Shakey Mo reckons INDIE IS THE NEW JAZZ - What current music will be the big cultural signifier of this time?

going over this thread JAZZ IS LIKE HEROIN TO ME ! ! ! ~~~~ ILM POST-1945 JAZZ ALBUMS POLL - THE RESULTS COUNTDOWN (now counting top 25!) and listening to nothing but jazz in the last couple days - I've realized I have very little understanding/conception of the jazz audience of the 60s. I kind of assume jazz reached its commercial/popular peak much earlier (I know Miles' best-selling albums were in the 60s, but the ubiquity of jazz as a dominant style seems undeniable for earlier eras like the 20s-40s than it does for the 60s, what with r'n'r in the picture), but as a genre the general consensus represented here is that the aesthetic/artistic peak was in the late 50s through the 60s. This is when a lot of the essential ingredients of jazz - swing, improvisation, acoustic ensemble playing - became really intensely refined. But exactly how popular was, say, a giant like John Coltrane...? I have no idea. And who bought these records? Middle-class black people, white "intellectuals"...? I can't really see Hank Mobley and Grant Green appealling much to teenagers, the whole Blue Note vibe is one of adult sophistication, for example.

― I can feel it in my spiritual hat (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:31 (1 week ago)

like I would guess the genre skewed older and richer...? Black kids were being sold r&b, motown, etc. and white kids were being peddled a combination of pop and rock, I kinda can't imagine jazz was even on the menu for most younger music consumers...

xp

― I can feel it in my spiritual hat (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:33 (1 week ago)

but then jazz was sold to rock fans after that shakey

― Armand Schaubroeck Ratfucker, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:34 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

xp yeah i sort of wonder about jazz audiences, too -- obviously people like miles and coltrane were big cultural figures, but a lot of the time they'd be playing these tiny clubs! there must've been a disconnect between people who bought records and people who went out to gigs for whatever reason.

― tylerw, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:34 (1 week ago)

I don't think Coltrane was ever that popular among the general populace... A Love Supreme was considered a hit album by 60s jazz standards, but it didn't sell quite as much as the big rock and pop albums of the era. I think even back then Coltrane was mainly listened by "serious", highbrow jazz fans; the big, popular jazz hits of the 60s were more melody and/or groove oriented, like "Watermelon Man", or "The 'In' Crowd", or "Mercy Mercy Mercy".

― Tuomas, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:38 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

obviously people like miles and coltrane were big cultural figures, but a lot of the time they'd be playing these tiny clubs

exactly I find this perplexing, this ability to occupy a "serious" and well-preserved cultural space while... not really selling all that many records or being all that popular...? how does that work? seems like anything comparable would be totally impossible today. but maybe I'm underestimating how much Miles and Coltrane sold. certainly I can see how they would have something of an appeal to a casual, adult, well-educated middle class music listener, but uh how many of those were there in America really...

― I can feel it in my spiritual hat (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:39 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

but then jazz was sold to rock fans after that shakey

after what...? Bitches Brew?

― I can feel it in my spiritual hat (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:40 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

coltrane "crossed over" with my favorite things, but i think he just used that as leverage for the rest of his career to do what he wanted, as opposed to repeating the formula ad nauseam. though i suppose there are a few attempts at another "favorite things" in his catalog -- greensleeves, chim chim cheree, etc.

― tylerw, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:40 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

How it was explained to me in a 20th century music class: bebop's complexity and undanceability, while they were musical advances, were bad news for the form economically from the late 40s on. As jazz switched from a dance music to a chamber music, R&B and rock and roll claimed their audiences.

loads of xposts

― Halal Spaceboy (WmC), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:41 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

not really selling all that many records or being all that popular...? how does that work?

I think the key is that Coltrane and Miles appealed to the type of serious listeners who are also music writers, or musicians themselves, and they kept their names alive even if they weren't selling big amounts of records.

― Tuomas, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:41 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

how does that work?
the house that trane built book from a few years back about impulse records goes into some of this -- basically there was a fairly sizeable core audience of die hards, but in general, the label coasted by because it was part of ABC Paramount. Impulse had a few hits (ray charles comes to mind) that made the label able to get by for a while, i think.

― tylerw, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:42 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Were these artists profiled in, say, LIFE magazine, the way contemporary visual artists were (esp. thinking of the abstract expressionists)? They may have been chosen representatives of serious art by mass media publications.

― _Rudipherous_, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:43 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

As jazz switched from a dance music to a chamber music, R&B and rock and roll claimed their audiences.

this makes sense. what seems really odd to me is that the artform would fluorish and reach its peak several decades AFTER its commercial peak.

xp

― I can feel it in my spiritual hat (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:46 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

obviously people like miles and coltrane were big cultural figures, but a lot of the time they'd be playing these tiny clubs! there must've been a disconnect between people who bought records and people who went out to gigs for whatever reason.

seems like back around the middle of the 20th century artists (visual and musical...authors too) could get to be "big cultural figures" and not be all that popular. a houswife or salesman in Lawrence, Kansas would know OF someone like Coltrane, Miles Davis, Keurorac, Ginsberg, Warhol etc, but not be too familiar with their work. they'd know they were important figures in their discipline, but not why.

