Trombone’s limited audience appeal for solo career

[fiddlefestival]

As a newcomer to trombone, I have only been familiar with a handful of trombonists until recently. I learned about many more on this forum and started to work my way through your lists of essential/renowned/favorite trombonists on Spotify. It surprised me how few listeners many have, despite often very long lists of recordings under their name. Are trombonists just recording for their mom and members of trombonechat?

I did find 2 superstars of the trombone, in the range of 1.5 million monthly listeners. One has been dead for many decades, the other is still young (20s). Answers below, but maybe you have fun to guess first. I saw no close runner up, but who would you guess would be in the hundreds of thousands of monthly listeners (I found 2, again one active and one dead, only guessed one correctly). What I thought as the “famous” trombonists are obscure on that metric compared to other instrumentalists. What do you expect for your classical stars (Lindberg, Alessi) compared to the classical stars on other instruments (like Lang Lang or Yo Yo Ma)? Numbers below, but you may want to think through your expectations first before looking at the numbers.

Now, this was not a designed systematic study (I do that for my job, not for my hobbies). Here I use only a single metric, Spotify monthly listeners (not including other streaming services, apple, amazon, nor purchases). And current listeners, no measure of life-time or total. You can easily improve on that, use a bigger list of musicians and additional metrics. Could even make a research paper for a college student, comparing across instruments and genres.

First some calibration numbers: The extreme tail of pop stars, Taylor Swift, Beyonce, are in the 50-80 million monthly listeners. The evergreens, Rolling Stones, Led Zep, Pink Floyd, Beatles, are in the lower tens of millions. Among instrumentalists, the jazz superstars, Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Stan Getz (yes, he is even slightly above those) are 2-4 million, similar to the superstars of classical music, alive (Lang Lang, YoYo Ma, Daniel Barenboim) or dead (Karajan).

There are no trombonists in that range that I found. And there are only two that broke that 1 million monthly listeners threshold (by quite a bit , 50%).

Drum roll (you can make it a fanfare) for the two superstars of trombone:
Rita Payes and Glenn Miller.
Both are bona-fide trombonists, no doubt, but Rita Payes also writes her own music and sings, Glenn Miller had a big band that produced hits.

The next, really wide tier, of between 100k and 1 million seems was sparse, I expect you can find others, but I searched for a while and only saw 2, again one younger active player and one historic
Trombone Shorty and Tommy Dorsey.
That is the tier where you normally expect to find all the “household” names, even on fringier instruments. I immediately found several instrumentalists in other more obscure instruments, mandolin (Chris Thile, Sierra Hull, David Grisman), banjo (Bela Fleck), upright bass (Edgar Meyer, Ron Carter) in that range, but not trombonist despite trying much longer.

Instead, trombonists are well below <100k, even JJ Johnson, Slide Hampton, Curtis Fuller. Classical trombonists, well, they may record under their name, but don't find listeners. I checked to make sure that this is not due to an absence of recordings under their name (i.e. if somebody exclusively records as part of an orchestra). No, all of them have recordings under their name, and generally a longer list than Rita Payes.

Summary:
More than 1 million monthly listeners
Active Musicians Historic Recordings
Rita Payes 1.5m Glenn Miller 1.5m

More than 100 000 monthly listeners
Trombone Shorty 300k Tommy Dorsey 700k

More than 50k monthly listeners
Slide Hampton 85k
Rico Rodriguez 80k
JJ Johnson 70k
Curtis Fuller 45k
(didn't find a currently active performer)

l<50k
Christian Lindberg 36k
Joseph Alessi 14k
Steve Turre 10k


Under 10k
Marshall Gilkes 7k
Ian Bousfield 3k Urbie Green 4k
Albert Mangelsdorff 3k

<1k
Enzo Turriziani
Bart Van Lier
Branimir Slokar

[BGuttman]

First, understand that today's popular music is Rock (of various stripes). Of the rock bands, how many feature a trombonist? You can probably count them on one hand. Chicago, Tower of Power, [I can't think of any others]. You didn't mention James Pankow or Dave Bargeron in your analysis.

Popular music from 1920 to 1960 featured the Big Band. This ensemble had 3-5 trombones in the band, with at least one that played solos. Glenn Miller was a trombonist but wasn't as renowned as a soloist compared to Tommy Dorsey, who was the quintessential trombone soloist of the Swing Era. There are other trombone soloists of that era who were very well known in their day, but are now nearly forgotten (except by us trombone players). Later era the Big Band (Stage Band, Swing Band, etc.) became a niche player like the orchestra. Again, great trombone players in them but not terribly popular.

