi
news:3dd3bfa9$0$17645$4c5e...@news.erinet.com...
> It seems to me that all this anger is counter productive for
us, as it
> distracts us from the more important things in life. Why don't
we all
> just give Kenny G the same treatment we give to other musicians
we
> don't like -- an indifferent yawn -- and then get back to
practicing.
Apart from he has a very annoying, cloying, over-sweet and
affected sound, similar to some of Celine Deon's singing
(although she's improved recently) and that mock 'emotion' yodel
some C&W singers employ (Tammy Whine-ette?). I still have to turn
KG off quickly if he comes on the radio. Fingernails being
scraped down a blackboard is pleasant in comparison.
Icarusi
--
remove the 00 to reply
icarusi
> The
> problem is one of finding some way to break out of this
obscurity and to
> have a real career playing jazz. Being good just doesn't seem
to get very
> far, so how does one win over thousands of sheep?
Sex change, blonde hairdo and sing? Just kidding. You can stay
brunette, but the singing and sex change are mandatory.
Tom Lippincott
>> It seems to me that all this anger is counter productive for us, as it
>> distracts us from the more important things in life. Why don't we all
>> just give Kenny G the same treatment we give to other musicians we
>> don't like -- an indifferent yawn -- and then get back to practicing.
>>
>
>I agree that anger directed at Kenny G is counter-productive. I can't
>stand his music, but I don't really care what the guy does because I
>don't buy it.
>
>What does bother me a little, however, is when someone tells me how
>great Kenny G is, without having been exposed to other (better) guys
>doing similar things making a lot less money!
to me, this is the crux of the matter. The corporate machine that created the
whole "smooth jazz/love jazz/the wave" thing, including Kenny G, and the whole
Clear Channel Communications empire are not, in my opinion, bringing more
potential listeners to the "good stuff," they're in fact making it much more
difficult for the musicians playing the "good stuff" to attract an audience;
that potential audience is being lured into believing that listening to
insipid, out of tune soprano sax noodling over tunes written using only white
notes on the keyboard is what being a jazz fan consists of.
Of course, it's more complicated than that; this trend is a reflection of
larger trends in society in the last 20 years or so. Mass marketing,
globalization, the closing of the American mind, ect. ect. Kenny G is just a
pawn in the game, but he has apparently bought into his publicists' hype, hook
line and sinker. I think that is the main thing that bugs the jazz musicians
that are bugged by him. He is an side show entertainer, a cog in the corporate
machine. But instead of saying something along the lines of "hey, I just play
pretty for the people, pick up my paycheck and go play some golf" he makes
pretensions of being a jazz musician who is conversant in that style and who
knows the history and repertoire. And this isn't the first interview I've read
with him where he makes these assinine statements. This fact just makes it
that much more difficult for important jazz musicians of today like Henry
Threadgill, Jim Black or Ellery Eskelin to reach new listeners. Of course, the
idea that artists like these represent where jazz "is" now is just my opinion,
and one that I know is not shared by many who read this newsgroup. But heck, I
think Kenny G's posturing as some sort of jazz master makes it more difficult
for Pat Metheny, Jimmy Bruno, or even Wynton Marsalis to reach new listeners as
well.
Now, that sort of
>argument almost has nothing to do with Kenny G at all
agreed, but I think it does have at least a little to do with him personally,
as I assert above. If nothing else, just in the sense that "if you're not part
of the solution then you're part of the problem."
and reflects other
>things that may or may not be wrong with our society, but that's too
>much to get into here. :-)
>
>$0.02,
>
>Spence
Tom Lippincott
Guitarist, Composer, Teacher
audio samples, articles, CD's at:
http://www.tomlippincott.com
Tom Lippincott
>any of us up today and said he was putting a tour together and offering you
>$200K annual salary plus benifits, what would you say?
>
>If you would turn him down based on artistic/ethics or whatever, fine, then
>rant and diss him till the cows come home. OTOH, if you'd take that gig
>then STFU! (that's shut the fuck up).
>
>mercenary and I pursue very high standards. Yet, I'd take the gig with little
>hesitation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--------------------Mark Kleinhaut
Mark;
I don't disrespect you or anyone else for feeling that way, but I feel at least
reasonably assured that no amount of money could successfully tempt me to agree
to tour with Kenny G. I can't say for sure because I've never been in that
situation. Also, I don't have a wife or kids to support. That might change my
outlook considerably, but as a "footloose and fancy free" single guy I've
already made several decisions in my life that have probably adversely affected
my potential income, and I am pretty sure that the negative things about being
in the employ of Kenny G would far outweigh the benefits I could see from
making lots of money, no matter what the amount. Aside from other
considerations (like the probable outcome of having to spend a huge chunk of my
income on psychotherapy) I personally can't imagine ever being taken seriously
in the "jazz community" such as it is with the permanent stigma of "ex sideman
with Kenny G" attached to my name. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my best guess.
Of course, I don't think no matter how hard I tried that I'd be able to play
stylistically appropriately for a gig like that, so I don't think I'd pass the
audition in the first place.
I also realize this is all just my opinion; I play with midi sequences
sometimes on certain types of gigs and I know Mark K. and a lot of other jazz
musicians consider that practice to be pretty lame. So I realize I may not, in
some peoples' eyes, have the right to "cast the first stone," heh.
Jay Carlson
"Tom Lippincott" <tomli...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20021116052624...@mb-ms.aol.com...
Hey Tom, this has gotten pretty funny, hypothetical, but I liked your
reply.
The truth is, I wouldn't last long with him either, because I can't play
that way, no matter how hard I try, so this little cyber hypothetical
daydream/nightmare is moot, but sure, I would take the offer/gig as I said,
knowing full well it was a temporary thing for me, and do my best to help
him to open his eyes a bit to reality, and to the fact that he really is
'part of the problem' as you say, and I believe strongly. You know- with
intentions to steer the ship just a few degrees towards a better horizon.
I'd look at it like a teacher/student relationship and approach it with all
the patience I could muster. Heck- I'd be happy to spend a little lesson
time with him for free if it might help the man. A selfless act, but that's
the kinda guy I am.
Humbly,
Jay
http://artists2.iuma.com/IUMA/Bands/Jay_Carlson/
Joe Finn
All this talk about Kenny's band got me thinking. Just who is in the band
anyway?
Here is an article by a bass player who worked in Kenny's band:
http://www.bassfrontiers.com/archive/060196/touring.htm
Pretty funny stuff. I wonder how Herbie liked his playing. ......joe
Tom Lippincott
>Hey Tom, this has gotten pretty funny, hypothetical, but I liked your
>reply.
>The truth is, I wouldn't last long with him either, because I can't play
>that way, no matter how hard I try, so this little cyber hypothetical
>daydream/nightmare is moot,
I have to plead sleep deprivation on this one; I was really tired last night
when I got on my soapbox. Not that I don't stand by what I said, but I'm a
little embarrassed at how pretentious and self important I came across now that
I read what I wrote.
but sure, I would take the offer/gig as I said,
>knowing full well it was a temporary thing for me, and do my best to help
>him to open his eyes a bit to reality, and to the fact that he really is
>'part of the problem' as you say, and I believe strongly. You know- with
>intentions to steer the ship just a few degrees towards a better horizon.
>I'd look at it like a teacher/student relationship and approach it with all
>the patience I could muster. Heck- I'd be happy to spend a little lesson
>time with him for free if it might help the man. A selfless act, but that's
>the kinda guy I am.
>
>Humbly,
>Jay
>http://artists2.iuma.com/IUMA/Bands/Jay_Carlson/
so what was the hypothetical salary? $200k? Not bad for teaching a few
private lessons, I admit. Assuming the student was actually willing. You
could always wear a bag over your head on the gigs and your schtick could be
"the unknown guitarist." You're secret's safe with me.
Jay Carlson
> so what was the hypothetical salary? $200k? Not bad for teaching a few
> private lessons, I admit. Assuming the student was actually willing. You
> could always wear a bag over your head on the gigs and your schtick could
be
> "the unknown guitarist." You're secret's safe with me.
>
>
>
> Tom Lippincott
Yeah, I wind up embarassed from writing late-night rants when I get home
sometimes too.
PS- The unknown guitarist. There are some jobs I wind up doing where I
really would like to wear a bag on my head. but I'd rather be Gene Gene the
dancing machine- he was hipper.
DaaaaaaaaaaaaDAHT daht!,,,,,,,,, daht!, daht! :)
hope you had a nice gig,
-CDs finally went out today
Jay
http://artists2.iuma.com/IUMA/Bands/Jay_Carlson/
Max Leggett
wrote:
>All this talk about Kenny's band got me thinking. Just who is in the band
>anyway?
>Here is an article by a bass player who worked in Kenny's band:
>http://www.bassfrontiers.com/archive/060196/touring.htm
>
Thats's a funny article. He nails it quite succinctly, saying Kenny G
is a pop act, and Herbie is a jazz act. I'd assume that if Herbie
hired him he must be able to play like a mutha. Probably why G hired
him too - gives G some jazz creds.
thom_j.
for some who arent aware of the parallel'ed or un'parallel'ed genres.
Really telling..eh? cheers thom_j.
thom_j.
"Jay Carlson" <j...@viaccess.net> wrote in message
news:utd712g...@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
> > so what was the hypothetical salary? $200k? Not bad for teaching a few
> > private lessons, I admit. Assuming the student was actually willing.
