How can we support the evolution of jazz on the trombone?

[mgladdish]

I've been musing on this a while and have no good answers, so thought I'd see what the collective wisdom here can come up with.

I think the business is harder now for trombonists than it's ever been, especially for creative, new music. The young jazz trombonists I see are all working so hard going from commercial gig to commercial gig just to keep their heads above water financially that there's pretty much no room for anything genuinely creative. And, if there's one thing I think the trombone needs, it's a new creative push to generate excitement and a "scene" about the instrument. I have more personal peeves about the staleness of improvisation on the trombone than I can list here, but it's going to need a push if we're to do something about it. And looking at the listings for jazz venues supporting new music, how many of those are led by a trombonist? Vanishingly few. The reasons will be complex, and I suspect with a significant chicken-and-egg factor.

So, what can we/anyone do to fix it?

One approach I considered was to fund organisations that have been instrumental in the past. E.g. I talked to the National Youth Jazz Orchestra about sponsoring the lead trombone chair and that was going to be ~£1,000 for the year. Which is quite spendy for an individual to stump up and was difficult to see the direct benefit the player in that chair (over and above the continued existence of NYJO which is admittedly no small thing).

Competitions could be another avenue, with prize money and/or gig/recording opportunities as the prize. But to do it properly will take a decent chunk of money.

Commissions could also be a thing. But also as a one-off they're not going to help very much. So I suppose backed by an opportunity to perform the new commission would be needed.

Maybe it all comes down to opportunities to perform? Surely a long-term residency at a club would give the space and opportunity to really develop new material and approaches, as well as to build up an audience and a following. All we need to do is find an amenable venue...


What do you think could be done to support the evolution of jazz on the trombone?

[harrisonreed]

Possibly unpopular opinion, but if we're talking about America, I think you would have to start by making jazz in general relevant to the average American before worrying about elevating one instrument within that genre. A quick skim of google and I found a research article that said that, even in the broadest sense, only about 5% of Americans consider Jazz the best genre and regularly listen to it. Another page looked at Spotify and concluded that of those listening to jazz, nearly all the music being listened to is of deceased artist, who no longer have any output.

So, that said, I think that if you wanted to "elevate" jazz, on any instrument, you'd have to make a shift to making it more accessible. Think Nils Landgren. Sure, he plays funk, but his Funky Abba project is a great example of taking something that actually is popular, crossing it with his genre, and creating something that would appeal to far more people. Jazz peaked in popularity in the 30s and 40s. It definitely it kept evolving from there, but continued to get less popular. I guess it's because jazz is kind of music for musicians. So I think that the best place to start is to think about what average people actually want to hear, what they appreciate, and move jazz in that direction. Let the average person in on the inside joke, so to speak.

I think that's what makes Jacob Collier so exciting for people. His musical vocabulary is so large, and he is capable of producing music that sounds like it is from an alien planet, but he also knows that people like songs. His covers of popular tunes consist of chords and concepts that are beyond my comprehension and beyond inside jokes, but he makes it accessible. Maybe we should hand him a trombone!

[mgladdish]

Sure, that's one approach. Certainly if we want to have a trombonist headline a stadium gig then that would need to happen. But I'm not thinking *that* big. There are a good number of jazz musicians who I assume must be making a good living from making their own original music. E.g. I doubt Chris Potter is struggling to make ends meet (there's a separate argument as to whether he ought to be doing even better than he is, but that's for another thread).

But I'm thinking more within the jazz scene (such as it is). There are still a good number of festivals around the world, even drawing the likes of Herbie Hancock to travel to play them. But even that's bigger than I was thinking to start with - first I think we need the new, interesting voices to emerge on the instrument, and for them to have a high enough profile to get regular work doing their own thing. Then we'll see just how far they can go.

[EriKon]

I know many of the thoughts and situations mentioned in your post. It's true that times were easier at some point because A) there were much less players around B) there was more funding for culture at least in Germany and culture was much more important in the society. That said, Germany has very good institutional funding compared to many other countries, so I'm talking from a quite privileged point of view here.

Over here in Germany (probably Europe as well) there are some very interesting and innovative players in my opinion. Some of them being still younger and will probably be wider known in a few years (names like Janning Trumann), others are already quite well known at least nationally or Europe-wide) and in the scene for many years (thinking of Nils Wogram, Shannon Barnett or Matthias Müller). I'm pretty sure or at least I hope the same goes for US or areas of the world?