In orchestra, most of the instrumental soloists are piano, violin, and cello. Other instruments play solos, but very infrequently. Hence, orchestral trombone soloists are very niche. We trombonists appreciate them, but they don't appeal to the general public.

Why is this so? We had a whole thread exploring this about a year ago and never came to a conclusion. Suffice it to say the popular musicians of today play something electronic; mostly with 6 strings. Close behind would be someone playing an electric keyboard.

[harrisonreed]

Lindberg has reached a very wide audience in his career, but almost entirely through live performances. I think there were about 3500 in the audience at the Kennedy center when I saw him, and that was one of three performances that weekend, and one of probably 200 concerts for him that year.

I'm not surprised at all that Taylor Swift gets billions of views while trombonists get barely any. The vocal and lyric component of vocal speaks to human beings much more than purely melodic music.

[AtomicClock]

Are trombonists just recording for their mom and members of trombonechat?

... and tenure committees.

[tbdana]

Are trombonists just recording for their mom and members of trombonechat?

I dunno, but that’s what I do. No trombonist should expect to compete generally. It’s just not in the culture. Even trombonists don’t listen to a lot of trombone music. Of course, I’m just a hobbyist, but I’m lucky if one of my YouTube videos gets a thousand views total.

[Goodgig]

Baby Shark has had over a billion views.

[tbdana]

Baby Shark has had over a billion views.

And there we have it, a demonstration of modern culture in a nutshell. (And actually I think it's over 15 billion views.)

[fiddlefestival]

Are trombonists just recording for their mom and members of trombonechat?

... and tenure committees.

Ah yes, the academic signaling. I was wondering about some of the material among the classical trombonists (pretty much none of them made it onto my saved list). Still, assuming I had identified the biggest name classical trombonist and they don't pick their material purely for academic reasons, the upside potential for trombone appears small, even if just compared to cello, also a (mostly) single line instruments with almost identical range. Two orders of magnitude in audience using the spotify metric. Many still seem to get manufacturers make signature models.

I was similarly surprised to see a similar gap between jazz trombonists that seem to be considered seminal in this forum (e.g. JJ Johnson, Curtis Fuller) and other wind instruments. Tenor saxophone, also single line instrument, approximately same range as a trombone. It isn't just Stan Getz or John Coltrane. Coleman Hawkins, Lester Young, Sonny Rollins, Dexter Gordon have current listeners that jazz trombonists don't seem reach (by a factor of 10 times or 20).

[Bach5G]

I’d probably pay to hear Steve Davis. No one else comes to mind.

[tbdana]

This is all because trombone does not have the facility of those other instruments.

[Doug Elliott]

I’d probably pay to hear Steve Davis. No one else comes to mind.

I'm listening to Steve Davis right now live at Blues Alley in DC. First set was completely sold out.
I don't do Spotify and I think that applies to a lot of musicians. Could be wrong.

[WilliamLang]

Trombone has just as much facility as other instruments, and facility isn't the only thing that matters. Yo-Yo Ma is probably just as famous to general audiences for playing the Swan everywhere he goes as he is for the Bach Cello Suites, and neither of those are anywhere near the hardest or most impressively technical things written for cello.

There's a whole classical music industry built up around Piano, Violin, Singing, and Cello being at the top of a hierarchy. It's self-referential, and has more to do with societal conditioning than the potential of the instruments themselves.

[GGJazz]

Hi all .

In my opinion , we can not make a comparison between who listen to Taylor Swift and who listen to J.J.Johnson...

Spotify support business . Business = money .

X ( Taylor Swift) = super good business = super good money .
Y ( J.J. Johnson) = very bad business = very bad money .

Of course , the trombone is not a so popular instrument ., nowadays .
I do not guess that a trombone player are obsessed about to reach a super- large audience ; in case he care about this , for sure he choose the worst way to become popular...

Maybe also Alban Berg' Violin Concerto do not collect so many wiews on Spotify ; so what ?

Regards
Giancarlo

[Doug Elliott]

Whenever I play a gig at a casino, somebody asks "do you gamble?"

