Sax on the Web Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
434 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Rehearsal session for just released album on Youtube. Tune is Switchback.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XGHpTR7jzQ

Soli: Karolina Strassmayer/alto - starts at approximately 2:00 in. Wow!
Paul Heller/tenor - starts at approximately 4:10 in.

Marshall Gilkes (NY) and the WDR Big Band (Germany). Great stuff.

.....helps to have a Grammy nominee as composer.....just released the CD last month: "Always Forward."
 

·
Registered
Tenor, alto, Bb Clarinet, Flute
Joined
·
2,457 Posts
Wow! I just started liking jazz a lot more. Halfway thru I started realizing my face was getting tired from smiling so much. Loved it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
692 Posts
Karolina Strassmayer has an album with Drori Mondlak called "Of Mystery and Beauty" that sounds pretty darn good. I'm checking it out now.
As much as I love tenor, I've been asked to play alto my last two gigs and I'm really enjoying it. Reviving an appreciation for alto again.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
28,511 Posts
Who is this alto player? She's enormous? I've been digging this big band in concerts with Kandace Springs, a truly great jazz vocalist and everything they do is incredibly good.



The alto player on this one below is great. He also plays tenor on the other concert of hers. The guy is great. I have no idea who he is.



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,647 Posts
Fabulous!!
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2015-
Joined
·
34,571 Posts
Who is this alto player? She's enormous? I've been digging this big band in concerts with Kandace Springs, a truly great jazz vocalist and everything they do is incredibly good.


The video cites Karolina Strassmayer at t = 4:22. I agree - love that robust sound.


Hey, did ya notice the bari player doubling on BASS CLARINET?! (See t = 18:13)
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2016
Joined
·
18,927 Posts
This thread is pretty old. The clips are indeed very enjoyable.

I guess to me the premise of the title is arguable. When folks say this-or-that genre is 'dead'...they aren't referring to the fact that there are no longer excellent practitioners and musicians who perform it.

In my interpretation of the phrase, it means more that as a popular, dynamic, evolving musical form....it is tired. Has become a museum piece. No longer pings the popular culture radar. Although very good artists and musicians, and its loyal adherents, may pay deference to the genre, it has become 'irrelevant' in regards to the music contemporary society enjoys and relates to.

Any of the above is arguable and for certain they'd ruffle plenty of feathers in a place like this...although I also agree with some of it when it comes to Jazz, myself (and I have been playing it for 40+ years now)....but these are fairly common arguments and they do have some valid points, whether we may like to hear them or not.

But I don't think a refutation to a "this genre is dead" sort of position is simply providing examples of artists who execute and perform the genre very, very well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,546 Posts
Whether or not a style or genre of music is currently in vogue with contemporary society is by no means a measure of its quality or value. Disco is a good example of what I call "throw away" music much like paper plates and plastic utensils that are used once and then thrown away. A segment of society still listens to recordings and attends symphony concerts that contain music written hundreds of years ago. A segment of society loves to listen and dance to music from the "big band era". A segment of society supports jazz performances and groups of all types. Music of value does not "die" or pass from existence so long as there are aficionados who study, teach, and perform such music in each successive generation. This is the main reason I believe music education is such a vital part of our schools and universities. "Pop" music and culture certainly have their place in our society---especially as a commercial product, but regardless of how "popular" these styles and genres are, they will never become a replacement for music and art that has lasting value.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member/Forum Contributor 2009
Joined
·
7,919 Posts
"Pop" music and culture certainly have their place in our society---especially as a commercial product, but regardless of how "popular" these styles and genres are, they will never become a replacement for music and art that has lasting value.
Plenty of jazz that doesn't have 'lasting value' and plenty of pop that does. It's not really black & white.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,546 Posts
The "test of time" will be the final arbiter of what lasts and what doesn't. For me when I like a song just as much or more every time I hear it, it has "lasting value" for me personally---think Louis Armstrong singing "What a Wonderful World". When I hear a song on the radio or on tv and say "God do I have to listen to that again?" It probably doesn't---think Achy Breaky Heart. :) I think each generation has its likes and dislikes, so mine aren't going to be the same as everyone else's.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2016
Joined
·
18,927 Posts
Whether or not a style or genre of music is currently in vogue with contemporary society is by no means a measure of its quality or value. Disco is a good example of what I call "throw away" music much like paper plates and plastic utensils that are used once and then thrown away.
a) First sentence - yes, 100% agreed
b) I'd point out that there are classic Disco tunes. Just very good songs that have withstood the test of time.