I want to add that not everyone who's studying jazz trombone wants to become like Nils Wogram (taking him as a example, because he's probably the best known) and do their own music which is striving for innovation. It's something that I'm thinking about a lot recently. I basically have the best foundations for trying to go for innovations and my own stuff. I was able to study a funded scholarship masters program where I was able to study with Nils Wogram, played in the National Youth Jazz Orchestra so I got connected with the top talents from all over the country and had a great overall jazz education. Still my own musical ideas and projects are mostly on ice right now (with one exception). Why is it like that? Because I usually have so much work with other gigs, including theatre shows, pit shows, lots of bigband, sideman jobs, lots of sitting in with bands as a sub, my teaching job at the university, some studio recording work and also a bit of orchestral stuff, which usually is so much work that I don't get the time to work on my own stuff. So I actually would need to plan with time for writing music, doing the organizational part of getting, to really get the things started again. And this will lead to less income because I can't work as much for earning money but also because the 'jazz' gigs where I can present my music usually don't pay nearly as well as most of my other jobs. And if I play with a band I want my colleagues to get paid well, so I would probably even throw in my share or something of my money to give them what they should get. Only way to work around this would be funding and as you said it's a bit of an chicken-egg factor, because you won't get funding if you don't play gigs.

I've never been a huge fan of competitions... To me music shouldn't be about competition although I can't say I'm completely free of comparing myself to others, I wish I were.

So what I think needs to change is the financial support of cultural locations (that have a jazz program). That needs to be better so that those gigs are financially more attractive and it pays off that you're working on creative music and improvisation. Probably in addition with some more locations.

[EriKon]

Sure, that's one approach. Certainly if we want to have a trombonist headline a stadium gig then that would need to happen. But I'm not thinking *that* big. There are a good number of jazz musicians who I assume must be making a good living from making their own original music. E.g. I doubt Chris Potter is struggling to make ends meet (there's a separate argument as to whether he ought to be doing even better than he is, but that's for another thread).

But I'm thinking more within the jazz scene (such as it is). There are still a good number of festivals around the world, even drawing the likes of Herbie Hancock to travel to play them. But even that's bigger than I was thinking to start with - first I think we need the new, interesting voices to emerge on the instrument, and for them to have a high enough profile to get regular work doing their own thing. Then we'll see just how far they can go.

And I agree a bit with what Harrison said. Jazz is just not popular music nowadays.

Jazz musicians who make their living (and not one that means you have to worry at the end of the month if you'll be able to pay your bills) with their own original music are rare, super hard-working (compared to someone who plays commercial gigs and all that stuff) and they're working on it for years to build a network. And usually this still all goes along with a teaching job at a university/college. It's something that needs a lot of courage to go this way. I have not had this courage until now. It needs creativity in terms of your musical output. But it most importantly it just needs hard work, on the instrument and the music AND on the organizational part of it (writing dozens of mails, forms for fundings, booking places for colleagues and and and and...)

[mgladdish]

Yeah, I'm super-jealous of the support that the likes of the NDR and WDR get. I'd love to see our own London Jazz Orchestra get that same level of help - we could do something really special.

I'll have to check out those other players - I only know a bit of Nils Wogram's playing from a couple of his albums.

And yes, everything would be better with more money. I'm trying to think through exactly how and where that money could come from and how it would best be spent.

[tbdana]

Yeah, I've been thinking about this. Let's start by looking at the landscape. Sorry for the length.

Jazz is no longer popular. It was huge when it was dance music. As soon as it evolved into bebop its popularity began to decline, and has continued to decline as rock, pop, grunge, techno, disco, hip-hop and other popular genres have arisen. Frankly, jazz has become too sophisticated for most lay persons' ears and the beat isn't one they can move to, so as long as that is where it lives it will never see a resurgence. Popular music is simple music, always. Jazz will become the new classical. New artists will all but vanish, and those who listen to it will be a niche audience who cherish the past of jazz, not the present or future.



Trombone is no longer popular. It's a dying instrument. These days, rarely does anyone write for trombone. See any trombones in hip-hop, country, rock, techno dance music or other popular genres? No. It's relegated to limited and diminishing use in classical music, occasional commercial use, and a small slice of what remains of jazz. That's about it.



Live music is less popular than ever. It has been dying since technology's advance, and has really taken a nose dive since the pandemic. More people are turning to technology for their music. Fewer and fewer are going out to non-dance clubs and concerts, and the industry has turned to huge productions and even huger venues to attract live audiences. Live music of any kind is less often a night out anymore, and has become more an "event" activity.



Trombone is a pretty terrible jazz instrument, frankly. It almost never plays the melody. It is the least versatile and takes the most skill of all the jazz instruments just to put together a barely acceptable solo. It can't rip off the kinds of solos sax players, trumpeters and pianists do. Plus, it lives in the baritone/tenor vocal range rather than the contralto/alto range that popular music favors, as the human ear and brain biologically tends to gravitate toward the range of mothers' voices rather than fathers'.



Recordings are not made, marketed or sold the way they used to be. The whole business changed with the advance of streaming music services rather than CDs or vinyl. There was a time when anyone with a good sound or a unique idea could get a record deal. But the business has moved away from that model, and now will pour its money into fewer investments, and those investments are more formula, more visually oriented, more expensive, and targeted toward a broader appeal. And songs are more the target now, as opposed to albums, because consumers no longer need to buy an entire CD, and can simply download their favorite songs.