Well I decided to play trombone for a living... if that's not gambling, I don't know what is.

[Bach5G]

I’ve kind of stopped worrying about what other people listen to.

[tbdana]

Trombone has just as much facility as other instruments.

Well, we're gonna have to agree to disagree on that.

There's a reason trombone parts don't look the same as violin and flute parts.

I thought I had pretty good facility. But, playing a jazz piece the other day I gave up trying to keep up with this sax player: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6c1ooaau ... 54gt7&dl=0

When the trumpeter has to move his fingers 3/4 of an inch to go back and forth between two notes, while trombonists have to move their whole arm back and forth 2.5 feet each way to play the same thing, I think it results in a facility advantage to the instrument requiring less mileage.

[Kbiggs]

Whenever I play a gig at a casino, somebody asks "do you gamble?"

Well I decided to play trombone for a living... if that's not gambling, I don't know what is.

Funniest thing I’ve heard in a while. I almost snorted my coffee!

[AndrewMeronek]

My Alma Mater (Wayne State University in Detroit) has a small but very robust music program that is locally well-known for training a lot of good jazz musicians. It seems lately that they are heavily investing in their music technology program, which to me seems like a pretty good idea. There are a lot of schools (in the U.S., at least) who really have a problem justifying the tuition and other charges their trombone students have to deal with, without seeing a reasonably viable career path.

[Trombo]

People are not interested in the trombone at all. People are interested in MUSIC.
That's why Rita Payes and Glenn Miller are so successful, and they are not great trombone players (IMHO).

[tbdana]

People are not interested in the trombone at all. People are interested in MUSIC.
That's why Rita Payes and Glenn Miller are so successful, and they are not great trombone players (IMHO).

[harrisonreed]

Good luck beating that on solo trombone for mass appeal.


Also, trombonists cannot pull off a mullet. But guess who can, and still make more popular music than us? But seriously, you can't do the "hook" easily, if at all, in instrumental music. The "hook" is why people listen...




People relate so much more to "I can hear you sing it to me in in my sleep!" So much more than they do to Vox Gabrieli:

[AndrewMeronek]

That's why Rita Payes and Glenn Miller are so successful, and they are not great trombone players (IMHO).

I don't know much about Rita but from what I understand, Glenn Miller had something of a genius for marketing. That detail probably gets lost if someone just goes and listens and compares Miller's music to what else existed in his time: yes, it was good music and a good band but nothing exceptional. He was doing pretty much the same musical things other successful bands at the time were doing. And in terms of marketing, he kind of got lucky when he got killed during WWII, after which his popularity skyrocketed.

I don't think that's really a career path that any of us want to try.

[EriKon]

Trombone has just as much facility as other instruments.

Well, we're gonna have to agree to disagree on that.

There's a reason trombone parts don't look the same as violin and flute parts.

I thought I had pretty good facility. But, playing a jazz piece the other day I gave up trying to keep up with this sax player: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6c1ooaau ... 54gt7&dl=0

When the trumpeter has to move his fingers 3/4 of an inch to go back and forth between two notes, while trombonists have to move their whole arm back and forth 2.5 feet each way to play the same thing, I think it results in a facility advantage to the instrument requiring less mileage.

I doubt that the reason why people don't listen as much to trombones is because of the fact that other instruments might be able to play more notes in one bar. People listen actively to music because it has to mean something to them. And people seem to forget that most of the music that is been listened to nowadays (via streaming or radio) is passive listening.

[tbdana]

I doubt that the reason why people don't listen as much to trombones is because of the fact that other instruments might be able to play more notes in one bar.

I think it is the reason, or at least part of the reason, in a roundabout way. Among the differences between trombone and more popular instruments is that those other instruments can play more notes, more intervals, more expression, more color, they're easier to play, and easier to play cleaner than trombone. All that put together makes those other instruments more versatile, easier to fit into multiple genres of music, and more able to carry a melody (particularly a complex melody) than the trombone. It also all combines to make trombone sound "not as good" as the other instruments, given a generic genre and identical level of ability.

There's a reason trombone parts aren't written like the parts for saxes, clarinets, flutes, oboes, violins, cellos, pianos, guitars, synthesizers and a host of other instruments. It's because trombonists can't play those parts easily or in a way that sounds good. And they can't play those parts because the trombone has inherently less facility than those other/easier instruments. It's the same reasons tympani has such a limited audience appeal for solo career. Or French horn. Or marimba.