― A True White Kid that can Jump (Granny Dainger), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:46 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

lee morgan's "sidewinder" crossed over and sorta kick started the "soul jazz" thing in the early/mid 60s. my understanding is coltrane lost a lot of fans after 'a love supreme'

― excuse me you're a helluva guy (m coleman), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:46 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

like once it had weaseled its way into being considered "serious"/highbrow it was able to economically coast and reap the benefits of that security without having to sell records.

xp

― I can feel it in my spiritual hat (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:47 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

They may have been chosen representatives of serious art by mass media publications.

That's my sense of it (mainly from talking to older family members)

― A True White Kid that can Jump (Granny Dainger), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:47 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I guess the economic bar was reset a good bit lower and artists could experiment. xp to shakey

― Halal Spaceboy (WmC), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:47 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

the soul/jazz movement is an obvious pop re-crossover attempt - a move back to jazz as dance music, but this time replacing swing with contemporary (at the time) funk and r&b rhythms. (I'm not knocking this stuff, I like a lot of it).

xp

― I can feel it in my spiritual hat (Shakey Mo Collier),

An interesting example of how much critical consensus has shaped our understanding of that era of jazz is that Charles Lloyd was actually one of the most popular, if not the most popular jazz artist of the 60s, yet he has been almost completely excluded from the 60s jazz canon, because his artistic merits weren't considered big enough, and the critics felt he was pandering to the hippie audience.

More discussion on the subject in this thread:

Artists/bands that were once quite popular, yet nowadays are mostly ignored in canonical history books

― Tuomas, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:55 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

xp - Didn't a bunch of musicians end up spending long periods in Europe because it was they only place they could make any sort of reliable income?

― dubplates and monster munch (seandalai), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:55 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

they still do!

― i drive a wood paneled station dragon (La Lechera),

Were these artists profiled in, say, LIFE magazine, the way contemporary visual artists were (esp. thinking of the abstract expressionists)? They may have been chosen representatives of serious art by mass media publications.

Yeah. Here's a Miles write-up from Time, in 1958. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,868196,00.html

― something of an astrological coup (tipsy mothra),

During the 1970s Lloyd played extensively with The Beach Boys both on their studio recordings and as a member of their touring band. In the late 1970s Lloyd was a member of Celebration, a band composed of members of the Beach Boys' touring band as well as fellow Transcendental Meditation followers Mike Love and Al Jardine. Celebration released two albums.

WHAT THE FUCK

― I can feel it in my spiritual hat (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:58 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

European support of chamber music extending to American forms, Americans being too invested in moving they asssss shocka.

― Halal Spaceboy (WmC), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:58 (1 week ago)

was thinking some more about the 60s jazz audience this morning and wondering if there was a modern parallel to the cultural space that jazz occupied during that time - "serious" music, audience of primarily college kids and middle class "intellectuals", paid lots of lip service by mainstream media, perceived as "cutting edge" and then thought... oh duh, indie rock

― you will always be wrong (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 16:33 (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

big bands:dancing::bebop:chinstroking:::"rock and roll":dancing::indie rock:shoegazing

― Antonio Carlos Broheem (WmC), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 16:38 (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

exactly

― you will always be wrong (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 16:43 (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

vulcan mind-meld

that one music appreciation course I took where the prof said "jazz just turned from a dance music to a chamber music" snapped so much into sharp focus for me -- that progression has been repeating for centuries

― Antonio Carlos Broheem (WmC), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 16:52 (57 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

A while ago I started a thread where I tried to formulate that sort of change in musical genres, but it wasn't very popular:

Major musical changes and the body/brain dichotomy.

― Tuomas, Tuesday, 13 September 2011 16:56 (54 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

not enough of an attention-getting thread title, should've gone with IS INDIE ROCK THE NEW JAZZ???!?!!! lol

― you will always be wrong (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 17:10

Is it? Does indie have the same type of audience as jazz in the 60s or have the same amount of cultural cache? If not, who does? What current music will be the big cultural signifier of this time?

Shakey who are the Miles & Trane of today? ;)

lol was this really necessary

miles = one of the jerkoffs from fleet foxes?
trane = one of the jerkoffs from animal collective?

What current music will be the big cultural signifier of this time?

up through the last decade I would have said hip hop. jazz was not the big cultural signifier of the 60s, that was definitely rock's time in the spotlight.

are fleet foxes actually that successful?
xp

lol i have no idea, those were just the two indie rockers that came to mind first for my joke.

nobody's successful anymore.

except Weezy

the elimination of the big cultural signifier and musical eclecticism will probably be the dominant theme in the history books

i always thought,judging by posts on ilm anyway, that dave matthews band,phish etc were what was listened to by american college students in the late 90s/early 00s.
Is it dubstep now?

lol "books"

xp

by posts on ilm anyway, that dave matthews band,phish etc were what was listened to by american college students in the late 90s/early 00s.
Is it dubstep now?

that's kind of a... skewed portrait to say the least. Animal Collective is huge with the college kids. also Deadmau5 lol.