So what does that mean for the future of jazz trombone? Personally, I think it's (not so) slowly dying. To my mind, the best possible outcome for jazz trombone is for some artist to come up with a sound and presentation that gives trombone jazz a brief renaissance by making appealing to aging upscale hipsters who are looking for something cool. Something to show that they are still cool. Something more quirky than megastar artists. Something they can relate to as a group, for a while. Trombone jazz can have that kind of appeal if done in the right hipster way IMHO.



Beyond that, I think we're on a permanent downward trajectory into oblivion.

Not very optimistic, am I? Sorry. Anyone have a plausible scenario with a better outcome?

[EriKon]

Not very optimistic, am I? Sorry. Anyone have a plausible scenario with a better outcome?

Yes! Because of the increasing amount of AI but its lack of creativity and originality in cultural aspects, people will realize that music and other arts are what makes humans humans after all. And as the pandemic showed people are longing for a live experience of arts. 2022 was insane job wise and basically everything I played was sold out. The live experience of music will always remain a unique experience, no matter whether it's a jazz club, a big concert hall or a stadium. Live is live and as probably most of us have experienced there are so many things that happen for exactly this reason because it is happening live. So, I'm at least not too pessimistic about the live music scene. Recording industry is something else tho...

[mgladdish]

Ha! Well, tbdana, I agree with absolutely everything in there. All apart from the terminal decline bit.

There are a few glimmers of hope to be had. Yes, provincial jazz club audiences are getting older and will all die off (literally) within the forseeable. But the higher-profile venues attract a younger, hipper crowd. Audiences at Ronnie Scott's aren't a sea of grey hair and we had all ages turn up to this weekend's gig at the Vortex to hear a programme entirely of original big band compositions.

And there are undeniably jazz musicians out there creating the music they want to create and making a good living from it. I mentioned Chris Potter above, there are many more.

There is no trombonist equivalent of Pat Metheny, Jan Garbarek, Dave Douglas, etc. And whilst you're absolutely right that the trombone is an absolute bugger to play the same things as the more common instruments, my position is it has other strengths that we can lean into instead. The Jan Garbarek comparison I think is a good one - his wailing folk song thing would translate brilliantly to the trombone. I'd pay good money to go to a solo trombone gig in a cathedral a-la Tommy Smith.

So whilst jazz is undeniably on its arse compared to "the good old days", it still only smells funny.

[Mr412]

Tbdana nailed it! Mic drop!

[harrisonreed]

Everything Dana says here seems to be true or rings true. That's why I think the way to elevate the trombone or jazz is to make it relevant, especially to young people. That is not impossible to do.

But, like she says, it is so distant from what a regular person wants that if it keeps evolving away, it might as well be like classical music. It's pretty much already at that point.

One of my jazz friends tried to "hip" me to some new jazz, bleeding edge or whatever. Sounded like whales. Maybe it's time to move it back in the other direction.

[Mr412]

Yeah.

Part of the reason why a lot of people don't like jazz is b/c they can't mouth the words to what the performer is playing. Look at nearly everyone at a Taylor Swift concert. If you aren't there mouthing the words, you are completely out of it. A lot of what I hear being played as jazz doesn't even have words, much like a lot of the classical music. And if it did, a listener couldn't mouth the words anyway a lot of times b/c the player is off in outer space somewhere on the chord changes. Egghead jazz only appeals to either other eggheads or posers.

What we need, if we want to "bring it back", is a 'bone player who plays vox populi music to where the listeners can snap their fingers, mouth the words and (gasp) dance! Who ever heard of such a thing in jazz!!! I suppose Trombone Shorty comes a little close, if you like New Orleans-style music. I think he would be most excellent at a rave party, if folks still do that, b/c he just riffs on and on and on. Gets kinda boring though, if you ask me. But then again, I don't do drugs n@.

[EriKon]

Wow... This is getting in a problematic direction with generalization and insinuation. The 'young people' are not a homogeneous group where everyone does, likes or thinks the same. Not everyone who's young likes rave parties. There are young folks who like to listen to Taylor Swift, some who like to listen Bach, some who like to listen to John Coltrane. And then there are a lot who are very open minded and have no boundaries in their way of thinking and like listening to all of them.

And the wording which makes it sound like all young people take drugs is hopefully just by accident...

[Mr412]

Lol. At my age, EVERYONE else is young. Point taken, though. Okay, so I edited my post and took out the word "young". I think that fixes everything up nice now. Sorry.

Oops. Meant to hit the "edit" button.

[tbdana]

Wow... This is getting in a problematic direction with generalization and insinuation. The 'young people' are not a homogeneous group where everyone does, likes or thinks the same. Not everyone who's young likes rave parties. There are young folks who like to listen to Taylor Swift, some who like to listen Bach, some who like to listen to John Coltrane. And then there are a lot who are very open minded and have no boundaries in their way of thinking and like listening to all of them.