You
> > could always wear a bag over your head on the gigs and your schtick
could
> be
> > "the unknown guitarist." You're secret's safe with me.
> >
> >
> >
> > Tom Lippincott
>
> Yeah, I wind up embarassed from writing late-night rants when I get home
> sometimes too.
>
> PS- The unknown guitarist. There are some jobs I wind up doing where I
> really would like to wear a bag on my head. but I'd rather be Gene Gene
the
> dancing machine- he was hipper.
> DaaaaaaaaaaaaDAHT daht!,,,,,,,,, daht!, daht! :)
LoL..jay C, The good Ole' Gong Show!! t.j.
Adam Bravo
Or maybe because he plays like a mutha? G always has tons of great musicians
in his band, and a lot of them are straight-ahead jazz players. I heard a
story about a few of them that were playing some Miles in the back of the
tour bus while Kenny was up in front getting ideas for that night. He came
back and got all mad and asked them to "turn off that crap." Apparently not
a Miles fan.
Jurupari
>as I assert above. If nothing else, just in the sense that "if you're not
>part
>of the solution then you're part of the problem."
>
To me, the guy's fun to poke fun at because he comes off as a sort of walking
Far Side cartoon - he'd have to be pretty thick skinned to present himself as a
jazz musician anyway, so I don't see much harm in having a chuckle at his
image's expense.
Frankly I wouldn't want his audience. You wouldn't either if you stopped to
think about it. The money, sure, but you could probably earn it an easier way,
like french kissing a boomslang with AIDS now that we have entertainment like
Jackass....
Clif
Will Sperry
It a soporific for people who don't want awareness, but to turn off
and tune out.
Therefore the audience that listens (likes) his music are asleep too.
He's just a mirror reflecting a distorted picture of our spiritual
state.
He's bad because he represents the will to mediocrity, which every
artist should strive to overcome.
WS
thom_j.
"Will Sperry" <taejo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e6be1756.0211...@posting.google.com...
David Moss
(I do that every now and then!) .
Seems to me, you've chosen to be a jazz musician,
which is completely understandable - jazz is a complex,
sophisticated and demanding form of music which is
bound to give a lot of satisfaction to musicians when
they master it as you have. And the flip side of that
coin is, it's not going to appeal to non-musicians who
are just looking for some undemanding entertainment.
What I'm saying is, the fact that jazz doesn't sell in
millions isn't a regrettable problem, it's inevitable -
if the kind of people who buy CDs by the million
liked jazz, *you* wouldn't like jazz.
I guess the conclusion is, if you try to give jazz
mass appeal, you'll inevitably trivialize it the way
Kenny G does. The only way to get the best of
both worlds is to be a serious jazz musician with
a day job as a pop star.
So, I'll look forward to getting my copy of your
next album - The Mark Kleinhaut Trio with guest
saxophonist Kenny G. If he doesn't agree to the
collaboration, wait until he's dead and then use
his recordings.
"Mark Kleinhaut" wrote...
cl...@claymoore.com
<david.no...@fgs.fzk.de> wrote:
>I guess the conclusion is, if you try to give jazz
>mass appeal, you'll inevitably trivialize it the way
>Kenny G does. The only way to get the best of
>both worlds is to be a serious jazz musician with
>a day job as a pop star.
I'm curious if any Brandford Marsalis or Kenny Kirkland fans (besides
Wynton, of course) got upset with them for joining Sting's group.
Clay Moore
http://www.claymoore.com/
cl...@claymoore.com
wrote:
>to me, this is the crux of the matter. The corporate machine that created the
>whole "smooth jazz/love jazz/the wave" thing, including Kenny G, and the whole
>Clear Channel Communications empire are not, in my opinion, bringing more
>potential listeners to the "good stuff," they're in fact making it much more
>difficult for the musicians playing the "good stuff" to attract an audience;
>that potential audience is being lured into believing that listening to
>insipid, out of tune soprano sax noodling over tunes written using only white
>notes on the keyboard is what being a jazz fan consists of.
Hi Tom,
I seriously doubt this is true, the part about attracting listeners to
the "good stuff" as it were. There are a lot of things in the
corporate world that are complete fiction. Here's one of them: a
corporation has a slow quarter, and suddenly it's huge cause for
alarm. Hands wringing, blame placed. We're told it's a crisis *because
they sold less than they expected*. We're being told that the record
industry is "down in sales." We're also reminded that "jazz" is
getting less and less of the pie.
Let's look at some other interesting stats. How many folks on this NG
even have recorded their own CD's? I've got two out, and a 3rd on its
way, and I can think of you, Tom, Kevin Van Zant, Tim Berens, Mark
Kleinhaut, Rick DelSalvio, Mike Cea, Mr Will, Rick Stone, Jody Fisher,
and Chris Buzzelli just off the top of my head. (sorry for the folks I
forgot). Practically every musician I go to see live has a CD or two.
Certainly the touring ones do. Let's say that, just for laughs, a jazz
fan goes to the local jazz club every night, and buys every CD that
everyone who plays there has out. He buys my two, and I've got Gordy
Johnson on bass, and he has two. Four CD's in one night. The next
night say Mark Elf is in town with a pickup bassist and drummer. The
fan buys all ten of Mark's CD's, plus the bassist Terry Burns has two,
so that's twelve. And so on. Now, do the math. At the end of a year
this fan is going to have thousands of CD's that he's purchased
directly from the artists. What's the point? No industry sales
logging, that's what. This may seem like "fuzzy math," but it's part
of the "not counted" jazz industry that is a vital part of the
picture. In the last week I've gotten five CD's from trades, four of
them from national artists. I've given out that many at least. The
cool thing about the above is: no middleman. I'm not paying Sony or
whomever. Small business, more direct.
The situation with live jazz gigs is similar. I hear people complain
all the time about how bad it is, but I can go out almost any night of
the week here and hear decent, if not exemplary jazz. I'm gigging four
nights a week on average. News alert! This is better than I've ever
seen it in my 25 years of professional activity, for jazz that is.
Yes, I know there were times when it was better, but it was a _long_
time ago. Things change. There are cycles. We'll probably never go
back to five night a week house gigs, but there are gigs.
Now, in order for the gigs to happen there have to be *some* people in
attendance (it might be presumptuous to call them listeners). These
are the ones (we hope) who, for whatever reasons, decided to go to a
"jazz" club. Or, they've hired you for their corporate party, or
college concert, or whatever. Do any of you folks have a jazz festival
in your town? Does Kenny G play there? Probably not. Our festival drew
thousands of people last summer. We have jazz on three radio stations,
one a "full time" jazz station. They play some "smooth" jazz at night,
but I also hear Charlie Parker, Bill Evans, Kurt Rosenwinkel, Eric
Alexander, Bill Corrothers, and a LOT of people I've never heard of,
many who have self-produced CD's. Probably 1/3 to 1/2 of those records
aren't even all that great, musicially, but they ARE getting heard.
The point of this rant is that getting news on "the way things are"
from any kind of corporate perspective isn't going to produce anything
close to reality. Who cares if Kenny G gets hyped? I doubt Charles
Lloyd's fans go to hear the G man, and Charles is still out there,
playing and selling product. What about the long term sales of records
like the Louis Armstrong Hot Fives and Sevens? Jazz rules!
Clay Moore
http://www.claymoore.com/
Jurupari
>Wynton, of course) got upset with them for joining Sting's group.
>
I remember working Fortress Around Your Heart up as a solo piece when I was
doing a midi assisted one man band. It warn't no Kenny G nothin'!
Outside of the damn vocal being just *that* much too high, the comping and
solos were interesting to do, and it was one of the more challenging pieces I
used to do. Wouldn't mess with The Nightfly, but still it took some practice
to sound presentable.
I thought Branford helped out what would probably have otherwise been a
rather insipid treatment.
I'm not exactly a fan, but I do like Branford (heard a neat Ornette cover of
his recently) and was glad not sad he'd been called to kick something in. Hope
he got some Sting-sized money!
Clif
Tom Lippincott
yes, thanks.
>-CDs finally went out today
>Jay
uh oh, now the pressure's on for me to live up to my half of the bargain, heh.
Tom Lippincott
the part about attracting listeners to
Hi Clay;
I think you make some very good points. I've gone on rants before about how
sad the state of the live music scene is here in S. FL before, probably to you
as well as to others. I have to admit, in at least some ways things do seem to
be turning around down here as well. It's certainly not turned into any
paradise by any means but in the last year or two I've noticed more venues that
are presenting live music, and more opportunities for full bands rather than
just solo and duo gigs.
However, I wasn't in my rant trying to suggest that the jazz scene is in some
kind of deplorable state, and that it's all Kenny G and Clearchannel
Communications' faults, if that's what you inferred. I was merely commenting
on the fact that one of the big arguments I seem to hear for not dissing smooth
jazz is that it supposedly brings new listeners to jazz, and was asserting my
own belief that, if anything, the opposite is true. Maybe you could explain
further what you mean by this statement;
>I seriously doubt this is true, the part about attracting listeners to
>the "good stuff" as it were.
are you saying you doubt it's true that the "Evil Empire" (Clearchannel) has
any negative impact on the general public's interest in what most of us here
would consider "jazz?" Do you agree with those who assert that Kenny G and his
ilk help bring new audience members to "real" jazz?
"a wandering frank" <mile_stones
"David Moss" <david.no...@fgs.fzk.de> wrote in message
news:ar823a$fm4ls$1...@ID-90151.news.dfncis.de...