I say "part of the reason" because there are other elements, principally sound quality. We humans inherently prefer notes in an alto/soprano range. Female alto and soprano singers are more suited to popular music than baritones and bases simply because we biologically prefer the higher ranges.

We humans also inherently gravitate toward tones that are more focused and have more core. Narrower, more focused tones are also biologically preferred and therefore more popular in popular music than broader tones (and trombonists are going increasingly toward broader tone qualities, the wrong direction for popular music).

Another element might be the cultural indoctrination of ears to existing musical preferences, making it very difficult to "undo the damage" with regard to trombones. People already expect a certain sound from their solo instruments, and so they show an inherent bias toward those sounds. Those sounds come from the instruments that are easier to play melodic content, and are thus more commonly heard and consumed. This is a frequency bias. McDonalds fries are terrible imitations of real french fries, but people have come to prefer McDonalds fries over better fries because they grew up eating McDonalds and got used to that taste as their unconscious definition of, or association with, french fries. So fries that taste more like McDonalds are more broadly popular than fries that taste less like McDonalds. They're used to it. McDonalds fries result in the activation of well established and deeply grooved pathways in the brain, whereas signals from the taste of other fries don't have an expressway to the pleasure centers in the brain.

I'm sure there are others, and this is all just my off-the-cuff opinion.

But if not these, then what do you think the reason is for the limited audience appeal for solo trombone careers?

People listen actively to music because it has to mean something to them. And people seem to forget that most of the music that is been listened to nowadays (via streaming or radio) is passive listening.

What about those two things (meaning and passive listening) is inconsistent with the trombone?

[EriKon]

I doubt that the reason why people don't listen as much to trombones is because of the fact that other instruments might be able to play more notes in one bar.

I think it is the reason, or at least part of the reason, in a roundabout way. Among the differences between trombone and more popular instruments is that those other instruments can play more notes, more intervals, more expression, more color, they're easier to play, and easier to play cleaner than trombone. All that put together makes those other instruments more versatile, easier to fit into multiple genres of music, and more able to carry a melody (particularly a complex melody) than the trombone. It also all combines to make trombone sound "not as good" as the other instruments, given a generic genre and identical level of ability.

There's a reason trombone parts aren't written like the parts for saxes, clarinets, flutes, oboes, violins, cellos, pianos, guitars, synthesizers and a host of other instruments. It's because trombonists can't play those parts easily or in a way that sounds good. And they can't play those parts because the trombone has inherently less facility than those other/easier instruments. It's the same reasons tympani has such a limited audience appeal for solo career. Or French horn. Or marimba.

I say "part of the reason" because there are other elements, principally sound quality. We humans inherently prefer notes in an alto/soprano range. Female alto and soprano singers are more suited to popular music than baritones and bases simply because we biologically prefer the higher ranges.

We humans also inherently gravitate toward tones that are more focused and have more core. Narrower, more focused tones are also biologically preferred and therefore more popular in popular music than broader tones (and trombonists are going increasingly toward broader tone qualities, the wrong direction for popular music).

Another element might be the cultural indoctrination of ears to existing musical preferences, making it very difficult to "undo the damage" with regard to trombones. People already expect a certain sound from their solo instruments, and so they show an inherent bias toward those sounds. Those sounds come from the instruments that are easier to play melodic content, and are thus more commonly heard and consumed. This is a frequency bias. McDonalds fries are terrible imitations of real french fries, but people have come to prefer McDonalds fries over better fries because they grew up eating McDonalds and got used to that taste as their unconscious definition of, or association with, french fries. So fries that taste more like McDonalds are more broadly popular than fries that taste less like McDonalds. They're used to it. McDonalds fries result in the activation of well established and deeply grooved pathways in the brain, whereas signals from the taste of other fries don't have an expressway to the pleasure centers in the brain.

I'm sure there are others, and this is all just my off-the-cuff opinion.

But if not these, then what do you think the reason is for the limited audience appeal for solo trombone careers?

People listen actively to music because it has to mean something to them. And people seem to forget that most of the music that is been listened to nowadays (via streaming or radio) is passive listening.

What about those two things (meaning and passive listening) is inconsistent with the trombone?