We are getting further and further away from our college years.

sorry - "history blogs"

xxp

I have one facebook friend who is college-aged and her musical interests are: Techno, Metal, Classical, Reggae, Anything But Rap & Country, Sander van Doorn, ATB, and Tiesto. She sometimes puts up metal quotes on her facebook posts and I am confident that she is referring specifically and solely to the subgenre of Screamo.

I also feel that she is more representative of American college students than someone who listens to Animal Collective.

Someone offered me free tickets the other day to see "The Walkmen + The Fleet Foxes" and I thought it would be at the local bar around the corner... nope, 3500 capacity outdoor arena. Have no idea who either of these bands are. Would be dope if they covered A Love Supreme in full.

Jesus, they're playing Merriweather out here. That's more like 20,000. I wouldn't expect those bands to be bigger than like the 9:30 club. I'm crazy out of touch.

I think Fleet Foxes are a lot bigger than The Walkmen

christ,these bands are a lot bigger than I thought then.

indie cant be the new jazz then, since the biggest acts are well outselling Miles & Coltrane.

The new Fleet Foxes album debuted in the top 5 in the U.S., though it's increasingly difficult to extract any meaning from that.

well "outselling" is comparing apples to oranges - music industry landscape is now totally different.

I was wrong about capacity of the Greek Theater, it is 8500... whoa.

for one thing, MORE people are listening to more music than ever before, and in a variety of different media/formats/venues that simply didn't exist in Miles and Trane's day. otoh, no one books bands for multiple-week stints at clubs, and no one gets played on the radio.

If my friend's husband is any indication, Fleet Foxes are pretty successful. He was not a music nerd when they met, but he has since found that going to festivals is something he and his friends can do and drink copious amounts of liquor throughout, so now he is "into music." He is "always downloading stuff" and travels to see bands he likes, like Fleet Foxes and Avett Brothers.

However, we cannot have a coherent conversation in spite of ostensibly having similar interests.

xp - Didn't a bunch of musicians end up spending long periods in Europe because it was they only place they could make any sort of reliable income?

― dubplates and monster munch (seandalai), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 22:55 (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

they still do!

― i drive a wood paneled station dragon (La Lechera),

Not only that but Hendrix was bigger in the UK first, so does that mean Fun Loving Criminals are the jazz of its time and Kings Of Leon are the new Hendrix? :)

It's like those people who say they like going to concerts and traveling. I also like going to concerts and traveling, but...

A bit of googling tells me that The Walkmen's last album sold 40,000 or so and Fleet Foxes debut sold 250,000 (can't find figures for their most recent one)

maybe emo is actually the new jazz

i don't know about "cultural significance", but you could argue for a lot of experimental electronic music (beat scene, uk bass, etc etc) occupying the musical space of '60s jazz, i.e. taking music that has roots as popular/dance/vocal styles and pushing into other areas. that's been going on forever too, though.

lol @ this line from that '58 miles profile: Although he rarely composes any more, Trumpeter Davis recently sketched some music for a French movie entitled Lift to the Gallows ("about a man who has committed the perfect crime—until he got stuck in an elevator").

Wiki sez 408,000+ for FF debut and 150,000+ for new one.

i like music but i hate going to concerts and traveling.

You love going to concerts and traveling. You also like spending time with friends, and good food.

i wonder what the biggest selling albums miles ,coltrane,hancock,mingus etc had? Is there a list anywhere of biggest selling non vocal jazz albums?

iirc Kind of Blue is Miles' biggest (altho it was eclipsed initially by Bitches Brew). Coltrane's is definitely A Love Supreme.

Although he rarely composes any more

I love that. Wonder who was writing his solos?

i like music but i hate going to concerts and traveling.

DING! DING! This is me, pretty much. (Though sometimes I am really up for a road trip.)

got any figures shakey?

You also like spending time with friends, and good food.

way more than concerts and traveling! but anyway.

Although he rarely composes any more

I love that. Wonder who was writing his solos?

and this was a year before Kind of Blue!

Headhunters has to be Hancock's best-selling album.

Kind of Blue is the best-selling jazz album of all time, quadruple platinum (4,000,000+)

Oh, possibly Future Shock.

but again, album sales are not really a good metric of comparison - these jazz albums have been selling for 40 years, to people who actually buy music, but Davis didn't really play huge arenas til the 80s. whereas indie bands barely sell anything, but tour a lot more, and tons of people listen to their music without paying for it.

well I shouldn't say indie bands tour "a lot more" that isn't really true - they do regularly play bigger venues than the Five Spot tho lol

Jesus, they're playing Merriweather out here
For a second thought this was referring to the band Meriwether.