> What I'm saying is, the fact that jazz doesn't sell in
> millions isn't a regrettable problem, it's inevitable -
> if the kind of people who buy CDs by the million
> liked jazz, *you* wouldn't like jazz.
Amen, although I might argue with that a *little*...I'd sure love it if
fifty million people dug Bill Evans, Miles, Oscar, etc., etc, the way I do!
Beats the hell out of sitting in an Irish pub in Bucharest next to a
somewhat obnoxious Canadian businessman (is there such a thing as an Ugly
Canadian?) trying to foist the G-man on the club owner and his CD system,
insisting it was good jazz. :-7 (That actually happened...result: G got
played for about a tune, and then was quickly removed:)
> So, I'll look forward to getting my copy of your
> next album - The Mark Kleinhaut Trio with guest
> saxophonist Kenny G. If he doesn't agree to the
> collaboration, wait until he's dead and then use
> his recordings.
ROTFLMAO. If only we could edit his stuff while he's still alive...but by
the time you re-arranged everything you needed to, you'd have been better
off just throwing the CD in the dumpster.
In other news, I was in a record store looking through the jazz section and
cursing over the slim pickings of Diz to be had (three CDs). In the next
column were about 25 Kenny G CDs. Boy was I hard pressed not to lift the
whole stack out with the name tag and slot it over at New Age. A little
civil disobedience has to start at the grassroots, doesn't it?
Frank
thomas
>
> I'm curious if any Brandford Marsalis or Kenny Kirkland fans (besides
> Wynton, of course) got upset with them for joining Sting's group.
Have you seen that episode of The Osbournes where Ozzie basically
admits to being a parody of himself, but then observes that "It's not
so bad being Ozzy Osbourne. It could be worse...I could be Sting."
Joe Finn
> In the last week I've gotten five CD's from trades, four of
> them from national artists. I've given out that many at least. The
> cool thing about the above is: no middleman. I'm not paying Sony or
> whomever. Small business, more direct.
A friend of mine at Sony is greatly relieved at having had his contract
renewed recently. They let a lot of people go, so he tells me. The industry
as a whole is down.
> The situation with live jazz gigs is similar. I hear people complain
> all the time about how bad it is, but I can go out almost any night of
> the week here and hear decent, if not exemplary jazz. I'm gigging four
> nights a week on average. News alert! This is better than I've ever
> seen it in my 25 years of professional activity, for jazz that is.
I too am busier. I played eight gigs last week. I had four set for this
week. Two were cancelled due to the weather. I did about 200 last year and
this year is even better. I don't know what it is. I'm doing more promo. I
like to think at least some of it has to do with the quality of the music.
I'm putting a lot of miles on my car.
I had a regular tgif gig last year. Maybe I told this story already but the
club had the local smooth jazz radio station djs come and play cds while the
band took a break. They also gave away discs and t shirts. The gigs were
well attended. We hung on to the job for a while but only because we could
groove on Cantaloupe Island and Watermelon Man. If we played swing we would
have been fired tout suite for not playing jazz; as fucked up as that may
sound. Other bands got the axe accordingly. I'm not sure what the club is
doing now. I think they are going with the dj only and no live band.
I think Tom has a good point. Smooth jazz is a smoke screen, but because of
the sheer size of the radio audience the obfuscation of the term "jazz" has
actually had an effect. The tgif group I mentioned has done three fairly
high profile opening act spots. The most recent was for Boney James. I had a
previous commitment to do a gig for less bread so I kept it. I can see where
this shit is headed.
The hype has an enormous effect. Some of these guys use backing tracks in
their live presentations and I'm here to tell you it stinks.
I want no part of it. .....joe
Mark Kleinhaut
--------------------Mark Kleinhaut
markkl...@hotmail.com
Info and soundclips about:
"Chasing Tales":
http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/Chasing%20Tales.html
"Amphora":
http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/Amphora.html
"Secrets of Three": http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/SO3.html
Max Leggett
<markkl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>Kenny isn't taking my calls. Can you imagine the nerve of that dork?
>
Don't feel bad. Britney isn't returning mine, either.
thom_j.
Datz cuz Ms Spears is here..hahahaha Ahhh now I can wake up..:^)~
t.j.
Jurupari
They're supposed to be retrievers - maybe you should call the breeder.
Jonathan Giblin
> Of course, I don't think no matter how hard I tried that I'd be able to play
> stylistically appropriately for a gig like that, so I don't think I'd pass the
> audition in the first place.
I think that's what it really comes down to for any artistically
ambitious jazz musician.
Kenny G doesn't play the way he does because he's trying to fool the
world; he really believes that it's great stuff! I know that's a scary
thought, but I think it's true.
People like Kenny G are very sincere about their music, even though
they're not very musical. They find sidemen who are more or less in
the same place. No serious jazz musician would have a shot at the gig
in a million years. And if they did get the gig, they'd never be able
to play what Kenny wanted to hear. I know it sounds rediculous but I
think this guy's for real, at least in his own mind.
"a wandering frank" <mile_stones
"Mark Kleinhaut" <markkl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3dd9...@spamkiller.newsgroups.com...
> Kenny isn't taking my calls. Can you imagine the nerve of that dork?
Well, be nice to the guy, Mark -- he may live in fear of having to defend
his theses about Bird's nickname as the result of an improper reed squeak,
or Coltrane being merely a source of licks one has to learn, or Giant Steps
being a mere technical show-off exercise which he could play, but doesn't.
Besides, the last time he spoke to a jazz guitarist on the phone, look what
happened. :-)
PS- I was particularly heartwarmed by Mr. G's repeated insistence that he
has finally learned to play in tune (after ten or so years). God forbid you
should determine otherwise. :-)
Frank
Max Leggett
wrote:
>to play what Kenny wanted to hear. I know it sounds rediculous but I
>think this guy's for real, at least in his own mind.
Pop musicians are, and so are country musicians. To them it's what
sounds real. To me, some guy in a Stetson singing pop songs is
meaningless, but a lot of people swear by it. Mojo is a music
magazine, and a good one, devoted to pop music and how it reflects
people's lives. Kenneth Gore-Lickke likely thinks his stuff is real.
SOK - no law says I have to listen to any of it. Come the revolution,
though, and there'll be some changes made. We're keeping a list of
"transgressors". They will be "re-educated". Stay tuned for the New
Reality.
thom_j.
"Jurupari" <juru...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021118161905...@mb-cl.aol.com...
> > Don't feel bad. Britney isn't returning mine, either.
>
> They're supposed to be retrievers - maybe you should call the breeder.
My phone # is un'listed :^)
Nick Naffin
news:3dd7ca82....@news.outtech.com...
> I seriously doubt this is true, the part about attracting listeners to
> the "good stuff" as it were. There are a lot of things in the
> corporate world that are complete fiction. Here's one of them: a
> corporation has a slow quarter, and suddenly it's huge cause for
> alarm. Hands wringing, blame placed. We're told it's a crisis *because
> they sold less than they expected*. We're being told that the record
> industry is "down in sales." We're also reminded that "jazz" is
> getting less and less of the pie.
Ach, but RMAA and their minions have been spoiled to hell and back with
innumerable repackaged albums, box sets, and whatnot. They got fat, lazy
and greedy by selling overpriced re-releases and moronic compilations (Jazz
For When BlueNote Just Got A Hernia From Laughing So Hard), and now are
naturally disappointed that sales are going down. Well, if your A&R
department mainly consists of necrophiliacs...
> Let's look at some other interesting stats. How many folks on this NG
> even have recorded their own CD's? I've got two out, and a 3rd on its
> way, and I can think of you, Tom, Kevin Van Zant, Tim Berens, Mark
> Kleinhaut, Rick DelSalvio, Mike Cea, Mr Will, Rick Stone, Jody Fisher,
> and Chris Buzzelli just off the top of my head. (sorry for the folks I
> forgot). Practically every musician I go to see live has a CD or two.
> Certainly the touring ones do. Let's say that, just for laughs, a jazz
> fan goes to the local jazz club every night, and buys every CD that
> everyone who plays there has out. He buys my two, and I've got Gordy
> Johnson on bass, and he has two. Four CD's in one night. The next
> night say Mark Elf is in town with a pickup bassist and drummer. The
> fan buys all ten of Mark's CD's, plus the bassist Terry Burns has two,
> so that's twelve. And so on. Now, do the math. At the end of a year
> this fan is going to have thousands of CD's that he's purchased
> directly from the artists. What's the point? No industry sales
> logging, that's what. This may seem like "fuzzy math," but it's part
> of the "not counted" jazz industry that is a vital part of the
> picture. In the last week I've gotten five CD's from trades, four of
> them from national artists. I've given out that many at least. The
> cool thing about the above is: no middleman. I'm not paying Sony or
> whomever. Small business, more direct.
A couple of comments from a day-job publicist's perspective. Yes,
but... on the other hand, Clay and all, the steady "inflation" of indie CDs
means there's a lot more music to find, check out, and choose for pretty
much any listener. If I remember correctly, a few years ago, a RMAA report
claimed there were more than 250,000 discrete CDs produced in the U.S.
alone. Now, as a conservative guess I'd venture 90% of these die during
their first run, due to lack of marketing know-how, advertising strategy and
dollars spent, maybe a general lack of business sophistication, or maybe
even because the music's not all that great.