So, why are two of the most popular trombonists, according to the OG post, trombonists who are not known for being very virtuousic? If that would be a significant argument, players like Marshall Gilkes or historically eg. Urbie Green would be the most popular trombone players. I don't use any streaming devices, so I don't know if those actually are or not, but I doubt they are the most popular trombone players by streams on Spotify etc.

Jazz, and especially busy/virtuosic/versatile jazz, isn't popular nowadays at all. Check out the leading genres nowadays:
https://www.statista.com/chart/15763/mo ... worldwide/

7 out of those 10 are more or less dance/party music. Jazz is not. Classical music is the oldest music we have (I'm sure it's not, but to simplify it), so it has other rules. Trombone never was a composer's favorite for solo works and therefore most of the traditional literature is just bad (imo). Especially compared to the great compositions of other solo literature.

My two cents: Limited audience appeal for trombone has mostly two reasons.

1. Trombone mainly isn't used as a solo instrument in popular music. Even in jazz it wasn't used a lot in the beginning. If it is used, the literature/compositions/songs often are a lot worse than those for other instruments.

2. Many individual players tend to play without having in mind what story they want to tell the audience and what the audience would like to hear to have a good experience. If you can tell a story with your instrument, it doesn't matter which kind of instrument you play. That includes not only playing but also compositions (if you write the music on your own).

One more word about passive listening: Rita Payes is much more suitable for passive listening than the average trombone music which tends to be a bit more rough in jazz. But that's similar in saxophones (Dexter Gordon is better than Coltrane in that manner). The difference is that Coltrane is a jazz giant that every instrumentalist in jazz should check out at some point - > more listeners. There are not really any trombone players that are real jazz giants that everyone needs to check them out (although I personally think there are some that would be worth to check out for other instruments as well). So trombone needs to be smooth or danceable/"partyable" to be able to be listened to passively.

[tbdana]

I'm really enjoying your thoughts, Erik. But let me touch on a few things:

So, why are two of the most popular trombonists, according to the OG post, trombonists who are not known for being very virtuousic?

I think that's the wrong question. I'm sure there are a gazillion trombonists who are not very virtuosic. The right question would be something along the lines of why are there only two trombonists with those kind of numbers, when the numbers are so much higher for non-virtuosos of other instruments? That may lead you to the same conclusion, but again, I think there are a great number of trombonists like that (Wayne Henderson comes to mind), and still there's no love and no numbers. I'll also note that I can't think of a single trombonist who is a popular smooth jazz recording artist, and that seems to be right in the pocket of the smooth, passive listening, non-virtuoso archetype.

Yet somehow, Trombone Shorty is (relatively) popular.

My two cents: Limited audience appeal for trombone has mostly two reasons.

1. Trombone mainly isn't used as a solo instrument in popular music. Even in jazz it wasn't used a lot in the beginning. If it is used, the literature/compositions/songs often are a lot worse than those for other instruments.

Ya, but doesn't that kind of beg the question? Why aren't trombones used as a solo instrument in popular music? I posit that it's probably for the reasons I set forth.

2. Many individual players tend to play without having in mind what story they want to tell the audience and what the audience would like to hear to have a good experience. If you can tell a story with your instrument, it doesn't matter which kind of instrument you play. That includes not only playing but also compositions (if you write the music on your own).

Is that unique to trombonists? I mean, can't we say the same thing about players of every instrument? If it's just trombonists, why do you think that is? And if I suddenly start playing having in mind what story I want to tell the audience and what the audience would like to hear (more on that in a sec), would I become a popular solo artist?

As for what audiences want to hear, one of my points was that audiences don't want to hear trombones. So...???

One more word about passive listening: Rita Payes is much more suitable for passive listening than the average trombone music which tends to be a bit more rough in jazz. But that's similar in saxophones (Dexter Gordon is better than Coltrane in that manner). The difference is that Coltrane is a jazz giant that every instrumentalist in jazz should check out at some point - > more listeners.

I dunno, man. Dexter is a jazz giant, for sure. And this also begs the question about why there are saxophone jazz giants, but:

There are not really any trombone players that are real jazz giants.

I think that goes back to the horn being so much more cumbersome, with it's relative lack of facility, and also the tone profile (audiences don't gravitate toward trombone tones like they do tenor sax tones).

So trombone needs to be smooth or danceable/"partyable" to be able to be listened to passively.

Rita Payes is a good example of that, right? I swear, if that's all we need to do in order to be popular, I'm gonna do nothing but that starting today.

