Again, both Diki and Chas make valid points. If nobody listens, it's hard to educate. And, the "catch all" phrase, "jazz" is pretty illusive to define.
"Hitting the pocket", again a pretty overused and ill-defined phrase, is kind of like peeing in a dark pair of pants. You can't see anything, you just get this nice warm feeling.
And that's the point. "Feeling", interpretation and attitude are as much of the definition (if there is one) of jazz as anything.
"Smooth" jazz, in large part, is nothing but 60's thru 80's tunes recorded with a different attitude. We're talking Fatburger,
Foreplay and similar groups. For dining rooms, that's my thing, but "dumbed down just a bit so it is not so busy.
Rory and Tommy Emmanuel do not sell themselves as jazz players, but are certainly able to hold their own on a bandstand with the best jazzers around.
Maroon 5 is not a jazz group, but I certainly enjoy playing their material.
Traditional big-band jazz is certainly jazz, but , while I occasionally fill in for someone, I certainly don't enjoy the rigidity of the format.
My favorite all time writer/performer, Kenny Rankin was hard to categorize, but could certainly hold his own as a unique artist who re-defined parts of many styles. Take some time to Google him...Blackbird, while My Guitar Gently Weeps...Here's that Rainy Day and the beautiful, Hiding Inside Myself
are more than just performances...they are indescribable emotional experiences.
My nebulous definition of jazz is in constant flux. The art form is in constant flux.
And that's part of the wonderful, frustrating challenge.
Small wonder jazzers across time have been tortured souls.
I wouldn't have it any other way.
Russ
[This message has been edited by captain Russ (edited 06-07-2010).]
You would probably have hated that, too, Tony 
Previous Topic
Index