The lack of sales logging Clay mentions is a serious disadvantage. Now
that there's been a few years of trial and error in self-releasing, at least
most people I see around surviving are putting bar codes on their CDs; alas,
those only work if and when one gets distributed into a "brick and mortar"
store reporting to SoundScan. Should there be any label interest in a
performer, I've seen that copies of manufacturer's invoices for a certain
amount of CD runs and reruns seem to be working for some. But on the great
and whole, today "having a CD out" doesn't mean anything anymore. Pretty
much any idiot with Cool Edit or ProTools Free and a CD burner can do it
(and on some days at the office, it seems they do). So while there's more
'product', there's less significance - greater span, lesser depth, as Ken
Wilber put it in a different context.
Clay's 'just for laughs' example is a good one, but doesn't reflect that
while CD supply has risen dramatically, demand (or the buying power of one's
"target group") has not increased that much. So instead of, say, creating a
*big* joint venture of "independent" (i.e. unsigned) artists (by way of a
collaborative, a union-type thing or what have you) that combines and
fosters the limited funds of many and establishes a reliable "indie"
industry structure (thereby losing the indie moniker, I suppose), many jazz
(or 'folk') performers sit back comfortably in their misery and self-pity,
and tell each other how really special their music is, because quite
apparently not many people are interested in buying it.
Consequently, there's a new breed of weasels telling musicians what
they'd like to hear, and catering to the overdeveloped ego and
underdeveloped knowhow of performers in order to get at their money from the
self-help producing, -publishing, and -releasing angle. There are more
conferences and workshops than you can shake a stick at, all proposing to
tell some insider secrets and strategies on how to produce even more CDs,
and sell them "just like the pros" or something. It's the music business'
version of the American Dream; and apparently enough suckers shell out their
hard-earned day job dollars for a seminar on how to get something for
(almost) nothing (or, as the case may turn out to be, how to spend even more
money to become another casualty of the 90% rule). Just because it has
become so easy to "produce" a CD, some seem to think, it somehow has to be
similarly easy to place it, get it to the consumer, sell it. Good one.
Note: Of course anybody thinking or telling themselves jazz is a really
special music, and not for everyone, is entirely correct. In the jazz
section of the recording industry, 5-10,000 copies sold means you have a
veritable hit album. In the pop world, most acts under 10,000 units sold
don't even register on the radar. Kenny G is successful because he caters
to a low-brow, low common denominator perception of "jazzy", whatever that
means. He sells tons of albums because people like to listen to his shit;
it's that simple. Fancy playing jazz? Okay, start practicing and stop
complaining. It was your choice. The world doesn't owe anybody anything,
and to me it seems to make that abundantly clear each day.
You want to change things in the business?
A) Well, it's been set up to work like that for a few centuries now;
there's not a fat chance they'll change what works. Don't worry; we're
artists. We'll get paid when we're dead.
B) We'd need to get organized. Trying to beat industry pros at their
own game is a futile exercise for most, because first and foremost it means
forgetting about your music once you're done producing it, and ruthlessly
turning it into product (which also implies a good hard look at supply and
demand); something artists are notoriously bad at. Where do you think all
those money guys got their entrance in the first place? - So we need to
change the game, organize many small limited funds into a bigger one, find
and utilize different means of marketing and distribution.
Again, not many musicians are good at that; that's why we have all these
lone warrior types who proudly sell three, four CDs per week, and maybe a
dozen on the web. 200 copies a year if they're any good at it. How much
did that first run cost? How many of those went out as promo copies
(airplay, reviews, etc)? How many would you have to sell to break even?
What do you have to do (and spend) in order to do that? - If you do your
math, I think you'll find you have to produce at least two runs (and sell
about 70% of these) in order to break even for your first one, including
production. And that's where, for many, resources, patience and tolerance
run out; and, frankly, I think it's designed to work like that. See A).
So until a few artists organize their various resources in creating more
marketing buck and a fairer share distribution, it'll be a long way to
SoundScan. Instead, the latest thing I see is guys trying to play along and
hype "#17 on the world-wide charts" or something in their ads and kits, only
to let on later we're talking about mp3.com's internal download count. Now
those guys charge artists a fee in order to let them give away their music
for free. As long as any number of players are still buying into that, I'm
tellin' ya, there's no chance in hell we'll ever get anywhere without
professional help. - So, we don't need to educate the big majority of the
audience as to what is good, or decent jazz music. We need to educate
*ourselves* as to how can a reasonable number of people be reached? How do
I get this thing of mine across? How do I focus what little I have, avoid
pitfalls, spend wisely, and don't get lost in this jungle? We need to learn
how the game works (and is rigged) before setting out to win or change it;
just like most of us have to practice scales, arps, chords and such in order
to understand and play jazz. I remember this movie 'Rounders' from a couple
of years ago. Matt Damon asks someone why they think the same four poker
players are at the table at the finals of the annual championships each
year. Is it because they're just so incredibly lucky at a game of chance?
Or is it because they know their game, and focus, and prioritize, and do
what they need to do to consistently stay on top of it for a good run?
Nick
_______________________
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
Mark Guest wrote:
> I don't think that it's jealousy that makes jazzers treat the G-man as a
> lightning rod/whipping boy. It's the pack instinct. When a runt (musical or
> otherwise) draws attention to himself, the pack attempts to cull the weak
> member. Smooth jazz is such a different animal from modern/traditional jazz
> that all attempts by smooth jazzers to further hijack the "jazz" moniker
> raises hackles among the "genetically pure" jazzers. It is appropriate to
> want to drive the (G)-runt man out of the pack...he's not part of the jazz
> flock, and he doesn't get it.
>
> If smooth jazz went by another name (smooth dental office music?
Hey, watch it! ;-)
Steve Bornfeld, DDS
> smooth
> elevator tunes? smooth schlock?) I doubt that jazzers would take any more
> note of Mr. Gorelick than we do Garth Brooks. As it is, I'm looking for
> another name for my whirled yogurt breakfast drink. Smoothies just don't
> sound appetizing anymore.
>
> Are we really losing practice time over Kenny G? Not much, if any. Is
> engaging in the G-runt controversy counterproductive? Only as much as
> listening to any other joke at the office. Sorry about the rant. Maybe I
> need some more time on the greens to smooth me out.
>
> --
> Mark Guest
> Mark at MarkGuest.net
>
> "Tim Berens" <ti...@erinet.com> wrote in message
> news:3dd3bfa9$0$17645$4c5e...@news.erinet.com...
> > It's just too easy for jazz musicians to hate Kenny G.
> >
> > What really doesn't make sense to me is this: why we are so quick to
> > attack Kenny G, yet we completely ignore many other pop musicians
> > whose pretenses are in the same vein as Kenny G's?
> >
> > Kenny G is making a living -- a great living -- playing music. A part
> > of making a great living playing music is publicity, hype, PR,
> > bullshit, whatever you want to call it.
> >
> > For some reason, we jazz musicians don't bristle at all when country
> > star X, or rapper Y or rock singer Z puts out some ridiculously smarmy
> > song or absurd statement in the press, but let Kenny G do it and we
> > get our panties in a terrible wad.
> >
> > To tell the truth, I find that I am really quite jealous of the living
> > Kenny G makes. I wonder if much of the open hatred for him isn't at
> > least partially rooted in jealousy of the success he has had.
> >
> > It seems to me that all this anger is counter productive for us, as it
> > distracts us from the more important things in life. Why don't we all
> > just give Kenny G the same treatment we give to other musicians we
> > don't like -- an indifferent yawn -- and then get back to practicing.
> >
> > Tim
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > http://timberens.com
> > A Website for Guitarists
> > Learn something...Have some fun
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Jurupari
>
> Hey, watch it! ;-)
>
>Steve Bornfeld, DDS
really - we should call it smooth elevator music and decide on that once and
for all as the definition of vertical improvisation.
Clif
JuJu Voodoo
wrote in message
> the steady "inflation" of indie CDs
> means there's a lot more music to find, check out, and choose for pretty
> much any listener.
Dilution has occurred. It is so loose, that folks can easily get,
"lost," in it. Focus mechanisms are required.
> If I remember correctly, a few years ago, a RMAA report
> claimed there were more than 250,000 discrete CDs produced in the U.S.
> alone. Now, as a conservative guess I'd venture 90% of these die during
> their first run
Legion are they.
> on the great
> and whole, today "having a CD out" doesn't mean anything anymore.
Must DO something with it.
> Clay's 'just for laughs' example is a good one, but doesn't reflect that
> while CD supply has risen dramatically, demand (or the buying power of one's
> "target group") has not increased that much. So instead of, say, creating a
> *big* joint venture of "independent" (i.e. unsigned) artists (by way of a
> collaborative, a union-type thing or what have you) that combines and
> fosters the limited funds of many and establishes a reliable "indie"
> industry structure (thereby losing the indie moniker, I suppose),
A structure where participants in each city became promo/distribution
reps for each other, as in each person a node in the net, is something
I've run by people before. But it is difficult for win/win to get in
when so many have been trained from the cradle for hyper-competitive
win/lose scenarios. It'll take somebody to package it in a rah-rah,
"team," thang, with the accent on what, "I," can get out of it. Which
would get the greed, self-serving thing going, without the finer
nuances that the, "original," unblemished, "vision version," had going
for it. But hey, it is the world, so what to expect.
> Consequently, there's a new breed of weasels telling musicians what
> they'd like to hear, and catering to the overdeveloped ego and
> underdeveloped knowhow of performers in order to get at their money from the
> self-help producing, -publishing, and -releasing angle.
Ain't they something...
