] [Thread Prev
"out" music = derivitive of jazz?
How much of this "new" music would people say is a derivitive of jazz?
Often I'm considered a "new" musician (not my favorite term due to
vagueness) or an "out" musician, but I really don't place much weight on
jazz as part of my musical development. I've heard some Coleman and Davis
albums, but really didn't weigh in on them that much. Maybe I'm young
(age = 25) to have a feeling that this sort of stuff has "always existed".
San Francisco has a thriving experimental music scene (for example,
electronic music that isn't dance, homemade instruments, sampling music,
noise music, minimalism, that sort of thing). One of the strangest things
about it is that all the venues for experimental music point about 80% of
their resources towards jazz and free jazz. Local composers, bookers, and
promoters also group experimental music with the jazz forms into something
they call "creative music" - a term that seems to have more than its share
of both ambiguity and pretense.
Sure, I can see how many of the groups and musicians that were listed on
original post (Thrill Jockey, Masada, Zorn, Tom Waits, etc...) come from a
jazz background, but not everything that's "new" and "out there" is
particularly from a few jazz albums released in the 60's, is it?
>From: email@example.com (Dave Trenkel)
>I find it pretty interesting that we still refer to this as "new" music. I
>mean, when was Ornette's Free Jazz recorded, 1964? Bitches Brew is over 30
>years old! And this stuff still stirs controversy, at least among the
>Marsalis/Burns axis. I think that what Dave Douglas, among others, is
>is really the mainstream of jazz for the present day, he's just considered
>a radical because his history of jazz doesn't end in 1965.
>Dave Trenkel : firstname.lastname@example.org
>New & Improv Media
>Now available: Admiral Twinkle Devil: Wabi Dub
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com