And the wording which makes it sound like all young people take drugs is hopefully just by accident...

I don't think the intent was to trash young people or label them all the same. But generalizations are generalizations, and they may be largely true and still paint some folks falsely.

But do this experiment. Assume 100 million young people.

How many of those listen to Taylor Swift? How many would pay to go to her concert?

How many listen to Bach? How many would pay to go to a Bach concert?

How many listen to Coltrane? How many would pay to go to a Coltrane retrospective concert? And are those young Coltrane fans going out to support contemporary jazz artists?

When's the last time a contemporary jazz artist could routinely draw this kind of paying crowd?



I think any fair analysis shows Taylor Swift fans outnumbering jazz fans by 1000s to 1. So while there might be some jazz fans, the vast majority are not, which I think was his point.

[Doug Elliott]

Jazz is never going to be popular. 5%? I think it's more like .0005%
Trombone is never going to be popular.
But I really believe that whatever listening public there is will always appreciate great quality music and great quality playing... even jazz, and even trombone.

If you want to further the art and the instrument, don't suck and don't put out BS. There's too much of that out there already and that's a large part of the problem as I see it.

[EriKon]

Wow... This is getting in a problematic direction with generalization and insinuation. The 'young people' are not a homogeneous group where everyone does, likes or thinks the same. Not everyone who's young likes rave parties. There are young folks who like to listen to Taylor Swift, some who like to listen Bach, some who like to listen to John Coltrane. And then there are a lot who are very open minded and have no boundaries in their way of thinking and like listening to all of them.

And the wording which makes it sound like all young people take drugs is hopefully just by accident...

I don't think the intent was to trash young people or label them all the same. But generalizations are generalizations, and they may be largely true and still paint some folks falsely.

But do this experiment. Assume 100 million young people.

How many of those listen to Taylor Swift? How many would pay to go to her concert?

How many listen to Bach? How many would pay to go to a Bach concert?

How many listen to Coltrane? How many would pay to go to a Coltrane retrospective concert? And are those young Coltrane fans going out to support contemporary jazz artists?

When's the last time a contemporary jazz artist could routinely draw this kind of paying crowd?



I think any fair analysis shows Taylor Swift fans outnumbering jazz fans by 1000s to 1. So while there might be some jazz fans, the vast majority are not, which I think was his point.

I feel like people nowadays are just much more open to different music. I barely know people who just listen to one genre or artist only. That's what I was trying to say. The same person can go to a Taylor Swift concert and still enjoys My Favorite Things by Coltrane, because they discovered it resampled in a hip-hop or electro swing tune or wherever and checked out the original recording. And that's what I see a lot nowadays, especially with 'young people'

[Mr412]

Thanks to Tbdana for opening up this thread, even though it may come to get locked!

I've had these things kickin' around in my craw for some time now and I finally get to unload, once & for all.

I want to believe that a contemporary trombone-player could still make it on the national stage if they wailed away on the tunes of say, Kelly Clarkson, Justin Bieber, Beyonce, Prince, etc. If said trombone-player gets played on the likes of "Tailgate Radio", etc. - there might be a chance. But as pointed out above, they would have to decidedly not suck and yet not be too much of a "Sophisti-Cat" either. Like Kai Winding - who I think was headed in that direction - they would have to not be afraid of getting their slide a little bit dirty. I think Buddy Morrow was headed in that direction, as well.

Too bad Harrison - by HIS admission - sucks at improv (how would I know b/c I've never heard his efforts). I think someone WITH improv skills and with a big band experience, could make the transition to pop with a pop-group backing. I think it's done on a regional level more often than we know, but we don't get to hear them b/c they don't make it to national.

I was in Florida once at a very small concert where there were three amplified guitarists and a drummer. They were terrific on '70's numbers. They made a call out to the audience and two guys stepped up; a harmonica-player and A TROMBONE PLAYER!!! Both smoked! I mean, rocked, with a capital R! The lead guitar-player knew the harmonica-player. He was a regular. But he was flabbergasted at the trombone-player (and so was I). It can be done.

[BGuttman]

I don't think we can "evolve" jazz on the trombone. Even if we did, it won't do much for its lack of popularity.

I'd certainly like to see the trombone become more popular along the lines of somebody like Yanni. As was mentioned above, we need a player with great sound and interpretation, monster technique, and enough luck to get promoted.

Right now the trombone's role in modern music is as part of a "horn line" (coupled with a trumpet and a saxophone) and doing things that the more percussive regular members of the Rock Band (guitar, bass guitar, keyboards, and percussion) don't do well, like long lyric phrases.

[tbdana]

I tend to think that if there's one trombonist out there who could exceed typical trombone popularity, it is Spanish trombonist Rita Payés. She's female, young, pretty, sings well, plays beautifully, and improvises in a beautiful and soulful way that is accessible to the lay person's ear.

Here she is with the WDR Big Band, but she also has a small group. I'm imagining not just bossa novas like this one, but a more hip kind of popular music.