> We'd need to get organized. Trying to beat industry pros at their
> own game is a futile exercise for most, because first and foremost it means
> forgetting about your music once you're done producing it, and ruthlessly
> turning it into product
As I sit in front of the computer, I have a call to make today... to
supposed big money people that somebody talked to about me. I saw an
entertainment attorney yesterday.
> - So we need to
> change the game, organize many small limited funds into a bigger one, find
> and utilize different means of marketing and distribution.
Before you know it, its a record company, booking/concert circuit
thing. Putting product in record stores at the ground level. Local
radio and television, and developing, "relationship$," with Clear
Channel folks.
> Again, not many musicians are good at that; that's why we have all these
> lone warrior types who proudly sell three, four CDs per week, and maybe a
> dozen on the web. 200 copies a year if they're any good at it. How much
> did that first run cost? How many of those went out as promo copies
> (airplay, reviews, etc)? How many would you have to sell to break even?
> What do you have to do (and spend) in order to do that? - If you do your
> math, I think you'll find you have to produce at least two runs (and sell
> about 70% of these) in order to break even for your first one, including
> production. And that's where, for many, resources, patience and tolerance
> run out; and, frankly, I think it's designed to work like that.
The woods are full of this.
Depending on what somebody, "wants," steady sales in a steady gig in a
high tourist saturation area can be a trap.
> Nick
Great post, Nick
JuJu
cl...@claymoore.com
wrote:
>I had a regular tgif gig last year. Maybe I told this story already but the
>club had the local smooth jazz radio station djs come and play cds while the
>band took a break. They also gave away discs and t shirts. The gigs were
>well attended. We hung on to the job for a while but only because we could
>groove on Cantaloupe Island and Watermelon Man. If we played swing we would
>have been fired tout suite for not playing jazz; as fucked up as that may
>sound. Other bands got the axe accordingly. I'm not sure what the club is
>doing now. I think they are going with the dj only and no live band.
>
>I think Tom has a good point. Smooth jazz is a smoke screen, but because of
>the sheer size of the radio audience the obfuscation of the term "jazz" has
>actually had an effect. The tgif group I mentioned has done three fairly
>high profile opening act spots. The most recent was for Boney James. I had a
>previous commitment to do a gig for less bread so I kept it. I can see where
>this shit is headed.
HI Joe,
Well, the hype surrounding smooth jazz is no where near creating the
type of market these corporate weasels expected, IMO. There was a
smooth jazz station in Austin, TX that had all the trademarks of a pop
station, the tasteless ads, the repetitive playlists. They began
playing non-smooth jazz stuff after a while, like Clapton, and I
sensed that things weren't going that well for them. I turned it on
one morning to hear a country station. The same went for the clubs. A
restaurant/bar called Sullivan's began as a smooth jazz place, trying
to get concerts going with some of the recording artists. They still
have a bit of that vibe, but the national acts have long fallen by the
wayside. The same is true here in the TC. There are a few groups doing
the smooth jazz thing, but AFAIK there's only one club where they
play, which also features "regular" jazz, so it seems it's not that
pervasive. Just my opinion, but it seems that once any venue or
station figures out there's only a marginal profit in this music they
drop it, whereas real jazz clubs seem to be in it for the music, not
just to make a quick buck. The two "real" jazz clubs in town have been
going for many years.
Clay Moore
http://www.claymoore.com/
cl...@claymoore.com
wrote:
> I was merely commenting
>on the fact that one of the big arguments I seem to hear for not dissing smooth
>jazz is that it supposedly brings new listeners to jazz, and was asserting my
>own belief that, if anything, the opposite is true. Maybe you could explain
>further what you mean by this statement;
>are you saying you doubt it's true that the "Evil Empire" (Clearchannel) has
>any negative impact on the general public's interest in what most of us here
>would consider "jazz?" Do you agree with those who assert that Kenny G and his
>ilk help bring new audience members to "real" jazz?
Hi Tom,
My point is, why bother with dissing smooth jazz to begin with? We
know a lot of it is marketing hype, so why should we allow the
corporate weasel mentality to affect us at all? No, I seriously doubt
exposing someone to Kenny G is going to turn him or her on to "real"
jazz, but is that truly a problem? All of us who read this group know
that good jazz isn't for everyone, but there do seem to be hardcore
jazz fans and a fairly large number of "middling" fans, and I think
the audience is growing. The thing is, there will always be people who
believe the hype, and they will buy crappy music, junk food, and
movies with no plots except to blow things up and have car chases, and
another percentage who prefer to sort things out for themselves. We
get some of those people. I'm happy that I get those folks.
I'd also like to address some points made by Joe Finn, and at the same
time perhaps remind us of a little history. "Smooth" jazz, in the form
of taking "the real thing" and supposedly diluting it, has been around
for a _long_ time. The Dave Brubeck Quartet was hated by a lot of hard
core jazz fans for that reason, so were trends such as "bossa nova"
and "soul jazz," and folks like George Shearing, Ramsey Lewis, Les
McCann, and even Wes Montgomery. Remember Chuck Mangione? Do you
really think that had a huge detrimental effect on "real" jazz? I
don't. And that was 25 years ago! Smooth jazz ain't new, and it ain't
taking away from the other, IMO.
Clay Moore
http://www.claymoore.com/
Joe Finn
>
> Well, the hype surrounding smooth jazz is no where near creating the
> type of market these corporate weasels expected, IMO. There was a
> smooth jazz station in Austin, TX that had all the trademarks of a pop
> station, the tasteless ads, the repetitive playlists. They began
> playing non-smooth jazz stuff after a while, like Clapton, and I
> sensed that things weren't going that well for them. I turned it on
> one morning to hear a country station.
I've had that experience too. I don't know much about the radio business but
it sure seems like the stations change things around a lot more than they
used to. Announcers come and go and programming formats change overnight
without warning. Do stations get bought and sold more than they used to? It
seems like a crazy business.
> The same went for the clubs. A
> restaurant/bar called Sullivan's began as a smooth jazz place, trying
> to get concerts going with some of the recording artists. They still
> have a bit of that vibe, but the national acts have long fallen by the
> wayside. The same is true here in the TC. There are a few groups doing
> the smooth jazz thing, but AFAIK there's only one club where they
> play, which also features "regular" jazz, so it seems it's not that
> pervasive. Just my opinion, but it seems that once any venue or
> station figures out there's only a marginal profit in this music they
> drop it, whereas real jazz clubs seem to be in it for the music, not
> just to make a quick buck. The two "real" jazz clubs in town have been
> going for many years.
Ain't it the truth? Clubs owners in general are a fickle bunch. They will
reinvent themselves anytime they see a lucrative new angle. The jazz clubs
that I play all have the long term commitment to the music like you
describe. They all are well established and dedicated to the music and it's
presentation. This is how they hold their audience.
There really isn't anybody that I know of in my area that is playing smooth
jazz. The little bit of it that I've heard sounds over produced and very
synthetic. Maybe it's hard to pull that stuff off live without a really
rehearsed band and a ton of equipment. I don't know of a club that features
it either. The radio station has brought in national acts several times
during the last year and I hear that the shows are well attended. I
suspect that the market for smooth jazz is enormous. Somebody must be buying
all those Kenny G discs, right? ....joe
--
Joe Finn
> I'd also like to address some points made by Joe Finn, and at the same
> time perhaps remind us of a little history. "Smooth" jazz, in the form
> of taking "the real thing" and supposedly diluting it, has been around
> for a _long_ time. The Dave Brubeck Quartet was hated by a lot of hard
> core jazz fans for that reason, so were trends such as "bossa nova"
> and "soul jazz," and folks like George Shearing, Ramsey Lewis, Les
> McCann, and even Wes Montgomery. Remember Chuck Mangione? Do you
> really think that had a huge detrimental effect on "real" jazz? I
> don't. And that was 25 years ago! Smooth jazz ain't new, and it ain't
> taking away from the other, IMO.
I don't really think smooth jazz is a diluted version of the real thing.
Smooth jazz is better described as modern instrumental pop music. A lot of
it sounds like R&B to me. To my ears it seems like it's coming from a
different stylistic direction than the jazz tradition. I see them as two
different things. The repertoires differ greatly as well.
The artists you mention above do have roots in the jazz tradition. Their
various stylistic forays were indeed disturbing to purists but jazz is big
enough to survive this. I don't see that any of them have had any
detrimental effect. It's funny that you should mention Chuck Mangione.
Even though he has been reviled for some of his more commercial efforts,
that guy can really play! I played in a band that opened for him on two
occasions. He did perform some of his obligatory well known material but he
also played some very fine straight ahead jazz. Gerry Niewood and Joe
LaBarbera were in the group at the time and they played great, too.
Another guy I played with more recently was guitarist Chris Standring. Chris
is an Englishman who lives in LA. He basically plays in an R&B style. The cd
he gave me sounds sort of like one of those George Benson albums like Livin'
Inside Your Love or something. He is a very fine guitarist. I'm not sure if
he even considers himself a "jazz" player or not but he's got some killer
blues licks going. His set included the old BeeGees tune How Deep Is Your
Love and a lot of smooth/funk originals.
I guess when you've got a guy like Dave Brubeck or George Shearing or Wes
Montgomery you are really talking about somebody who owes a lot to the
mainstream tradition. I think a lot of these "smooth" guys were R&B
players first. .....joe
cl...@claymoore.com
<cant...@takenotepromotion.com> wrote:
<a lot of great stuff, which I snipped>
Nick, your points are well-thought out, and you obviously have a good
background in the topics discussed. My question to you is, do you
think the situation (musicians getting their share of the record sales
pie) was better before musicians were able to produce their own CD's,
and market them at gigs and on the Internet?