If we are still trying to figure out who are these people who like Fleet Foxes, those are the people. Personally, I like travelling but only on my own terms. I love going to shows, but do not like hoardes of people, esp. people like the ones described above.

I would have traveled to the Big Ears festival but that went kablooey.

this comparison doesn't really work at a content level because chops imo. I guess if you're just talking demographics maybe but I think the jazz audience has/had an actual appreciation for craft - like, there used to be a broader interest in mastery of the instrument, imo; this is true in rock, too - jazz musicians (like country and reggae musicians) are players, indie musicians have "styles" (that I often like! having a style can be as good as developing a style through technique) but it's not really a players' genre. so like you can make the case at a cultural level that indie is like jazz historically but the more important aspect imo is what's actually going on in the music, and jazz didn't really lose its chops-oriented nature even after free jazz (though free jazz did open the door to people w/o chops giving it a shot, although most free dudes got chops afaik)

OTOH I can attest personally to a couple of the Fleet Foxes' dudes chops, having played with Crystal Skulls: at least two of those guys can seriously play, could sit in w/anybody. But I don't think the audience is really a chops-interested crowd

jazz is still the new jazz

So we're back to screamo, then?

no we are back to jazz

Cap'n Jazz

aero totally otm and yeah that occurred to me too, which is why I was restricting in this strictly to a cultural/audience context. what is the big - but not "pop" - music of today that is marketed as "serious", "adventurous" and is consumed by that odd cross-section of college students and relatively affluent, smart people who wish they were still college students lol

obviously formally there are massive, massive differences, the chops/performative aspect being a biggie.

literary fiction is the new jazz

the chops thing kinda bums me out tbh (young me would be appalled at old me as I type this, but whatever). but this goes hand in hand with my recent realization that the performative aspect of music has become completely unimportant/irrelevant to music audiences now. nobody is interested in (or marvels at ) the physical act of making music, it's become completely beside the point.

xp

nobody is interested in (or marvels at ) the physical act of making music, it's become completely beside the point.

thanks, punk rock.

Some dudes have chops and may intentionally not let it show. 1 of my bros is kinda a mild indie sensation and was a huge jazzbo, played jazz (+ hc punk) for years before going folk-rock. while his work touches on his technical musical prowess, his recorded work is a bit more reined-in. If you watch him play you'd be like "wow" at how effortlessly he can jump around figures/turns/gestures, but his chops don't necessarily show up so much on record (which tbqh is probably better for both him and his audience).

(not Andrew WK btw, who is quite another interesting study tho)

thanks, punk rock.

eh it's more technology than punk rock. I don't really blame Chris Brown's stage show on punk rock, for ex.

i was just kidding

1 of my bros is kinda a mild indie sensation

I know who you're talking about but lol ever so coy shasta

They used to play all kinds of stuff
And some of it was nice
Some of it was musical
But then they took some guy's advice
To get a record deal, he said
They would have to be more punk
Forget their chops and play real dumb
Or else they would be sunk

secret chops

mute on chops

"I've listened to that cat in the Fleet Foxes all kinds of ways. I listened to him high and I listened to him cold sober. I even played with him. I think he's jiving, baby."

Shit, cat. It don’t make a difference. The man produced enough good music to last me a lifetime. This Lisbon thing’s just another example of the genius of The Walkmen.

I kind of assume jazz reached its commercial/popular peak much earlier (I know Miles' best-selling albums were in the 60s, but the ubiquity of jazz as a dominant style seems undeniable for earlier eras like the 20s-40s than it does for the 60s, what with r'n'r in the picture), but as a genre the general consensus represented here is that the aesthetic/artistic peak was in the late 50s through the 60s.

What current music will be the big cultural signifier of this time?

up through the last decade I would have said hip hop. jazz was not the big cultural signifier of the 60s, that was definitely rock's time in the spotlight.

― you will always be wrong (Shakey Mo Collier),

Interesting that it's seen that Jazz reached it's artistic peak long after it's commercial peak, but is that a different way round from what usually happens?
If you agree that the 60s was rocks biggest innovative period, then that was before its most commercially successful era of the 70s (the 70s also had a huge back to the roots thing going on).
'Indie' is now bigger than ever but is it long past its creative highpoint? I'm sure most here would say yes.
What would hip hops creative highpoint be? and which decade had the biggest commercial highpoint?
Something like metal is harder to pin down and there's always been evolving sub-genres but many im sure would argue that the 70s was the creative peak but the 80s was the decade it sold best.