[Jimkinkella]

I don't think we can "evolve" jazz on the trombone. Even if we did, it won't do much for its lack of popularity.

Hi Bruce,
Gonna disagree (partly) on some points.
There are a number of opportunites both through educational and professional means.

Through the higher education grant and performance systems there are some fantastic opportunities to bring in some different ideas. When I was back in school I got to back up Slide Hampton for a couple of nights.
But how many minds would have been blown if the schools had also brought in Nils Landgren or Glenn Ferriss?

Popularity can follow exposure

Alicia Keys for one could have helped the cause, she had some real chops.
Lady Gaga could have pushed the idea, hoping it evolves

my 2c

Jim

[mgladdish]

I'm thinking of popularity a bit more narrowly than some, I think. To me, I'm thinking within the existing jazz scene instead of a mass appeal artist. Not that both wouldn't be great, but I'm much more interested in raising the instrument's profile within jazz and exploring what can be done next in the music. And that's going to necessarily be more niche than headlining a stadium gig, but that's fine. It doesn't have to be either/or. But headlining the North Sea Jazz Festival should be achievable, or a record deal with ECM, etc.

So where's the trombone equivalent of, say, Nils Petter Molvær or Branford Marsalis going to come from? I can't see why it's completely impossible. And what can we do to help make it happen?

[AndrewMeronek]

I have a slightly different take:

Jazz doesn't have to be popular for musicians to make money. But - we have a larger problem: people simply can't afford to go on a regular basis to the smaller concerts and venues where trombones shine. If our societies better balance income inequality, I think that things may get at least a bit better, not just for jazz, but for lots of marginalized musics.

And, in the U.S., at least, fixing our urban sprawl (i.e., re-zoning and getting rid of sprawl) so that people can start to feel like they actually live in communities they can celebrate instead of grinding their long driving commutes and living in large clusters of overpriced and segregated subdivisions.

So, politics.

[GGJazz]

Hi folks.

In my opinion , Jazz Music is not dying at all , neither Jazz trombone .
Jazz is not Pop music ; so what ?

About the future of Jazz trombone ...well , just give a look at players like Marshall Gilkes , Ido Meshulam , Elliot Mason , Michael Dease , Andy Hunter , Nick Varayas , etc , and some "old guys" as Steve Davis (57) , etc. .
They are in a pretty good health !! Don' t worry about any death ! Just follow them , and they will show you the way ..

The OP wrote : 《I think the business is harder now for trombonist than it' s ever been....》.
When was easier ? 20 / 50/ 80 / 100 years ago ? Are you sure about that ?

I think that Jazz Music is , was , and will be , a pretty hard business .
That' s right to me , because life , in this World , is pretty hard for most people , too .

About the musicians working on Pop , Commercial stuff , etc , I do not think that ALL the guitar , electric bass , drums players working nowadays earn that money as WHO is playing with Lady Gaga or Taylor Swift ... And I don' t think either that they have so much opportunity to perform their own stuff ... For sure , they have to work hard too , going from gig to gig , as Jazz musicians do .

Regards
Giancarlo

[Cmillar]

Jazz is never going to be popular. 5%? I think it's more like .0005%
Trombone is never going to be popular.
But I really believe that whatever listening public there is will always appreciate great quality music and great quality playing... even jazz, and even trombone.

If you want to further the art and the instrument, don't suck and don't put out BS. There's too much of that out there already and that's a large part of the problem as I see it.

Right.

One problem, that actually happens in some 'live-music-starved' communities, it doesn't help 'the cause' when some of the only music being pushed as 'jazz music' falls into the category of 'free jazz/free improvisational experimental jazz'.

Nothing against 'free jazz', as I enjoy playing it once in awhile myself. But I certainly don't expect an audience to even show up, let alone be asked to donate or pay to see a group of people having a 'circle j---'.

(....sure, there are exceptions and there can be some areas of the world where truly phenomenal musicians can pull off a fantastic, musically satisfying free-improv performance, but to actually get people in the door? You better have a built-in audience or an amazing marketing team or gimic!)

Some types of 'jazz' actually turn people off of the art form, and trying to get them back in the door is pretty difficult.

And some major Jazz reviewers and magazines really do a disservice to jazz music. 'Downbeat' has really gone 'downhill', and 'Jazziz' seems to be more focused on selling vinyl and high end audio and having more 'glam photos' than any actual writing or reviews of any relevance. And, you have to pay a lot of money if you want to hope to have your album mentioned or reviewed.

Jazz shouldn't be about 'playing it safe' or just 're-playing the standards' over and over.

But, hey....'the standards' are pretty nice music that people want to actually listen to!

[tbdana]

Jazz is never going to be popular. 5%? I think it's more like .0005%
Trombone is never going to be popular.
But I really believe that whatever listening public there is will always appreciate great quality music and great quality playing... even jazz, and even trombone.