Clay Moore
http://www.claymoore.com/
Nick Naffin
news:3ddc545c....@news.outtech.com...
> Nick, your points are well-thought out, and you obviously have a good
> background in the topics discussed. My question to you is, do you
> think the situation (musicians getting their share of the record sales
> pie) was better before musicians were able to produce their own CD's,
> and market them at gigs and on the Internet?
>
> Clay Moore
> http://www.claymoore.com/
Hey Clay,
Good question! - And at first glance, of course the answer's a
resounding 'no'.
I guess to differentiate things a little, though, we'd need to agree on
what we mean by "their share of the record sales pie." There's a couple of
angles we could look at it from.
For instance, if a standard major label contract in the late nineties
offered a "new" act a whopping 2.8% of sales income, you could quickly argue
the musicians are not getting their *fair* share of the pie; on the other
hand, there are recording costs, distribution, and marketing, all of which
are traditionally fronted by the label, and fall under that woesome term of
'recoupable expenses', which means they're getting paid (back) before the
musicians do. As many of us know, even if for a jazz album the production
cost may be fairly low (not much studio time, not many overdubs etc, and we
may safely skip the video :-) after an even minimal national publicity
campaign, print advertising and so on there's a nice amount of expenses that
have to be covered, and recouped from album sales. I wouldn't consider that
percentage even remotely fair (and of course we've seen the rise of indie
labels offering contracts more adaequately reflecting the artists'
contribution); however, two things are worth pointing out to me. A) A major
or bigger indie label contract offers the musicians access to the company's
resources, their logistical network, and the services of the label's
business partners; resources otherwise ill-affordable or plain unavailable
to the artists. B) With this set-up, the *risk* is with the company. More
than 90% of albums do not recoup expenses; the musicians will likely not see
much, if any monies generated from sales, but they don't have to cover any
financial losses.
A self-released album is a different beast. Now the financial
investment and risk lies pretty much entirely with the musician; and yes,
they may get a much fairer share of sales revenue, but that doesn't mean
much, really, since they have to cover all expenses themselves. So if my
album cost me, say, $10,000 to produce and promote a little, the nominally
bigger share of revenue may look nicer on paper, but doesn't really come
into play either until everything's paid off. And as discussed, one pretty
much would have to relentlessly tour, market or advertise the album in order
to *maybe* recoup by the end of the second run; again, an
investment-intensive proposition.
So in light of this I'd answer your question by saying musicians now
have a better shot at getting their music heard by some. I think the
internet is a great outlet, offering several reasonably accessible avenues
of introducing one's music to interested listeners, and distributing one's
product to a good number of people, and as such definitely bettered the
situation for a lot of players. On the other hand, it also makes for a
flood of mediocre or simply bad albums "produced" by people because they
could, and not because interested third parties deemed it worthwhile product
from either an artistic or a business perspective. So the web did what some
romantics a few years back thought it ought to do, it "levelled the playing
field". The actual amount of levelling, however, may not be to everyone's
tastes. If I was a decent player with a fair album to my name, I might now
find myself having to 'compete' for the fickle and ever-decreasing attention
spans of international web surfers with a staggering amount of yahoos who
previously wouldn't have had a chance in hell of ever having a record
produced. So, the slices of your record sales pie have just gotten a lot
thinner.
In the gigging and freelancing reality, all of this is of course
entirely academic, in the sense that you plain *have* to have product in
order to introduce yourself as a professional act, and often to get booked
at festivals and such as well. And due to digital technology, you're now
able to come up with a calling card, if you will, and sometimes one that
eventually turns out to be sellable product. So after you recoup your own
expenses in making the album, you have the CD to augment your gigging
income. I suspect many players don't quite see it like this, though. The
10-12 bucks per CD sold on a good night look and feel just like additional
income, but they're not; it's just very slowly paying back a BIG personal
investment.
And, since we have to market the album mostly by ourselves, our reach is
limited by personal funds. The theoretically world-wide exposure on the web
doesn't mean much if people don't know who you are, or why they should come
by and check you out; and once they do, it's still a long way to logging
actual sales from your site or the page(s) at independent web retailers you
keep running. Part of that may be due to the fact that the increased
availability of CDs on the net means there's also a lot more choices for the
prospective buyer; part of it may come from the notion that many people do
still mainly rely on print media for their music-related information; part
of it may be because you need to repeat advertising stimulus for a good
amount of time before a buying impulse sets in.
So again, I find the situation is marginally better than it was before
the advent of digital technology and distribution; but there's also a lot
more people trying to get at their slice of the pie, and there's a million
web sites for basically unknown players, all essentially utilizing the same
forms of marketing; a couple of quotes, maybe a friendly review or two from
publications we never heard of, or from other, often equally undistinguished
web sites. So, after I sent him a free copy, Fred in Wisconsin thinks my
album's pretty good, and says so on
fuzzyreviewsbyfredofrecordingsyou'veneverheardof.com. Well, now sales will
surely sky-rocket. :-)
I'd look at a CD as a necessary investment for a professional player
performing under his or her own name. Some will sell at gigs. Some may
sell if a local brick-and-mortar store has an indie section. Some may sell
over the web. I just wouldn't expect much; and I'd think trying to get to a
label deal of sorts, to actual distribution (the real kind, where the
distributor takes the risk, not one of those dealers that charge *you* for
delivering CDs to some stores), and to access to funds or resources that
allow for repeated print advertising, maybe a couple of radio spots around
interviews in gig towns or reachable places where you already are getting
some airplay, all these little things that make up successful marketing (by
that I mean a tangible outcome in fair proportion to its cost), are the way
to go. Musicians need to realize that production costs are but a percentage
of the overall cost of an album. A big label album may cost anywhere
between $50-150,000; the marketing for it is easily three times that.
Looking at some numbers: If I make an album for, all told, $10,000 for a
first run of a thousand, I'd better be prepared to spend at least the same
amount in marketing. If not, at, say, $10 per CD sold at gigs or on the
web, I'd have to sell a thousand copies just to break even; but an easy 40%
of my first run should be going out as promo, airplay and review copies. So
now I have 600 CDs; assuming I actually sell those ($6,000), I still have to
pay for the second run before coming anywhere close to paying off the first
one. Let's say that second run costs me another $2,000, all in all. During
that run, I'll still ship a good percentage as promo, but let's assume I'll
keep 700. If things work out, I just paid back about $6,000 of my initial
investment of $10,000 production and first run; I have incurred another
$2,000 for the second run, so those 700 copies I kept have to pay back
$6,000. That done, I may begin to see some actual profit, for which, in
this little scheme, I have 100 copies left. So I've just spent $12,000 (not
counting promotional expenses) and, let's say, maybe two years of gigging in
order to make one grand from my CD; and that only if I sell all of my
copies, which, as we know, is not that likely. So, if these numbers are
anywhere near correct, has the situation gotten better for musicians to get
their share of the record sales pie? You tell me. ;-)
Mind you, we just got spammed by a company that offered to pick up up to
five unsold cases of CDs we might have lying around in the basement for
recycling (or EastAsian distribution, or Lord knows what they're up to) for
CDN $12 per box of fifty. So for 250 CDs they'd pay $60. That about tops
it off for me. I think I'll try poetry. I hear there's money to be made.
Nick
_______________________
cl...@claymoore.com
<cant...@takenotepromotion.com> wrote:
Hi Nick,
> Good question! - And at first glance, of course the answer's a
>resounding 'no'.
<snip>
> So I've just spent $12,000 (not counting promotional expenses) and,
> let's say, maybe two years of gigging in order to make one grand
> from my CD; and that only if I sell all of my copies, which, as we
> know, is not that likely. So, if these numbers are anywhere near
> correct, has the situation gotten better for musicians to get their
> share of the record sales pie? You tell me. ;-)
I understand the above example is intended to be hypothetical.
However, and I'm not trying to be a wise guy, why are *you* doing it,
then? You have a web site, CD's out, a promo company. Is it worth the
price to you? Are you doing what you want? Do you feel like you
control your destiny? If the answer to any of the last three questions
is no, (or even if it's not), do you feel you'd be better served by a
large record label?
Clay Moore
http://www.claymoore.com/
Nick Naffin
<cl...@claymoore.com> wrote in message
news:3ddecf48....@news.outtech.com...
Hey Clay,
Yes.
Sort of .
Partly.
And I, much like everyone else in our situation I know, would sign on to
swap my current better percentage of not much for better production, a
half-decent recording advance, a shot at larger exposure, distribution, and
a marketing budget in a New York minute.
Maybe I should add here that after getting a little tired of the folk
biz and what I was doing at the time, I've been focussing on woodshedding,
studying the guitar and harmony for the past four years or so. We've been
building the company, which took a lot of time, we built a little studio,
and bought a big ol' house in the country. So I haven't played out much,
except for the occasional concert or festival performance with Naffin &
Wright; so, just slowly getting back in the swing of things, I'm good for
now.
In the meantime, though, Take Note! Promotion allows us to work with
some great artists, help newcomers along a little, gain a lot of experience
in terms of marketing, publicity, and the media people encountered along the
way, and earn some money doing something related to what we love. Man, that
beats a lot of day jobs I used to work in. And while no one likes a
publicist much (except a charming old ornery bastard like me), it has
positive effects on my night job, in that I know a lot better how to get to
my contacts, and how to deal with whom in order to get closer to where I
long to be.