What about other genres? have any had a creative peak long after its commercial highpoint?

this comparison doesn't really work at a content level because chops imo. I guess if you're just talking demographics maybe but I think the jazz audience has/had an actual appreciation for craft - like, there used to be a broader interest in mastery of the instrument, imo; this is true in rock, too - jazz musicians (like country and reggae musicians) are players, indie musicians have "styles" (that I often like! having a style can be as good as developing a style through technique) but it's not really a players' genre. so like you can make the case at a cultural level that indie is like jazz historically but the more important aspect imo is what's actually going on in the music, and jazz didn't really lose its chops-oriented nature even after free jazz (though free jazz did open the door to people w/o chops giving it a shot, although most free dudes got chops afaik)

OTOH I can attest personally to a couple of the Fleet Foxes' dudes chops, having played with Crystal Skulls: at least two of those guys can seriously play, could sit in w/anybody. But I don't think the audience is really a chops-interested crowd

― pathos of the unwarranted encore (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned),

Good point about chops. Will having really good chops ever come back in or has technology made it redundant? The metallers I remember in the 80s were really big on technique and proficiency , but in the time i've been into metal it really has not been about that apart from maybe Death Metal, which again originated in the 80s. I've never been a big fan of that whole guitar histrionics thing in metal (lol yeah same as shakeys younger self) preferring the riff or the more atmospheric soundscape type of metal yet can admire it in say jazz or funk or even as mentioned - reggae.

But I don't think the audience is really a chops-interested crowd

Perhaps then indie is more in tune with the earlier commercial period of jazz in that you went to jazz shows to dance and nowadays an indie audience is to go to mosh or jump around or even dance.

i feel like a big paradox of contemporary music is that you can only really make money from live performances, not recordings, but so much of the music being made is computer-based. so the live performances are often a totally different thing than the record, or really bullshit-y (or both).

the only way these genres compare imo is that there's a cultural overlap in 'college students like this / consider it cerebral' sense between 60s jazz fans & 00s indie fans -- otherwise the music doesnt compare in any way

http://twitter.com/#!/gavinrussom/status/113691890414653441

^^^chops

I don't really get what this thread is supposed to be saying vis a vis indie rock

That indie rock is an example of a genre reaching its creative peak long after its commercial heyday? Surely not.

That indie rockers are the kind of *important cultural figures* who would be featured in life magazine if it were in existence? Doubtful. I mean I guess you have the occasional profile or SFJ piece in the New Yorker, but that's not really read by salesmen in Lawrence, Kansas.

i feel like a big paradox of contemporary music is that you can only really make money from live performances, not recordings, but so much of the music being made is computer-based. so the live performances are often a totally different thing than the record, or really bullshit-y (or both).

yeah this is SO weird

the only way these genres compare imo is that there's a cultural overlap in 'college students like this / consider it cerebral' sense between 60s jazz fans & 00s indie fans -- otherwise the music doesnt compare in any way

pretty much

both genres' enthusiasts were referred to as "hipstres"

i dont think anyone was saying otherwise deej tbh

indie rock is pop. jazz is something else (non vocal jazz of course). I agree with Jordan about experimental electronic music being the best comparison.

im sure squarepusher would agree with you. Where does dubstep and grime fit in?

Will having really good chops ever come back in or has technology made it redundant? The metallers I remember in the 80s were really big on technique and proficiency , but in the time i've been into metal it really has not been about that apart from maybe Death Metal, which again originated in the 80s. I've never been a big fan of that whole guitar histrionics thing in metal (lol yeah same as shakeys younger self) preferring the riff or the more atmospheric soundscape type of metal yet can admire it in say jazz or funk or even as mentioned - reggae.

I don't think "technology has made it redundant" since I don't think the effect of technology has been to recreate/improve on instrumental chops - certainly not in jazz - I think appreciation of musicianship was always a fairly niche-y thing but that cross-pollination between genres sort of diluted that in chops-intensive genres like jazz and yeah metal - the rise of metal acts w/o chops is to me a blight as you know but then again the best chops dudes don't even come off like they're about chops, technique is best deployed in the service of art not of itself. i also think that rejection of virtuoso technique really entered a reactionary phase that it never quite left some years ago - this "lol 'noodling!'" response to musicians who can play with feeling & technique - but that that's been sort of softening over the last ten years or so - maybe more, really - and that that's a relief because I've had quite enough of "it doesn't matter whether these guys can play or not, all that matters is feeling" - it's true that lack of technical proficiency should be no bar to self-expression but the pendulum has swung way too far the other way for me, give me guys who can play over guys who're all about "atmosphere" any day

Well it's a fine line between wanky and having good chops,and it did swing from one extreme to the other when it would be better if there was a happy medium. I do like a lot of math-metal, math-rock, prog (just not prog metal like Dream Theater and its ilk) so im not against chops, but you know that anyway. But some stuff is just too flashy for me sometimes. I think its the material that is important. Some flash guys in any genre are just all show and nothing else. But even shredders dont need to do so all the time, even Devin Townsend says that now he doesnt feel the need to shred all the time.

I'd agree with your point about technology not making chops redundant in rock, but as shakey points out, it has in other genres. Used to be pop stars had the very best in session musicians (ironic considering pop fans were always the worst for complaining about guitar wank in rock/metal). Is that the case now?