But I don't think it's that simple where Rita is concerned. There's more to it. When she became popular she was a very young and attractive girl with a trombone and she was a lovely singer. All this makes her something of a "novelty act," at least in terms of getting attention. After that, she has to hit it out of the park, and she did. Her market is international. Her mother markets her. Through her mother she had all sorts of contacts and "ins" in the industry that the rest of us lack. And she had the novelty thing going for her. I gotta say, if it was you or me doing exactly the same playing, I don't think either of us becomes a star. (Sorry! I know you had your hopes up! )

And if it were as simple as playing bossa novas in a smooth style, there would be thousands of popular trombonists. I think you're absolutely correct about passive listening and popular music audiences, but I don't think tailoring repertoire and style to passive listening is the holy grail here. I'm willing to give it a try, though!

I think you have a piece of the truth. I think I have a piece of the truth. And if we can figure out a formula to make us all popular solo trombonists, we can all make millions.

[fiddlefestival]

I think I would agree with EriKon's 2 arguments in his post above.

In contrast, I am more skeptical about the claim that the argument that the low profile of trombonists is caused by a lower ratio of notes played per second. Or that it is the wrong register (which is the same as cello or guitar) or that soprano voices are more attractive. Rather, trombone has some inherent attractive qualities, such as phrasing and using microtonality that are hard or impossible to do on other instruments (fretted string instruments for example). That didn't hold back guitar - but this missing characteristic was enough of a limitation that a whole set of variants of guitar was developed, slide, lap steel, dobro, pedal steel.

Rita Payes' success is not due to notes/second, but different and novel textures, whether the duos with her mother or her last recording. Much of it is unexpected, nylon string guitars, big band, choir, string quartet, yet blends in a coherent way. Trombone is still the main featured instrument, giving the instrument an exposure it apparently has been lacking.

EriKon, for comparison the two trombonists you mention (and for good measure, the famous German one).
Under 10k
Marshall Gilkes 7k
Ian Bousfield 3k Urbie Green 4k
Albert Mangelsdorff 3k

[tbdana]

So, fiddlefestival, why do you think trombones have such a limited audience appeal for solo careers? And why don't trombonists do what will get them rich and famous?

I am more skeptical about the claim that the argument that the low profile of trombonists is caused by a lower ratio of notes played per second.

Absolutely no one has made that argument, especially not me. I said relative lack of facility. That doesn't mean notes per second, although it does include the ability to play more notes per second. Please, no one get hung up on that. That's a straw man and a mischaracterization.

Rita Payes' success is not due to notes/second, but different and novel textures, whether the duos with her mother or her last recording. Much of it is unexpected, nylon string guitars, big band, choir, string quartet, yet blends in a coherent way. Trombone is still the main featured instrument, giving the instrument an exposure it apparently has been lacking.

Again, no one has said anything about notes per second (except you and Erik). Rita has certainly hit on something. But I think there are lots of people who do or can have exactly that sound. That's partly her smooth style (which I love) and partly an orchestration/recording technique thing (which I also love). I could do that. But I doubt it would make me a popular soloist. With Rita I think it's as much about who she is as what/how she plays.

Next week I'm recording Astor Piazzola's "Oblivion" with just me and an acoustic guitar. I sure hope it rockets me to stardom!

Okay, I think I've polluted this thread enough. I'll only chime in now if someone continues to misrepresent what I've said, or to respond to someone else's brilliant, life-changing insight.

[harrisonreed]

There's a reason trombone parts aren't written like the parts for saxes, clarinets, flutes, oboes, violins, cellos, pianos, guitars, synthesizers and a host of other instruments. It's because trombonists can't play those parts easily or in a way that sounds good. And they can't play those parts because the trombone has inherently less facility than those other/easier instruments.

Christian: håll min öl!



Sounds easy enough to me.

[tbdana]

Sounds easy enough to me.

Great! Post a recording of you playing it.

Aw, crap. I already broke my promise...

[Doug Elliott]

A lot of it is marketing and timing.
Glenn Miler isn't on the list because he was a trombone player. It was his band's popularity.
Rita had several huge advantages including a very early start and the Sant Andreu Jazz Band's novelty and popularity as a fantastic kids band. Besides being a really great musician herself, among a bunch of other really great young musicians.