If you want to further the art and the instrument, don't suck and don't put out BS. There's too much of that out there already and that's a large part of the problem as I see it.

Absolutely 100% this.

[Richard3rd]

Trombone Shorty. Net worth: 10 million. Touring year round. Is it jazz? Yes. Does he get people excited? Yes.

Next topic pushing boundries. You play an instrument with a slide. How many instruments have slides? That allows an infinite tonality between the normally heard notes. Explore Indian music. Expand your mind. Change it up. Learn. Grow. Build your own path.

[Bach5G]

Maybe we’re a little like turtles. Turtles have been around for 200 million years. Haven’t evolved much.

[henrysa]

If you want to see what is possible by creative musicians that sounds gorgeous and boosts the trombone at the same time look up "Road to Freedom" from the movie "Rustin", by Lenny Kravitz, with a trombone quartet intro put together by Trombone Shorty. It was actually up for a Golden Globe and the video is the most exciting example of what this instrument is capable of doing...and in front of a contemporary audience.

[Doug Elliott]

I don't get it. I mean it's nice, but "the most exciting example of what this instrument is capable of doing..." ???

"the evolution of jazz on the trombone" ???

[henrysa]

Should have said the video is "a very exciting example"....I thought a very cool vibe, and the staging with these four talented players, featured front and center, by an iconic musician like Lenny Kravitz was thrilling for this old guy. And my heroes were Dick Shearer and the Stan Kenton trombone section circa 1970.

[tbdana]

I'm focusing on the phrase "evolution of jazz." I think jazz has already evolved to its breaking point.

As I wrote above, jazz used to be popular dance music. It was deemed wild and edgy. By the 1970s jazz had evolved beyond the layperson's ability to hear or understand. Play a Coltrane solo for some regular Joe Blow and you'll lose him 4 bars into it. It takes a trained ear to appreciate jazz from the bebop era, onward. If it "evolves" any further, it will lose all but the most fringe musicians and will appeal to practically zero lay people.

I don't think jazz needs to "evolve" anymore, and I don't think the trombone is the choice to propel that evolution in any event.

In fact, IMHO jazz needs to go backwards. Smooth jazz was an attempt to devolve jazz and simplify the harmonic and melodic content to the point where lay humans could hear it and appreciate it, but it was far too tame for popular appeal. I think jazz's evolution is over.

[Bach5G]

Jack T is the T Rex.

[Nolankberk]

I have to admit, I feel completely lost listening to what could be considered free jazz, so there is definitely something to the idea that jazz needs to regress a bit for popular appeal

[GGJazz]

Hello folks.

Sincerely , I think that things changes when they have to ; not because someone says " oh , now' s the time that we have do something new!" .
Musicians like Charlie Parker or John Coltrane made their changes in music becase that was the result of their imagination and genius .

Free Jazz is about 65 years old music ; so it s not that innovative or contemporary at all ... To me , nowadays is almost a kind of "traditional stuff"...!

A pretty evolved musician could be , for example , David Liebman .
This kind of musicians , nowadays , plays around this way :


About evolved trbn players , to me none is as great as Hal Crook
( Hal solo at 04:27)

We can not stop the changes that happens in music , just because we can not follow them ...
Anyway , I think that we have the RIGHT TO PLAY AND TO LISTEN what we prefer , and we do not have to follow any evolution , if we do not trust and do not love it !
But still things will going in a straight innovative way , that is the human way of doing , i guess.

So , in my opinion , let' the Music run into the future , but play what YOU really feel honestly.

Regards
Giancarlo

[AndrewMeronek]

Free jazz is a very small microcosm of modern jazz. People should not equate that with all of jazz. Modern jazz is extremely diverse:

Snarky Puppy
Frank Gambale
WDR Big Band
Michael Buble
Meshuggah
Wayne Shorter
Donnie McCaslin
Bonerama

It seems pretty farfetched to say something like:

I feel completely lost listening to what could be considered free jazz, so there is definitely something to the idea that jazz needs to regress a bit for popular appeal

[mgladdish]

Well quite. There's absolutely an audience for cutting edge, modern jazz. Even if many on this board don't like to listen to it (which is also completely fine!)

And whilst you can absolutely argue whether Ronnie Scott's is where the really modern stuff gets played any more, it's doing very well indeed thankyouverymuch. So it's also true that venues can thrive putting on this music.

https://www.standard.co.uk/business/ron ... EqwdSiYiKs

All of which just reinforces the earlier points - that making a good living pushing the music forward is very, very hard, but not impossible.

And this thread started with the question about what we can organise, or where to invest, to make this path less hard and improve the chances of trombonists making their mark. I want to hear creative trombonists and I'm looking to do something proactive to help make that happen.

[mgladdish]

Also, here's a link dump for modern music I'm really into at the moment. None of it features trombonists in any meaningful way, and I think that's a real shame.

Django Bates - wonderfully chaotic, fun, writing. Every time I listen to this I hear something more.