So, and not wanting to be a wise guy myself, I make music because I have
to. (That part of my destiny I don't control :-) But I also have to eat,
and I once made a vow not to professionally play music I don't like or don't
believe in. So far, so good (knock on wood); but having *that* luxury means
I need to be realistic about the market and business we're in. Dreams need
to be assessed, and become goals; otherwise we'll never get anywhere except
by pure dumb luck, and I've never seen that last for long. So, I feel you
need to either play what "they" want to hear, or get real about just where
you're at, where you want to be, and what you need to do to get there. The
way I see it, a reasonably realistic assessment of the industry, and your
chances in it, already puts you in front of thousands of dreamers who pay
dearly for the luxury of their illusions. Both for our clients and myself
as an artist, I like to get more bang for the buck. Fuhgeddaboudit. ;-)
Have a good weekend! And thanks for the interesting discussion.
Nick
_______________________
www.nicknaffin.com
www.takenotepromotion.com
Joe Finn
> Maybe I should add here that after getting a little tired of the folk
> biz and what I was doing at the time, I've been focussing on woodshedding,
> studying the guitar and harmony for the past four years or so. We've been
> building the company, which took a lot of time, we built a little studio,
> and bought a big ol' house in the country. So I haven't played out much,
> except for the occasional concert or festival performance with Naffin &
> Wright; so, just slowly getting back in the swing of things, I'm good for
> now.
>
jazz project can be brought to fruition for > $10,000. The promo, airplay
and sales are sort of an on going thing. I do as much as I have time for.
And I intend to try to stay as independent as possible for as long as I can.
The expenses are deductible.
I don't know what it's like in the folk scene but as a jazz player you are
also available for all kinds of work as a professional musician. Much of the
work a lot of us do is lucrative. There is also a lot of it. By year's end I
will have done well over 200 gigs. This is ahead of last year. Like you I do
not play music I don't believe in. Everything I do is jazz, big band or
swing. Sometimes I might get a show but not that often. Because of my new
recording I'm able to get more and more dates under my own name. This is
gratifying and pays well too.
Again, without getting into your numbers too much I feel you are painting an
overly gloomy picture of the opportunities that are to be had. This has
been a good year and I'm optimistic about the future.
Good luck to you. ....joe
Bob R
on 11/23/02 2:52 PM:
> Nick: I don't want to argue too much with your numbers but an independent
> jazz project can be brought to fruition for > $10,000. The promo, airplay
> and sales are sort of an on going thing. I do as much as I have time for.
> And I intend to try to stay as independent as possible for as long as I can.
> The expenses are deductible.
Joe, you mean "for < (less than) $10,000", right?
-- Bob Russell
http://www.bobrussellguitar.com
CD, "Watch This!", available at:
http://www.cdbaby.com/bobrussell
Joe Finn
"Bob R" <w...@earp.com> wrote
>
> Joe, you mean "for < (less than) $10,000", right?
>
Sorry, Bob. You are correct. I did mean less than.
BTW, if you want I can produce one for you for any amount you choose over
$10,000 also. No problem, just say the word. ....joe
Bob R
on 11/23/02 4:34 PM:
> "Bob R" <w...@earp.com> wrote
>>
>> Joe, you mean "for < (less than) $10,000", right?
>>
>
> Sorry, Bob. You are correct. I did mean less than.
>
> BTW, if you want I can produce one for you for any amount you choose over
> $10,000 also. No problem, just say the word. ....joe
What the hell, it's all tax-deductible, right? :-)
Joe Finn
> What the hell, it's all tax-deductible, right? :-)
What a night.
oy....
As far as the budget is concerned you can go anywhere you want to go.
Hire an arranger. Producer. Art director. Publicist. All star rhythm
section, too. Guest soloists. You name it. If you book them they will come.
It's only money. Hopefully somebody else's.
Meanwhile back on planet earth; it's a live in-the-studio recording with
local sidemen.
For me it's always been about the music.
My accountant says I keep better records than most of his clients. That's
just business though.
I came to play. 8-) ....joe
P.S. I dig that Wyatt Earp thing. It's too cool. Tell 'em I said hi at the
o.k. corral.
--
Visit me on the web. www.JoeFinn.net
cl...@claymoore.com
wrote:
>Nick: I don't want to argue too much with your numbers but an independent
>jazz project can be brought to fruition for > $10,000. The promo, airplay
>and sales are sort of an on going thing. I do as much as I have time for.
>And I intend to try to stay as independent as possible for as long as I can.
>The expenses are deductible.
Hi Joe,
These are all points I wanted to make as well, but I waited to see
what Nick followed with. I made my last CD for $2,300, and it's
excellent quality, recording-wise. I printed a thousand, BTW. I
personally am glad to be independent.
>
>I don't know what it's like in the folk scene but as a jazz player you are
>also available for all kinds of work as a professional musician. Much of the
>work a lot of us do is lucrative. There is also a lot of it. By year's end I
>will have done well over 200 gigs. This is ahead of last year. Like you I do
>not play music I don't believe in. Everything I do is jazz, big band or
>swing. Sometimes I might get a show but not that often. Because of my new
>recording I'm able to get more and more dates under my own name. This is
>gratifying and pays well too.
Ditto here. A CD under your name, even in this day and age of "easy to
do," puts us in a better position to promote ourselves and land the
work. I know a lot of great players who have told me that they admired
my focus for getting recordings out, and how they toyed with the idea
themselves, but didn't for whatever reasons.
>Again, without getting into your numbers too much I feel you are painting an
>overly gloomy picture of the opportunities that are to be had. This has
>been a good year and I'm optimistic about the future.
One very interesting thing to me - and again, I'm not trying to be a
wise guy - but if I were a client of Nick's I'd be really curious why
he was posting these things in a very public forum. Nick, if you're
reading this, do you share these sentiments with your clients before
they sign on?
Clay Moore
http://www.claymoore.com/
Tom Lippincott
>
>Hi Joe,
>
>These are all points I wanted to make as well, but I waited to see
>what Nick followed with. I made my last CD for $2,300, and it's
>excellent quality, recording-wise. I printed a thousand, BTW. I
>personally am glad to be independent.
>
Clay;
I'd been meaning to ask you for some time about your latest CD. As well as
sounding great musically, it also is well recorded/produced and the packaging
has a "pro" if no frills look about it. I've been planning a second CD but
don't really have the money to spend that I did on my first one. My original
plan was to merely print the CD's up myself on a one off basis as needed, but I
feel funny about asking people to pay much for a product that doesn't look like
a "pro" one. At this point I'm even starting to feel funny giving out a demo
that doesn't have a professionally duplicated vibe to it. Anyway, $2300 seems
more than reasonable for an "on the cheap" CD production. I'm curious to know
what the breakdown of that cost was (studio time, sideman fees, CD production
and duplication, and whatever else) if you wouldn't mind sharing the info. And
also, how did you go about the CD duplication itself?
>>
>>I don't know what it's like in the folk scene but as a jazz player you are
>>also available for all kinds of work as a professional musician. Much of the
>>work a lot of us do is lucrative. There is also a lot of it. By year's end I
>>will have done well over 200 gigs. This is ahead of last year. Like you I do
>>not play music I don't believe in. Everything I do is jazz, big band or
>>swing. Sometimes I might get a show but not that often. Because of my new
>>recording I'm able to get more and more dates under my own name. This is
>>gratifying and pays well too.
>
>Ditto here. A CD under your name, even in this day and age of "easy to
>do," puts us in a better position to promote ourselves and land the
>work.
I think these days it's almost a necessity if you want to work under your own
name. Since "everyone and his brother" has a CD, it's kind of hard to be taken
seriously by club owners, festival promoters, ect. without having one, IMO.
I know a lot of great players who have told me that they admired
>my focus for getting recordings out, and how they toyed with the idea
>themselves, but didn't for whatever reasons.
>
I make no claims to being a great player, but Clay, the release of your first
CD was indeed one of things that inspired me to go ahead and do one of my own.
Tom Lippincott
Guitarist, Composer, Teacher
audio samples, articles, CD's at:
http://www.tomlippincott.com
Nick Naffin
news:3de0848d....@news.outtech.com...
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2002 14:52:54 -0500, "Joe Finn" <J...@joefinn.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Nick: I don't want to argue too much with your numbers but an independent
> >jazz project can be brought to fruition for > $10,000. The promo, airplay
> >and sales are sort of an on going thing. I do as much as I have time for.
> >And I intend to try to stay as independent as possible for as long as I
can.
> >The expenses are deductible.
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> These are all points I wanted to make as well, but I waited to see
> what Nick followed with. I made my last CD for $2,300, and it's
> excellent quality, recording-wise. I printed a thousand, BTW. I
> personally am glad to be independent.
Hey guys,
1) Maybe I should've been more specific (and consistently so) in terms of
currency. I live in Canada.
2) Maybe I should have been more beatific as well. All my points
developed from the premise that a performer reasonably educated about the
market and the business has two advantages, namely a) not losing much time
or money on illusions, b) knowing to focus on realistic goals, and spend
their money accordingly. As it happened, the positive aspects of being able
to utilize today's technology and resources had been mentioned, and, I
thought, acknowledged.
The other points made by you two don't seem to contradict anything I
wrote.