When folks say " _________________ is dead"...I do not interpret this as intending to mean "it has no musical/artistic value". I interpret it to mean contemporary society just does not deem it relevant...the vast majority of music listeners cannot relate to it. Aficionados do, adherents do, those trained in the genre do, those with some other sort of connection do. But this is a vast minority of 'music listeners', I believe.
One can say the same about a visual or performing arts movement or genre.
It may just no longer resonate with a large segment of society.

This is not a judgment on its value as an art form, IMHO.

Now here's something which popped into my head: " ______ is dead" ...is this the same thing as saying " it just isn't currently popular ?"

This is a good question...I am gonna have to ponder that. But I don't think those two statements are exactly synonymous...


[there is] Plenty of jazz that doesn't have 'lasting value' and plenty of pop that does. It's not really black & white.
Indeed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Now that the masses are not tied to commercial radio stations (think internet, Spotify, Youtube, etc.), is "________" in vogue or "_________" is dead even a thing?

I listen to what I want, when I want, wherever I am...
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2016
Joined
·
18,927 Posts
Now that the masses are not tied to commercial radio stations (think internet, Spotify, Youtube, etc.), is "________" in vogue or "_________" is dead even a thing?

I listen to what I want, when I want, wherever I am...
As do many people...and it's fair to say that most folks today have a greater flexibility in choice as far as what they wish to listen to, which is certainly a good thing.

But that doesn't mean the genre one may listen to, or buy tickets to, or go to a club to see, etc...is what one would call 'relevant', 'familiar', 'common', 'valued' in most of society's everyday life....

That is one aspect of being 'dead' (using the term in it's commonly understood sense - whether accurate or not) - the aspect of "is it in most people's heads ?" Is it common in most people's lives ?

The other aspect of dead may be...the dynamism and creativity and evolving qualities which the genre once possessed are now absent. This doesn't mean there are not good practitioners of the form, it means the form/genre has become relatively static. If not static - then specialized, over "precious-ized".

All of this has been said of Jazz, and I believe some of it to be accurate, In reference to the thread, again, the existence of good artists performing the genre very well...or the existence of a relatively small segment of a population being ardent fans - does not necessarily counter the argument that a particular art form/genre is 'dead'.
 

·
Registered
T880, YTS-82Z; B991; 'Crat 1 alto
Joined
·
1,327 Posts
Re claims of what genre(s) have “lasting value: Separating, classifying and ultimately comparatively judging different genres (like the jazz, pop and disco mentioned in this thread) is of course possible and not without occasional merit or truth, but it misses the bigger picture.

There are more similarities between these genres than there are differences. After all, they are all still music, all are built on the same foundations and, with minor exceptions, follow the same basic rules.

While I was in my youth a proud proponent of the conviction that “disco sucks,” in my later years I have come to be able to appreciate just about all genres of music, at least in one way or another.

And even within a genre, there is wide variation, from great to awful. (Love straight ahead jazz, not so much free jazz.)

While we are all entitled to our preferences, no entire genre should be dismissed out of hand . . . (Ok, maybe smooth jazz)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,546 Posts
Here is my opinion: If jazz in all its different forms continues to exist, is passed down from one generation to the next and continues to evolve it is very much alive in my view regardless of its popularity with the "masses".
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2016
Joined
·
18,927 Posts
Except an argument can be made that Jazz, among other genres, has not in fact 'continued to evolve'....which is one argument for the (really too-generalized) label that it is 'dead'....

Others can make an argument that by virtue of the fact it is still being played, it isn't 'dead' at all....which would be applying a different definition of 'dead'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,546 Posts
Except an argument can be made that Jazz, among other genres, has not in fact 'continued to evolve'....which is one argument for the (really too-generalized) label that it is 'dead'....

Others can make an argument that by virtue of the fact it is still being played, it isn't 'dead' at all....which would be applying a different definition of 'dead'.
Or one can make up their own definition of dead in order to win an argument. :)
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top