Don't ask me what jazz is. It is indefinable.

Any discussion of jazz always seems to end with a falling out over terminology, and I guess there are just lots of types of music that are grouped under the heading of jazz.

Recent letter writers have mentioned Ken Vandermark and the Urban Knights.

I checked them out with an open mind, never having heard of either.

Here is Ken Vandermark:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/recsradio/radio/B000GFK8P6

Sound like a load of incomprehensible honking and screeching to me. If this music makes you happy, then go for it. If it ain't got that swing...

And here are the Urban Knights

http://www.amazon.com/gp/recsradio/radio/B0000001US

Sounds like easy listening light soul/pop to me--the kind of thing you would hear in a hairdressing salon on the radio--but again, if this is what puts you into a state of ecstasy, then go for it.

We all have this tendency to try to convert others to listening to the music that we love, the music that moves our souls, because we want them to share our joy, but really it is a waste of time. You can only take the horse somewhere in sight of the water, and if the horse wants to be a mule, that is the end of the matter.

I am never going to fall in love with Ken Vandermark. I am never going to put myself into a state of ecstasy listening to his stuff while I am barreling up the highway. (If I did pla play his stuff, I would never notice that truck honking behind me or the squealing tires.)

Give me that old time jazz stuff,

It was good for our mothers...

...And it's good enough for me.

The two best conversations between rock and jazz that ever made the charts in America.

Heard it in a looo-oove song...

can't be wrong.

Yes, "Flip Fantasia" is another good example of collaboration. Also, the Black Eyed Peas (whatever you think of them) did a song with Sergio Mendez. That brings up Latin Jazz, which has also barely been mentioned on this thread. Lots of salsa bands (popular music where I live) incorporate big band sounds and instruments. And even though this is also "older," I love Stan Getz, Antonio Carlos Jobim, and bossa nova more generally. Another fun recording is an album called "Classic Meets Cuba." Not jazz and rock, but Latin-tinged versions of familiar classical tunes. Some of it has jazz qualities. I suspect that the snobs will criticize the album, but from a music teacher's perspective, it's great.

As for the snobby elitism, most of the jazz musicians I know (and most of them are truly amazing musicians) are about as non-elitist as can be. They just want to play music and pay their bills. They'll play in a 70s cover band one night, a more modern funk band the next night, then a big dance band at a retirement party, and small combos other nights. Then they will wake up on Sunday morning to play at a church service (contemporary, gospel, or classical sounding brass quintet). They live on the coasts and everywhere in between. And they listen to all sorts of stuff, including (outside of jazz) Mahler, John Adams, Bach, Josquin Desprez, live electro-acoustic music concerts full of composers you will never encounter otherwise, Alicia Keys, Radiohead, Willie Nelson, 2Pac, Johnny Cash, Erykah Badu, and the list could go on and on. They compose jazz music, pop music, and other stuff that brings in some extra cash. Elitism seems to exist more frequently among those who are not actually practicing musicians, or at least those who feel like they need to prove their own legitimacy.

The type of jazz that I like, such Bitches Brew and Bill Frisell, sounds a lot like the ambient/techno I also enjoy. To paraphrase a previous poster, it's when a bunch of technically proficient jazz virtuosos start soloing over the same set of chords that I get turned off.

Unfortunately, "louder, faster, higher" will never make up for the lack of a coherent melody.

Absolutely brilliant, Gary! Thanks from a fellow lover of these two worlds of music that take the body and the soul to new heights. Both are all about thinking real hard AND profusely letting go, aren't they?

That was a beautifully written article, and I thank you for articulating some of my own impressions of both rock and jazz better than I can. You even put your finger on some of my frustrations with each of the arts. I usually avoid articles about music, since music is very personal and is something that I enjoy tremendously in many forms, and strong opinions from shameless blow-hards inevitably irritate me. But this article was actually a relief, in that I truly understand more of my own thinking than before I read the article. Again, thank you.

After reading it I was inspired to go dig up some of the jazz in my collection. Miles Davis's "Kind of Blue" really is incredible. It gave me shivers.

But then I did something I shouldn't have, and I read some of the letters, and suddenly I was -- quite predictably -- very turned off.

Sigh.

I have studied music for a long time. I decided long ago not to try to make it my profession, and playing music was relegated to being a hobby, but I am passionate about music, nonetheless. And music is nearly always playing in my home, sometimes in the background, sometimes just because I simply feel like listening closely to some music, and sometimes even when I am playing one of my instruments.

But all at once, as I listened to Miles Davis for the first time in several weeks, all that has kept me away from Jazz was conjured back up when I read some of the letters.

You see, one of my biggest problems with jazz has always been the jazz people. Jazzies. They are so often some of the most self-righteous and obnoxious people on the planet, and this tends to be exacerbated by some sort of inferiority complex. Theirs is the ONLY TRUE ART in music. Theirs is the one American creation, the sole beauty, etc. Jazz is all that is good, and all that is good is jazz. Right.

One could write a book full of metaphors to illustrate why and how this is irritating to those of us who listen to anything but jazz (even if we do, in fact, listen to a lot of jazz), but I'll restrain myself to one: pretentious myopia. To be fair, Jazzies are not the only guilty party in this regard. But they are some of the most guilty. Also, not all those who listen to Jazz are Jazzies. But it doesn't take many to ruin the reputation.

Once upon a time Jazz was the people's music. My version of its history is that it grew up in the apartment over the bar, and then moved away to college, and it stayed away and became a professor. It's still there now.

Rock is younger, still growing up, but it's a different world now. A lot has happened. A lot is still happening.

It's unfair to say that one genre has properties that the other lacks, in sophistication or in visceral accessibility or anything. This discussion would be interesting if someone were actually open to having it, and I think that a Jazz purist could learn a lot from a hard-corps metal-head, and vise versa. It's unfair to deny ANYONE the hard, long hours they've spent with their instrument(s), and belittle their work or aspirations, no matter their choice of sound. It's similarly unfair to deny anyone their connection to their favorite records.

After reading a couple letters, I got a bad taste in my mouth. I turned off Miles for now. I'm listening to Tool.

Anyway, thank you. The article really was great.

Rock on, cool cats.