Nils Petter Molvær - a unique improvising style, long lines of very few notes. Achingly beautiful.


Knower - seriously tight


Jacob Collier - harmony like we've never heard before. This is one of my absolute favourite tunes and, I won't lie, makes me tear up a bit at the end. And his use of microtones is jaw-dropping.


Trio HLK - super-advanced re-imaginings of standards. Complex compositions, polyrythms a-plenty



There's no fundamental reason why any of this couldn't have been put together by a trombonist. And I'd love to hear it when they do!

[Doug Elliott]

All of that is some pretty stunning stuff. Wish I had time to study it more.

[harrisonreed]

Jacob Collier is on some other level. I think that recording of Bleak Midwinter is one of his times where he uses a significantly "compromised" tone from one JI chord to form the root of the next key change ... So that it goes into G half sharp (or some in-between pitch like that).



I don't think he is doing this kind of music without the aid of his computer though, which is very open about.

[mgladdish]

Jacob Collier is on some other level. I think that recording of Bleak Midwinter is one of his times where he uses a significantly "compromised" tone from one JI chord to form the root of the next key change ... So that it goes into G half sharp (or some in-between pitch like that).

[snip]

I don't think he is doing this kind of music without the aid of his computer though, which is very open about.

Agreed on all counts. And June Lee's transcription is a lesson in its own right.

[Bach5G]

The last forward thinking/sounding trombone recording I heard was Josh Roseman’s Nightwalker recording. But that was 2003. Before that maybe Julian Priester’s Love, Love.

But I don’t get out much.

[ngrinder]

Speaking as a jazz trombonist living in New York City with two albums of music (originals), I can tell you what would help:

Purchase our music.

To be frank, it took me nearly 6 years to pay off the debt incurred by my first album, and just last year paid off my second. The cost of producing music might be getting much lower, with home studios and good, cheap audio equipment from China, but to do it well (in a professional studio with good musicians in New York) is still very high, and the cost of promotion is astronomical. It is truly a labor of love for most of us. I am extremely fortunate to do a good amount of commercial work to keep me afloat, and as the OP alluded to, the balance of that and composing is something I'm still trying to figure out.

The streaming model has truly wrecked the recorded music industry. It's basically impossible these days to make your money back on an album - streams pay less than pennies, and for those of us not getting hundreds of thousands of listens, it's barely a drop in the bucket. GoFundMe and Kickstarter are a godsend for artists trying to produce new work.

I don't want to paint too dire of a picture - there are good ways to make a living, be it teaching, composing, or doing commercial work, but if you want to support creative music, please do it financially!
Those of you who are older/not struggling financially, it would help immensely if you took the time to buy trombonists' albums. Below are just a few trombonists off the top of my head who might be of interest to those here.

https://nickgrinder.bandcamp.com/

https://kaliavandever.bandcamp.com/

https://www.robertedwardsmusic.com/music

https://sam-blakeslee-music.myshopify.com/

https://ryankeberle.bandcamp.com/

http://jacobgarchik.com/?page_id=21

[tbdana]

I loved the Jacob Collier tune.

[Cmillar]

About evolved trbn players , to me none is as great as Hal Crook
( Hal solo at 04:27)

We can not stop the changes that happens in music , just because we can not follow them ...
Anyway , I think that we have the RIGHT TO PLAY AND TO LISTEN what we prefer , and we do not have to follow any evolution , if we do not trust and do not love it !
But still things will going in a straight innovative way , that is the human way of doing , i guess.

So , in my opinion , let' the Music run into the future , but play what YOU really feel honestly.

Regards
Giancarlo

Yes....Hal Crook! He's been the trombone equivalent of Michael Brecker as far as being a 'thinking' jazz horn player who is compositionally exciting to hear and follow. People that have studied with him at Berklee are very lucky to have done so!

Speaking of the 'evolution of jazz' hitting the heights of post-bop... (sorry...no trombone involved!)

THIS.... McCoy Tyner Trio featuring Michael Brecker at the 1996 North Sea Jazz Festival.



Great video footage, might be the best coverage of jazz players I've ever seen on video.

This is a heavy concert....you'll need to sit down, put it on good speakers, get a drink....

Unbelievable concert. Fantastic.

Probably one of the best concerts ever. Check out Avery Sharpe on Bass.

Enjoy!

[henrysa]

Jazz is going to do what jazz has always done....improvise(and evolve).....all on its own....support is simple....buy tickets....buy music...support financially all music in schools...and let the creativity of its participants evolve....organically.

[harrisonreed]

The stuff Hal Crook was doing in the recording up above was incredible, but did they put his mic inside a felt beret or something? How is the sax so clear but the trombone sounds like he is inside a wall?

[mgladdish]

Speaking as a jazz trombonist living in New York City with two albums of music (originals), I can tell you what would help:

Purchase our music.

