btw soul station is one of my favorite hard bop albums. and hank is a very original tenor player. sits right up there on my list with coltrane, and rollins.
What anger and disrespect? Music is supposed to bring people together and it does, that's why we care about it so much. And that's why we get so bloody irate when people who haven't got a fucking clue about music go on about how great they think the music they hear is without a) understanding it properly or b) even knowing that what they're hearing is just the commerical scheidt spoonfed to them because they're too lazy to go out and find out about real music. As far as I'm concerned a person has no right to enter into a debate about music if they fail to meet the following requirements. a) can read music. b) can write music. c) have a basic understanding of music theory. d) can play at least one instrument e) knows the difference between a genre of music and its respective commercial immitations. (this is the important one for you). Now getting back to the topic at hand, Jamie Cullum's music is different, and original and good and interesting, IF and ONLY IF, all you compare it to is the other commercial crap that's in the spotlight. He's not bringing jazz into the spotlight he's just bringing HIMSELF into the spotlight by deviating from jazz. The fact is that most people who call themselves music lovers have difficulty making an effort listening and understanding intellectual music. The market has made this worse by making things progressively easier for them. It's like working all day in a coal mine and being careful re-entering daylight for fear of going blind. Someone used to the commerical pop rubbish hear's Jamie Cullum and thinks - ahhh, that must be jazz. But play them real jazz and they'll probably switch it off not having a clue how to appreciate it. And don't give me that bollocks about jazz being dead. Jazz isn't dead at all, it's very much alive to the people who care about it. Jazz musicians. To people who don't play jazz and probably dont' know what it is these days thanks to all the mislabeling by the likes of Jazz FM and all those shockingly jazz-free albums such as "the very best of smooth jazz" (which doesn't contain more than 1 jazz tune on the whole 2CD album), it really doesn't matter. It's the same as with classical music. You either like it or you don't, and if you don't it doesn't matter and if you do then you can manage on your own without it being forced upon everyone else. Ok the masses of tabloid reading imbeciles would rather hear Kylie Minogue than Duke Ellington or J.S. Bach. Their loss. But when they start saying "Oooh Ooh I like jazz, that Jamie Cullum is great" then that's just taking the piss. It's just like the armchair football fan who follows Manchester United from his semi in Reigate (or perhaps his local) claiming to be a "loyal supporter" as if the team receive his encouragement from the stands each week. He doesn't REALLY know about football, he probably hasn't heard of more than a quarter of the professional teams in England. You compare Jamie Cullum to any CURRENT jazz legends, never mind those who are sadly no longer with us and a complete amateur is revealed. For a start, he's a singer. Vocal Jazz is an oxymoron. You have to be VERY good, eg Ella Fitzgerald or Billy Holiday to be a singer and call yourself a jazz musician. And the very fact that he's IN the spotlight makes it all wrong. Dear oh dear, and to think that they called Headhunters a sellout album!
i usually dont like debating but here goes nothing. 1. i think there is alot of anger and disrespect in calling somebody a ****. 2. if you don't like people who deviate from jazz, how could you like Headhunters (you meantioned it in your post)? 3. just because music is simple doesn't mean it is bad. jazz evolved from the blues. it doesnt get simpler than the blues. period. 4. smooth jazz is not jazz. it is a compilation of SMOOTH jazz. 5. fairweather fans (as described in your football analogy) are a part of nature. you wouldnt hate a team just because other people like it. thats letting other people control your taste in music, which is exactly what you are against. 6. i wouldn't put jamie cullum in the jazz category either. but just because he is not jazz doesn't make him bad. every type of music has things to be taken from it. 7. it's billie holiday not billy (no worries i make typo's all the time) hope i didn't rub you the wrong way. keep on speaking your mind, and helping to keep jazz alive!
At the end of the day this is just your opinion. Your opinions show someone who is very narrow minded. If someone likes Jamie Cullum WHAT'S IT TO YOU ??? I happen to hate Westlife but I don't give anyone a hard time for listening to them. You are showing no respect for anyone differening in opinion to you. I think you know nowt about jazz anyway. So there!!
Jamie Cullum, Westlife, there's not a lot in it if you ask me. Can't believe I spelt Billie Holliday's name with a y.
slightly deviating from the subject, but headhunters in my opinion is def. in my top two of herbie albums.
i agree with sax machine, to an extent, i think anyone that falls within his criteria has a more valid opinion about music but at the end of the day if we are to take things at a pure aesthetic value its about opinion, some like jamie cullum, some dont but as far as i can see this is a debate about whether jamie cullum is a jazz musician or not (considering i started this) and as far as im concerned he's not. if you wanna claim jamie cullum is a jazz artist, then so are westlife, as they've done an album of jazz covers...so yeah i agree with sax machine jamie cullum is as jazz as westlife are.
Errol Garner, Chet Baker, Wes Montgomery, Buddy Rich all couldn't read music and all were top jazz men. Saxy and Spyder you know next to zero
what we're trying to say is that, the more educated you are about music, the more you can show your opinion, obviously those people had a knowledge about what their instruments could do and were virtuoso's on them. But those of us that can read music can critically pick at music however this doesnt change the fact that jamie cullum (regaurdless of his musical abilities) is about as jazz as westlife so thank you very much, but accually i'll think you'll find that i know quite a lot and sax does also by the seems of it
I've forgotten more about jazz than u and saxy will ever know. Jamie Cullum is a fine artist. U pair are just jealous
I disagree with sax machine. A good musician has soul. Soul cannot be achieved by learning scales. He who has the most soul has the most valid opinion. This is disconcerting to people who spend a lot of time learning scales in order to become a musician. For them it is simply a profession. These people have no souls and are evil and shouldn't play music, but therefore they do, because they suck.
you started out making a decent enough (yet slightly flawed point) but then you just got ridiculous. Having musical theory will help your performance no end. whilst i feel soul is important (as i know people who just read fucking ntoes, and dont do anything to make it their own, which is jsut boring and uninspired) but threory is very relevant. For example, you may want to go for a certain kind of sound, and you may be able to think to yourself, hey, if i wrote it in dorian mode, it might acheive that. you cannot do this without the theory of dorian mode. you need theory to be able to play at a better level. simple.
yes pablo, im very jealous, it consumes me all this is fine and dandy, yes a good musician has soul, and yes i think jamie cullum can play the piano very well! dont doubt that, i also dont doubt that he isa very popular musician that effects people in a very deep way but that doesnt change the fact that he's not a jazz musician!