Clay wrote:
3)
<snip> > I personally am glad to be independent <
4)
> One very interesting thing to me - and again, I'm not trying to be a
> wise guy - but if I were a client of Nick's I'd be really curious why
> he was posting these things in a very public forum. Nick, if you're
> reading this, do you share these sentiments with your clients before
> they sign on?
re: 3) Clay, now me again not wanting to be a wise guy, but are you
really telling that me if Concord Records called you tomorrow, you'd refuse?
re: 4) Because I tell 'em like I sees 'em. I don't like hype, and I
don't like sugarcoating. This is about communication. Here, we're talking
amongst fellow players about a topic that concerns some of us; I found it
interesting, and offered a few viewpoints. Discussion ensued; perspectives
are questioned, maybe reassessed, and changed when necessary; good, that's
the idea. As to the question about clients, I'd say it depends on where
they're at, and what they expect from us. But we're musicians as well; so I
do share experiences, and yes, points of view - if only in order to ensure
they're spending their money on aspects of marketing and publicity that we
can address and follow up with quality and confidence. It doesn't do
anybody any good if someone comes to me, wants to spend a hundred bucks
(Canadian :-), and expects me to fuel their flight to stardom. They'll be
disappointed, and that's bad for business. I like my clients to know what
they can expect, and why; and that we'll do our best to get them
communications and material that get their thing across to whom and where
it's, hopefully, most beneficial at this point of their game. We deliver
quality work, material, and contacts in exchange for money; and this is a
serious, professional business. I may not be the most diplomatic publicist
you could hire, but I won't bullshit you or anybody else, unless they're
trying to do it to me first.
But to be sure, when Joe gets his producer fee of $10,000, I'd love to
provide the "El Magnifico" $5,000 promo kit.
Nick
_______________________
Joe Finn
"Tom Lippincott" <tomli...@aol.comnospam> wrote
> I've been planning a second CD but
> don't really have the money to spend that I did on my first one.
Now that's good news. Good luck with the new project, Tom. Keep us posted.
I hope you'll include some of that solo stuff. ......joe
Joe Finn
--
Visit me on the web. www.JoeFinn.net
<cl...@claymoore.com> wrote in message
news:3de0848d....@news.outtech.com...
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2002 14:52:54 -0500, "Joe Finn" <J...@joefinn.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Nick: I don't want to argue too much with your numbers but an independent
> >jazz project can be brought to fruition for > $10,000. The promo, airplay
> >and sales are sort of an on going thing. I do as much as I have time for.
> >And I intend to try to stay as independent as possible for as long as I
can.
> >The expenses are deductible.
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> These are all points I wanted to make as well, but I waited to see
> what Nick followed with. I made my last CD for $2,300, and it's
> excellent quality, recording-wise. I printed a thousand, BTW. I
> personally am glad to be independent.
That's what a lot of independent jazz cd projects go for today. I figure
it's going to break down to between $2 and $3 per unit. If you sell them off
a web site or the bandstand at $15 each you'll easily break even after
selling 200 or so.
Anyway at this level I think it's best to stay independent. For me it is.
It's true that the cd is a necessary part of what you need to get gigs. It
also lets you get airplay and reviews. It's also true that there are tons of
independently produced discs floating around. Luckily most of them are not
very good. Like a moth to a flame the allure of the spotlight will always
attract the dilettante.
On a musical level the cd is an important documentation of your playing and
the style. This is what I worry about the most. I just want the music to be
right. ......joe
thom_j.
"Joe Finn" <J...@joefinn.net> wrote in message
news:3de1b...@corp.newsgroups.com...
Just curious, but where do you get these definative numbers of
"most of them are not very good."? It seems (to me) if you put
any concrete or even vague numbers on the so called "not very
good." CDs in US or worldwide as it will seem to be distorted
at best.
I love the jazz genre and I'm glad I'm trying to grasp a working
knowledge of everything here on Rmmgj & other sites/forums.
Sadly with so many new main genres and then their sub'genres
off these main ones (Imho) "good old straight ahead jazz" has
been dieing a slow death for decades.
I applaud all the great' musicians on Rmmgj (and beyond) for
making 'straight ahead jazz' still apart of the music scene, and
I will continue to learn to play this form of "jazz" but as for it
coming back "strong" to a wide audience it does not seem to
be in the cards for the near, or distant future but this is jmho!
cheers thom_j.
..
Joe Finn
>
> Just curious, but where do you get these definative numbers of
> "most of them are not very good."? It seems (to me) if you put
> any concrete or even vague numbers on the so called "not very
> good." CDs in US or worldwide as it will seem to be distorted
> at best.
I'm not talking about definitive numbers. I just happen to hear a lot of the
stuff that leaves a lot to be desired. I hear demos through a friend who
books clubs. I used to write cd reviews too. I make it a point to listen to
stuff by guys on this group as well. As a player I do sessions for locals
who are doing independent projects also.
I think the fact that cd projects are affordable has lowered the bar in some
ways.
> I love the jazz genre and I'm glad I'm trying to grasp a working
> knowledge of everything here on Rmmgj & other sites/forums.
> Sadly with so many new main genres and then their sub'genres
> off these main ones (Imho) "good old straight ahead jazz" has
> been dieing a slow death for decades.
> I applaud all the great' musicians on Rmmgj (and beyond) for
> making 'straight ahead jazz' still apart of the music scene, and
> I will continue to learn to play this form of "jazz" but as for it
> coming back "strong" to a wide audience it does not seem to
> be in the cards for the near, or distant future but this is jmho!
> cheers thom_j.
The popularity of jazz is another question. Again I don't have any numbers
but there are a lot of festivals all over the world and they continue to be
well attended. The jazz labels still record and sell cds and the jazz press
still sells magazines. Jazz radio is alive and well all over the world and
the internet too. Last month I played a reception following Dave Brubeck's
local concert. The concert was sold out. That same evening Joshua Redman was
also in the area and sold out a larger venue. The combined audience was
close to 4000. And this is in Albany NY [a small town] .
The thing about jazz is that it has a loyal audience. It's sort of a hobby
too. I meet people all the time who have collections of recordings that go
back for years and years. I met a guy that has back issues of downbeat that
go back to 1961. Even back then there were ominous predictions that it was
dying. rothflmao ! 8-) ....joe
--
Visit me on the web. www.JoeFinn.net
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
Nick Naffin
news:3de1b...@corp.newsgroups.com...
> On a musical level the cd is an important documentation of your playing
and
> the style. This is what I worry about the most. I just want the music to
be
> right. ......joe
Amen. Good for you!
Nick
thom_j.
> "thom_j." <thom_...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >
> > Just curious, but where do you get these definative numbers of
> > "most of them are not very good."? It seems (to me) if you put
> > any concrete or even vague numbers on the so called "not very
> > good." CDs in US or worldwide as it will seem to be distorted
> > at best.
>
> I'm not talking about definitive numbers. I just happen to hear a lot of
the
> stuff that leaves a lot to be desired. I hear demos through a friend who
> books clubs. I used to write cd reviews too. I make it a point to listen
to
> stuff by guys on this group as well. As a player I do sessions for locals
> who are doing independent projects also.
>
> I think the fact that cd projects are affordable has lowered the bar in
some
> ways.
Well ....joe. I am very lucky to be in (what I call) a jazz friendly
area and to me, it is still alive and well but there has been many
posts on rmmgj stating the opposite.. IIRC? Philly swings and
always has but besides NYC & few other cities I hear nothing
but complaints about "no real jazz" in there town/area. I guess
this is where my distorted feedback comes from? Plus yes the
private CD maker is lowering the bar in many (if not all) of the
different genres of music..
>
> > I love the jazz genre and I'm glad I'm trying to grasp a working
> > knowledge of everything here on Rmmgj & other sites/forums.
> > Sadly with so many new main genres and then their sub'genres
> > off these main ones (Imho) "good old straight ahead jazz" has
> > been dieing a slow death for decades.
> > I applaud all the great' musicians on Rmmgj (and beyond) for
> > making 'straight ahead jazz' still apart of the music scene, and
> > I will continue to learn to play this form of "jazz" but as for it
> > coming back "strong" to a wide audience it does not seem to
> > be in the cards for the near, or distant future but this is jmho!
> > cheers thom_j.
>
> The popularity of jazz is another question. Again I don't have any numbers
> but there are a lot of festivals all over the world and they continue to
be
> well attended. The jazz labels still record and sell cds and the jazz
press
> still sells magazines. Jazz radio is alive and well all over the world and
> the internet too. Last month I played a reception following Dave Brubeck's
> local concert. The concert was sold out. That same evening Joshua Redman
was
> also in the area and sold out a larger venue. The combined audience was
> close to 4000. And this is in Albany NY [a small town] .
I dont read nor hear this but then again I am not on the streets
working hard as you are! I certainly hope you are right, as this
is one form of music that should last just like 'classical' music
but sadly this is slowing down in our area and this is sad too!
> The thing about jazz is that it has a loyal audience. It's sort of a hobby
> too. I meet people all the time who have collections of recordings that go
> back for years and years. I met a guy that has back issues of downbeat
that
> go back to 1961. Even back then there were ominous predictions that it
was
> dying. rothflmao ! 8-) ....joe
Again, I hope this is true, & I hope the audiences bulge at the
seams at any good (or even not so good) jazz concert, gig or
club night, as we all need this to surive, & not just for us true
hardcore jazz musicians but also the listener as well, new and
old! cheers thom_j.