To be frank, it took me nearly 6 years to pay off the debt incurred by my first album, and just last year paid off my second. The cost of producing music might be getting much lower, with home studios and good, cheap audio equipment from China, but to do it well (in a professional studio with good musicians in New York) is still very high, and the cost of promotion is astronomical. It is truly a labor of love for most of us. I am extremely fortunate to do a good amount of commercial work to keep me afloat, and as the OP alluded to, the balance of that and composing is something I'm still trying to figure out.

The streaming model has truly wrecked the recorded music industry. It's basically impossible these days to make your money back on an album - streams pay less than pennies, and for those of us not getting hundreds of thousands of listens, it's barely a drop in the bucket. GoFundMe and Kickstarter are a godsend for artists trying to produce new work.

I don't want to paint too dire of a picture - there are good ways to make a living, be it teaching, composing, or doing commercial work, but if you want to support creative music, please do it financially!
Those of you who are older/not struggling financially, it would help immensely if you took the time to buy trombonists' albums. Below are just a few trombonists off the top of my head who might be of interest to those here.

https://nickgrinder.bandcamp.com/

https://kaliavandever.bandcamp.com/

https://www.robertedwardsmusic.com/music

https://sam-blakeslee-music.myshopify.com/

https://ryankeberle.bandcamp.com/

http://jacobgarchik.com/?page_id=21

Thanks Nick. That's super-helpful.

I know deep-down everything eventually boils down to "give us yer feckin' money", as Bob Geldof would say. So I'm doing my bit and buying at least one album from everyone you've listed there. I'm halfway through Farallon now and there's some lovely playing - congrats.

I guess my followup question is what can we do to sell more albums to make it pay? I hear the same story of far-distant breakeven points from other musos, not just trombonists. So what do you think's missing from being able to sell more? Is it lack of publicity? I know over here the column inches spent on jazz album reviews is vanishingly small (albeit I'm trying to do my bit by writing lengthy reviews for The Trombonist magazine). As is the amount of radio airtime. Or is it a limited scope for side-hustling our other gigs? Being able to sell your own music when doing a stadium gig for a pop band may shift more than the dismaying handful at a more usual small jazz venue?

[ngrinder]

Speaking as a jazz trombonist living in New York City with two albums of music (originals), I can tell you what would help:

Purchase our music.

To be frank, it took me nearly 6 years to pay off the debt incurred by my first album, and just last year paid off my second. The cost of producing music might be getting much lower, with home studios and good, cheap audio equipment from China, but to do it well (in a professional studio with good musicians in New York) is still very high, and the cost of promotion is astronomical. It is truly a labor of love for most of us. I am extremely fortunate to do a good amount of commercial work to keep me afloat, and as the OP alluded to, the balance of that and composing is something I'm still trying to figure out.

The streaming model has truly wrecked the recorded music industry. It's basically impossible these days to make your money back on an album - streams pay less than pennies, and for those of us not getting hundreds of thousands of listens, it's barely a drop in the bucket. GoFundMe and Kickstarter are a godsend for artists trying to produce new work.

I don't want to paint too dire of a picture - there are good ways to make a living, be it teaching, composing, or doing commercial work, but if you want to support creative music, please do it financially!
Those of you who are older/not struggling financially, it would help immensely if you took the time to buy trombonists' albums. Below are just a few trombonists off the top of my head who might be of interest to those here.

https://nickgrinder.bandcamp.com/

https://kaliavandever.bandcamp.com/

https://www.robertedwardsmusic.com/music

https://sam-blakeslee-music.myshopify.com/

https://ryankeberle.bandcamp.com/

http://jacobgarchik.com/?page_id=21

Thanks Nick. That's super-helpful.

I know deep-down everything eventually boils down to "give us yer feckin' money", as Bob Geldof would say. So I'm doing my bit and buying at least one album from everyone you've listed there. I'm halfway through Farallon now and there's some lovely playing - congrats.

I guess my followup question is what can we do to sell more albums to make it pay? I hear the same story of far-distant breakeven points from other musos, not just trombonists. So what do you think's missing from being able to sell more? Is it lack of publicity? I know over here the column inches spent on jazz album reviews is vanishingly small (albeit I'm trying to do my bit by writing lengthy reviews for The Trombonist magazine). As is the amount of radio airtime. Or is it a limited scope for side-hustling our other gigs? Being able to sell your own music when doing a stadium gig for a pop band may shift more than the dismaying handful at a more usual small jazz venue?

Thank you so much! That is very kind of you.

To be honest, I think the biggest problem lies at the streaming method of listening. It simply is not sustainable for all but the largest pop stars, and as long as it's the dominant way of listening to music, recording isn't going to bring in much money for smaller artists. In my opinion it was a failure of AFM and even the government that we didn't find a model that pays artists more, much like Netflix.

As far as those big questions, I don't have any good answers. I think it's great to drum up discussion about this - collectively we can prop up our community, but of course more needs to be done. I think getting involved locally with your own jazz scene as either a performer or audience member is very important. Jazz is, at its best, a community experience.