Anyway bring back good guitar solos!

ps
I'm not the only one who goes all homer simpson everytime i read 'chops' am i?

my point about the technology kinda goes beyond chops - it's not that no one cares about seeing some absolutely amazing fret-work, it's that fewer and fewer people seem to be interested in watching music being physically performed on instruments at all. it's become immaterial, irrelevant, outdated. people like to watch a spectacle, but any actual music-making is incidental.

yeah I don't know - maybe at a mass level but like - there's "nobody" and then there's "well, not so many people." I think people are way too quick/eager to go "it's over!!!!!" on stuff that's just sort of peaked or constricted a little

bit like people prefer hollywood blockbusters with special effects then
xp

one of the only places where it does still matter - where there's an emphasis on "real" people playing "real" instruments - is in indie rock. which is sort of similar to the emphasis jazz placed on performance.

xp

yeah I don't know - maybe at a mass level but like - there's "nobody" and then there's "well, not so many people." I think people are way too quick/eager to go "it's over!!!!!" on stuff that's just sort of peaked or constricted a little

tbf this dawned on me while watching the MTV Music Video Awards so ... grain of salt. but then I consider what most arena shows are like (tiny guys on stage, TV screens, light show!), what most pop music consists of, the fact that most of the working musicians I know are all broke/underemployed etc

I guess those little girls did freak out over Bieber's drumming chops tho eh

one of the only places where it does still matter - where there's an emphasis on "real" people playing "real" instruments - is in indie rock. which is sort of similar to the emphasis jazz placed on performance.

Yeah but indie rock is one of the worst for hating chops and 'lol noodling'. So not the same.

true

the cult of authenticity, but without the chops

Yet the funny thing is...,in the uk at least, stone roses and ocean colour scene and the smiths get shitloads of praise from indie folk for having awesome guitarists (who as good as they are, aren't as good as the rock/metal guys they also slag off for being wanky). And with math-rock it definitely became more acceptable to be able to play in "indie". So maybe its just music critics who hate 'chops' and they are to blame for the anti-chops culture as much as anyone else?

in hip hop, being able to be shit hot at the actual art of rapping must be a big thing though?

and even in techno, i know plenty who are all trainspottery when they watch dj's.

not really. live hip hop shows are a joke, for the most part. too many words/too hard to keep it up for an entire set afaict.

xp

I wish i could find that issue of Muzik from the 90s where I think Carl Craig was doing some DJ thing in a big shop and there's photos and not one person was dancing, several hundred people were all pressed up watching what he did. It's hilarious. It's what i immediately think of when anyone talks about trainspotting in music.

dudes just come out and yell randomly over their pre-recorded tracks.

xxp

So maybe its just music critics who hate 'chops' and they are to blame for the anti-chops culture as much as anyone else?

I think this is pretty otm - I toured with a chops-intensive friend and indie audiences were all wowed

For some reason this thread reminded me of this AWFUL, AWFUL, AWFUL show I tried to watch the other day...

It was a songwiter/storytellers music variety show, and the guest of honor was the famous Mr. Lou Reed. Unfortunately, the host was Elvis Costello, who may be my least liked singer/songwriter (and now music variety host) ever.

After a really poor demonstration of the "passing chord" that many bands who cover "Sweet Jane" miss out on, Lou and Elvis try to perform "Perfect Day" together. It was so cringingly awful, worse than the worst karaoke nightmare meltdown you've ever seen, I just shuddered and closed my lap top in utter embarrassment.

What this has to do with this thread, I have no idea.... maybe that Lou and Elvis circa 2008 (?) have suffered a complete loss of any semblance of "chops" they once had, or that both of their depressing sub lounge act ventured into "the joke is on the audience" performance art. Try to see this if you can, maybe I will search the youtube right now while I'm not particularly busy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA2BjakmejM

539 likes, 9 dislikes

it cant be worse than the bbc charity version from the 90s

omg that first chorus

but yeah I dunno what it has to do with this thread

i am happy about this however:

I just shuddered and closed my lap top in utter embarrassment.

So maybe its just music critics who hate 'chops' and they are to blame for the anti-chops culture as much as anyone else?

I think this is pretty otm - I toured with a chops-intensive friend and indie audiences were all wowed

― pathos of the unwarranted encore (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned),

I wonder how many bands really can play and choose not to just because it's not fashionable.
I remember reading a letter in a magazine in the mid 90s that said the members of green day used to play in a black crowes type band and they really had the chops. Dunno if it's true or not but it does make me wonder how common this is.
Even metallica released an album without solos so i think that proves how unfashionable it became.

from that youtube

Truly amazing. This is the kind of performance that only great artists, like Reed and Costello, can pull off. It's a shame that people don't get to see this kind of performance on American Idol, MTV, etc...all those entities care about is the the manufactured sound and look, pushing what ever is trendy down our throats, and making big buck$ off it all.
Venture73 1 year ago 18

Good thing Gary Peacock wasn't there.

This is a great thread, guys. Lots of really interesting ideas in here.