Popularity contests don't mean a whole lot. Reminds me of that idiotic TV show Family Feud and "the most popular answers" to stupid questions.

[WilliamLang]

Willie Colon might deserve a place in this discussion. Latin music has always utilized trombones quite well.

[BGuttman]

Willie Colon might deserve a place in this discussion. Latin music has always utilized trombones quite well.

Latin music is again a niche genre. There are all manner of excellent trombone players, but if they don't satisfy a public fancy, they exist in their admittedly small world. I remember reading that JJ Johnson had a day job as a drawing inspector at Sperry Instruments, a major Long Island defense contractor, when gigs were sparse. And JJ was at the very top of his field.

[WilliamLang]

Willie Colon: 9,050,248 monthly listeners

[fiddlefestival]

William, you nailed it here. Willie Colon does not only have an audience that is big for a trombone player (like Glenn Miller or Rita Payes), but it is huge for any musician. 9 million monthly listeners. Completely different ballpark than what we had been discussing so far.

I didn't know that Willie Colon was a trombone player, so didn't look him up. I knew about Rico Rodriguez (very similar numbers to JJ Johnson and Slide Hampton), so he was in my original post. But I'm not knowledgeable about trombone and the others I knew about and looked up like Raulzinho, Zé da Velha, were in the Bousfield/Alessi range. And since they are not trombonists commonly mentioned in this forum, I didn't list them. The exception would be João Donato (pushing a million), but those are his jazz piano recordings, no trombone on those (he played trombone with Tito Puente and Eddie Palmieri).

[AndrewMeronek]

7 out of those 10 are more or less dance/party music. Jazz is not.

Tons of jazz is great dance music.

[Trombo]

Jazz before bebop was dance music. And Glenn Miller's music was more dance than jazz in today's sense.
Glenn Miller's genius was that he understood that the music that musicians liked was not liked by the general public at all. I read somewhere that he regularly held a vote among the musicians of his orchestra, which piece from their repertoire they liked the most. After which he excluded the piece that the musicians liked from the orchestra's repertoire.
Parker and Gillespie acted in the opposite way, inventing bebop.
The result is well known - modern jazz, based on bebop, is music for musicians, of little interest to the general public.

[Trombo]

We humans inherently prefer notes in an alto/soprano range. Female alto and soprano singers are more suited to popular music than baritones and bases simply because we biologically prefer the higher ranges.

We humans also inherently gravitate toward tones that are more focused and have more core. Narrower, more focused tones are also biologically preferred and therefore more popular in popular music than broader tones (and trombonists are going increasingly toward broader tone qualities, the wrong direction for popular music).

This makes sense. I wondered why the famous concertos of Albrechtsberger and Wagenseil were written for alto trombone and not for tenor, which also existed then?

[BGuttman]

We humans inherently prefer notes in an alto/soprano range. Female alto and soprano singers are more suited to popular music than baritones and bases simply because we biologically prefer the higher ranges.

We humans also inherently gravitate toward tones that are more focused and have more core. Narrower, more focused tones are also biologically preferred and therefore more popular in popular music than broader tones (and trombonists are going increasingly toward broader tone qualities, the wrong direction for popular music).

This makes sense. I wondered why the famous concertos of Albrechtsberger and Wagenseil were written for alto trombone and not for tenor, which also existed then?

I'm not sure I buy this fully. The mot popular singers of the Big Band era were females who sang in the lyric soprano to mezzo range and men who sang in the baritone range (between tenor and bass). Classical solos most commonly used a full range voice (piano), soprano (violin) and low tenor to baritone (cello).

I'm sure that Maximilien could expound better, but solos that featured the trombone, few as they are, included both the alto voice and the tenor voice.

One thing that may be a factor supporting your argument might be that historically men controlled the finances and a high voice felt to men like a sexual partner. Of course this doesn't explain why the dominant solo voice in the modern Big Band is the tenor saxophone.

I wish there was a clear answer to the original question. If we knew what would make the trombone more popular with the public more of us could make a living playing it.

[Trombo]

The answer is very simple. Trombonists should all switch to alto trombone in solo performance and under no circumstances play bebop.
That was a joke.
Seriously, trombonists should more often remember Glenn Miller's principle: "The music that musicians like, as a rule, does not please the general public."

[officermayo]

The reason Shorty is so popular compared to Rita is actually pretty simple. The public has no discernment when it comes to what is truly good music.