Got anything to add to it?

i... don't really understand the point of this thread, guess i should read it properly from the beginning

this whole chops/technique/ability thing is a bit smelly tho. firstly in how it's being defined, and this idea that it's not desirable in indie rock.

if you replace the word "chops" with "funk" the thread gets a lot better

I think I'd have to agree with the idea that IDM / experimental electronica is the closest to a current analogue for the way jazz evolved; roots in a populist dance music, but heading towards avant-garde territory and finding a niche audience, pracitioners making money not through record sales (or live performance, to a lesser extent) but through installation work, licensing music for specific uses (films, advertising, etc) (jazz analogue might be commissioned pices, scores, etc? Thinking Lift to the Scaffold?). I'm sure salespeople in Romsey would be 'aware' of Aphex Twin in the same way housewives in Boston were 'aware' of Miles Davis, even if that awareness is raised through different channels (i.e. not big highbrow magazine features but something else, web & TV based). Emphasis on technical ability and boundary-pushing (even if the technical ability is programming rather than out-and-out chops, as it were). Audience of college kids and 'cool', 'educated', 'alternative' professional types. At work so can't think this through much more than that at the moment; it 'feels' like the right response to the question though, certainly moreso than indie.

Really interested in the whys and hows regarding the persecution of 'chops' amongst music writers / some indie fans / some musicians. See Oasis and Snow Patrol and Coldplay as apotheosis of this, emotion as all, technical ability as somehow a little suspicious.

Oasis and Snow Patrol and Coldplay

One of these things is not like the others

Oasis split up?

But Oasis probably do value "chops" to a certain extent. They like lengthy guitar solos and so on. And Noel also gradually replaced the original members of the band cos they weren't up to his technical standards

I think I'd have to agree with the idea that IDM / experimental electronica is the closest to a current analogue for the way jazz evolved; roots in a populist dance music, but heading towards avant-garde territory and finding a niche audience, pracitioners making money not through record sales (or live performance, to a lesser extent) but through installation work, licensing music for specific uses (films, advertising, etc) (jazz analogue might be commissioned pices, scores, etc? Thinking Lift to the Scaffold?). I'm sure salespeople in Romsey would be 'aware' of Aphex Twin in the same way housewives in Boston were 'aware' of Miles Davis, even if that awareness is raised through different channels (i.e. not big highbrow magazine features but something else, web & TV based). Emphasis on technical ability and boundary-pushing (even if the technical ability is programming rather than out-and-out chops, as it were). Audience of college kids and 'cool', 'educated', 'alternative' professional types. At work so can't think this through much more than that at the moment; it 'feels' like the right response to the question though, certainly moreso than indie.

I think I'd agree with this.

Oasis did kinda bring back the guitar solo and Alan White was brought in because he was a better drummer, but I suppose you could argue Oasis influences were 60s and 70s bands who did have chops. Oasis are a bit different to indie acts really. They saw themselves in the beatles/stones/Who lineage I think.

I do wonder what will be the big music of this decade. Are we still waiting on this decade to happen? As it seems to feel no different to the 00s so far. Cant think of any album that defines the start of a new decade in the way Nevermind did.

that Reed/Costello video points up the difference between jazz and "indie" - Lou & Elvis each have idiosyncratic styles refined (or ossified) over time, as opposed to a common set of chops

persection of chops among indie audiences?

there are whole sides of indie where "chops" is the whole point of what's going on

critically revered indie bands, wilco, for example, have ppl like glen kotche in them who has mad chops

I know Elvis Costello thinks he's a cross between Tony Bennett & Alan Toussaint or something but he sounds more like Rod McKuen in that vid

persection of chops among indie audiences?

there are whole sides of indie where "chops" is the whole point of what's going on

critically revered indie bands, wilco, for example, have ppl like glen kotche in them who has mad chops

― Crackle Box,

Wasn't the difference here that it was being seen as experimental music rather than having mad chops?

hmm, both, kind of like new things happening in jazz..

I think I'd have to agree with the idea that IDM / experimental electronica is the closest to a current analogue for the way jazz evolved; roots in a populist dance music

idm/electronica has it's roots in populist dance music? if anything i think idm/electornica headed away from the avant garde towards populist dance forms.

Audience of college kids and 'cool', 'educated', 'alternative' professional types

lol waht?

i think he is suggesting that is the fanbase of IDM acts like Autechre,Aphex Twin, Squarepusher et al

Precisely. That's what I am, and what all the other people I know who like that genre of music are, too.

Crackle Box; I'm not saying it maps directly, not at all, just that it seems like the closest fit.

Noel did replace the rest of Oasis but with better players but even so, I'm pretty sure technical prowess wasn't the point of that; Noel himself is certainly not a virtuoso.

I don't think he is against musicians having chops either, just they weren't allowed to be better than him on guitar!

i think the wight brothers both have "chops" not sure tho

I think of Phoenix being one of those bands with "chops" that doesn't show them off at all.

But whoever said it upthread otm in re their being indie subcultures that are/were into chops -- see, e.g., hella, don caballero.