That's why Dollar General has three separate shelves of Little Debbie cakes but doesn't carry gourmet food.

Of course I've been wrong before as I remarried my ex wife.

[harrisonreed]

This makes sense. I wondered why the famous concertos of Albrechtsberger and Wagenseil were written for alto trombone and not for tenor, which also existed then?

I don't think there is a definitive consensus that those solos actually were written for alto. A lot of the passages in them, particularly the trills, make a lot more sense on a Bb instrument.

[tbdana]

Of course I've been wrong before as I remarried my ex wife.

Is that true? If so, I think that's awesome! I love stories like that.

The sentence is also funny as hell.

[harrisonreed]

Of course I've been wrong before as I remarried my ex wife.

Hey, don't be so hard on yourself. You might've been right all along!

[AndrewMeronek]

Jazz before bebop was dance music. And Glenn Miller's music was more dance than jazz in today's sense.

There are a lot of people who try to pigeonhole jazz as being strictly and only bebop and its derivatives, and this just isn't the case.

Weather Report
Antonio Carlos Jobim
Machito
Snarky Puppy
Steely Dan
Blood Sweat & Tears
Sergio Mendez
Frank Sinatra
Kenny G

We can "categorize" all of the above into some other modern genres, but these are all also jazz. AND these are all dance. Some music can be more than one genre.

Sorry, I guess this has become a pet peeve of mine as I've gotten older and grumpier.

[WilliamLang]

Trombone Shorty is a good musician. So is Rita Payes - one doesn't take from the other.

[GGJazz]

Hi Folks.

In my opinion , Glenn Miller music is not Jazz Music . To me , this is the "Pop/ dance " style of the '40.
Of course , is Jazz-derivated .
Nothing wrong , I love this Band !

The Count Basie Orchestra was playing for dance too in that period , but they was playing JAZZ , no questions about it .

Anyway , nearly at the same time that Miller' Band was playing " In The Mood" , " Moonlight Serenade" , etc , same others musicians was performing some Music that we can call JAZZ , without any doubt .
And there was not only Big Bands , but also groups as quartet and quintet , performing in small clubs as the next generation of Jazzman did ( the bop musicians) .

Here , the first recording of Duke Ellington' " Black , Brown , and Beige", 1943


Here , Lester Young 4et : " Indiana" , 1942


About what Trombo wrote above , "The music that musicians like , as a rule , do not please the general public" , that can be true ; but this is the way business man act in the market...
If so , we never had masterpieces as Stravinsky' " Rite of Spring" , or Thelonious Monk' "Evidence" , etc.

In my opinion , there is COMMERCIAL music , CLASSICAL music , JAZZ music , ROCK music , POP music etc .
They are all quite different, but there is room for everything !
Pop music sell xxxxxxxxxxxxx K$ , Jazz music sell xxx K $ .....
Everybody in the world know who is Beyonce' ; really few know who is Bob Brookmeyer ...
That' s perfectly fine , to me !

Regards
Giancarlo

[officermayo]

Trombone Shorty is a good musician. So is Rita Payes - one doesn't take from the other.

Perhaps, but my beef is that the students I hear locally have chosen to blast away like Shorty as opposed to playing with finess and style like Rita.

Then again, VHS was chosen over Beta by the unwashed masses. I shouldn't be surprised.

[NathanSobieralski]

FWIW- When I took my trumpet studio to ITG (International Trumpet Guild) they kept saying "Dr. Sobieralski!! look there's so and so, and look over there its you know who!!" of course, I did not know anything about any of these people...because they are social media famous. Instagram and the like. The traditional route of recorded soloist is rapidly becoming a thing of the past, I think.

[robcat2075]

I've generally felt that the trombone's greatest strength is as an ensemble instrument, in a trombone section. Some of the most memorable moments in music are trombone-section-related. That strength dwarfs Its charms as a solo instrument.

It can be wonderful to hear the trombone step out for a brief solo in a larger jazz or orchestral work, but in my life i've been to one solo trombone recital that didn't leave me feeling i had merely fulfilled a duty.

Part of it is the lit which is largely of interest to trombone-players only. Meanwhile a strong college pianist or cellist or violinist can put together a real show.

But it is also the instrument. It is nearly impossible for a solo trombone to remain compelling for even a modest concertante work. Trombone + piano is an unfelicitous combination.