Battles are def chops based

chops based god

having good control of tone, timing, INTONATION, interplay with yr effects and band and all that stuff is just as CHOPS as being able to knob off hemidemisemiquavers at 200bpm imo

for those reasons i don't feel like pheonix really "hold back" their CHOPS they just use them for a diferent effect, also pheonix drummer loves to show off his chops "oh look i can play open handed and do some sweet ghosting with me right hand too, oop there's a triplet on the kick drum etc etc"

i feel like a big paradox of contemporary music is that you can only really make money from live performances, not recordings, but so much of the music being made is computer-based. so the live performances are often a totally different thing than the record, or really bullshit-y (or both).

yeah this is SO weird]

i'm tempted to start another thread on this, although i don't know that there's actually much to say about it?

also as long as we're doing the indie rock chops talk again, i think of like dirty projectors and st vincent as good examples of style based on pretty serious chops...

i think a lot of the musicians not wanting to have chops is a myth actually, perpetuated by stupid things said in interviews. never met a kid that legitimately didnt want to get better at playing guitar.

PJ Harvey to thread.

jandek to thr..

oh wait, jandek is like nile rodgers now rite

More chops than a lumberjack.

As Iggy Pop once said, "We had chops too, man, we just had different chops."

And as Neil Young said, "Whaddya mean Crazy Horse can't play? They can't play with you."

Really interested in the whys and hows regarding the persecution of 'chops' amongst music writers / some indie fans / some musicians

-I think it's always been a reaction to seeing the musical conversation dominated by guys who had the time and inclination to practice playing scales really fast - I.e., not necessarily the most tuneful or economical songwriters, not necessarily the best looking, coolest or most fashionable people, basically huge nerds.

there's a noticeable and totally predictable split in opinion between britishers/Americans here: re indie vs. IDM as an analogue for jazz, just FYI. nobody gives a shit about IDM in America, indie has a way huger audience and also (as we all know) has a completely different definition/context. Oasis are one-hit wonders over here, not mainstream idols.

Jazz and electronica both eventually became:

- largely instrumental
- appealing to trainspotters
- host to entire sovereignties of home listening

None of which is to say that electronica will be "the big cultural signifier of its time." For one thing, electronic dance music is too large a church, and I'd argue "jazz" is too. You might associate a kind of swinging Lindy hop style jazz with the 30s and 40s or something, but not Roland Kirk, for instance.

re: the live performance problem, just came across this quote from shlohmo that resonated:

It’s actually interesting for me, because I still don’t really know what to do in a live setting. When I play a show, I want to play my own music, but a lot of times I’m booked at more of a party atmosphere, so they might be expecting something uptempo. And I’m trying to have a good time, too, with playing some Waka Flocka or something.

Have you given a lot of thought to how to translate Bad Vibes to a live setting?

Yeah. Right now, it’s pretty stupid (laugh). I don’t really have any idea of what to do with my current setup. Up till now I’ve just been stemming out the tracks and making cue points and playing pieces of the tracks with singing. I feel like it’s not really doing it justice at all. I might as well just be DJing and it’s not music to be DJed really. I’m starting to work towards a more live set, like playing the album all the way through. I might try to go no computer on it, but it’s hard because that’s what I know the best. I’ve never really done that before. I played guitar in a band… I played bass in a band, but the thought of doing it all alone and with some kind of looping workflow. I’m still trying to figure out the logistics of it. Maybe Ableton with loop pedals where I can loop myself and reproduce all the parts of the songs.

there's a noticeable and totally predictable split in opinion between britishers/Americans here: re indie vs. IDM as an analogue for jazz, just FYI. nobody gives a shit about IDM in America, indie has a way huger audience and also (as we all know) has a completely different definition/context. Oasis are one-hit wonders over here, not mainstream idols.

Yeah but you got owl City

and jam bands (those guys care about chops, right?)

jambands are a pretty niche thing, and afaict their niche has significantly declined

i think we've established that the jam band kids also like skrillex/pretty lights/etc. now, and that there are festivals that bring those two delicious tastes together

I got the impression that they were huge. Esp DMB and Phish.

Phish has been broken up for over a decade now, iirc. without big-name bands holding that scene together, it splintered off into a million different directions - Ween, Animal Collective, Wilco etc.

but yeah those guys tend to prize chops

xp

Im out of touch, i dont even know who skrillex is/are and only place ive ever seen the name is on ilm.

my bad Phish reunited in 2009 after being defunct for most of the 00s

wait a min ween anco and wilco are jam bands?

fuck me im more out of touch than I thought

omg the jamband people LOVE Ween. they play like 3 hour sets and do medleys of Ladies' Night etc

fwiw this is more descriptive of a subset of those bands' FANS and not the music per se.

They dont exist over here so I have no idea what jam band fans are like other than what I've read here.

are they the type of people who think Legend is the best Bob Marley album?

lol... sorta?

That is my knowledge of american college students (all based on what I read on ilm)

Bon Iver played an 8,500 capacity venue tonight at 7pm.

No idea who that is.

had the #2 album in the country, schmohawk