Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Jazz Fusion or Jazz Prog Fusion
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedJazz Fusion or Jazz Prog Fusion

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
Message
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Prog Specialist

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19459
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 22:13
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

I don't like where this is heading.

Let me try to rephrase Iván's question:

"Is all of Jazz-Fusion Prog?"

I don't think so. Imagine that the prog metal team would say: All technical Thrash/Death metal is prog. I don't think this is a sane thing to do, and neither is to include all Jazz Fusion or Jazz-Rock. Just my two cents ... since I'm still a newbie when it comes to Jazz-Fusion, feel free to ignore this post, but maybe some of you might agree.
 
Let's use the Venn diagrams  to make it easy: (Sorry for the quality of colors, I'm not an expert: Wink
 
 
In theory, we should only add to Prog Fusion the red section, the yellow one to Prog Fusion Related or maybe another variety of Fusion, and completely ignore the the rest, including simple Jazz Rock in blue..
 
Am I OK?
 
Are we doing this?
 
Iván
            
Back to Top
jammun View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3447
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 22:15

I've tried to articulate this before, perhaps unsuccessfully, so I'll try it again.

For those of us who were listening to prog in the late-60's/early-70's, it was virtually a natural progression that we would start listening to fusion (RTF, WR, Miles, HH), because just at the time that traditional progressive-rock was stagnating, fusion was growing its wings; and, lo, it had many of the same characteristics that we loved in progressive rock:  complex songs and way-competent musicianship, opening our minds to really endless new possibilities.  I remember seeing Mahavishnu O opening for ELP 'round about '72, if you get my drift. 

I can't tell you much about the people who frequent this site, but I can tell you that if they found their way here at all it is because they are inclined to like  'challenging' music, which I would think would include fusion and even traditional jazz.  (Jeez, I stumbled upon the site looking for a Rush review (hardly my definition of a 'pure' prog band)).  Hence there is a fusion category here.  I agree it is disorienting to see Kind of Blue there as the most popular album, but that will eventually fade and we'll see We Want Miles up there.Big%20smile

History sez that during the time frame in question there was cross-pollination that made categorization next to impossible.  I understand the impulse to keep the site 'pure', but history tells us that music is an inveterate and lecherous cross-breeder (who woulda thunk that Robert Johnson would beget Led Zep).



Edited by jammun - August 22 2008 at 22:16
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 59081
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 22:26
Originally posted by jammun jammun wrote:

I've tried to articulate this before, perhaps unsuccessfully, so I'll try it again.

For those of us who were listening to prog in the late-60's/early-70's, it was virtually a natural progression that we would start listening to fusion (RTF, WR, Miles, HH), because just at the time that traditional progressive-rock was stagnating, fusion was growing its wings; and, lo, it had many of the same characteristics that we loved in progressive rock:  complex songs and way-competent musicianship, opening our minds to really endless new possibilities.  I remember seeing Mahavishnu O opening for ELP 'round about '72, if you get my drift. 

I can't tell you much about the people who frequent this site, but I can tell you that if they found their way here at all it is because they are inclined to like  'challenging' music, which I would think would include fusion and even traditional jazz.  (Jeez, I stumbled upon the site looking for a Rush review (hardly my definition of a 'pure' prog band)).  Hence there is a fusion category here.  I agree it is disorienting to see Kind of Blue there as the most popular album, but that will eventually fade and we'll see We Want Miles up there.Big%20smile

History sez that during the time frame in question there was cross-pollination that made categorization next to impossible.  I understand the impulse to keep the site 'pure', but history tells us that music is an inveterate and lecherous cross-breeder (who woulda thunk that Robert Johnson would beget Led Zep).



very well said, and what a great time when bands as MO and ELP both on one bill was common.. but what's you're opinion on whether artists who didn't do Prog or JR/F per se should be added to the site;  i.e. Herbie Hancock who did fusion of all sorts involving jazz, world, funk, experimental, ambient, rock, etc. but who was not seen as a 'Jazz Rock/Fusion' artist the way Di Meola or Bruford were..?





Back to Top
darkshade View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Jazz Rock/Fusion Team

Joined: November 19 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 10964
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 22:30
Originally posted by jammun jammun wrote:

  I agree it is disorienting to see Kind of Blue there as the most popular album, but that will eventually fade and we'll see We Want Miles up there.Big%20smile



YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
Back to Top
jammun View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3447
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 22:35
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

Originally posted by jammun jammun wrote:

I've tried to articulate this before, perhaps unsuccessfully, so I'll try it again.

For those of us who were listening to prog in the late-60's/early-70's, it was virtually a natural progression that we would start listening to fusion (RTF, WR, Miles, HH), because just at the time that traditional progressive-rock was stagnating, fusion was growing its wings; and, lo, it had many of the same characteristics that we loved in progressive rock:  complex songs and way-competent musicianship, opening our minds to really endless new possibilities.  I remember seeing Mahavishnu O opening for ELP 'round about '72, if you get my drift. 

I can't tell you much about the people who frequent this site, but I can tell you that if they found their way here at all it is because they are inclined to like  'challenging' music, which I would think would include fusion and even traditional jazz.  (Jeez, I stumbled upon the site looking for a Rush review (hardly my definition of a 'pure' prog band)).  Hence there is a fusion category here.  I agree it is disorienting to see Kind of Blue there as the most popular album, but that will eventually fade and we'll see We Want Miles up there.Big%20smile

History sez that during the time frame in question there was cross-pollination that made categorization next to impossible.  I understand the impulse to keep the site 'pure', but history tells us that music is an inveterate and lecherous cross-breeder (who woulda thunk that Robert Johnson would beget Led Zep).



very well said, and what a great time when bands as MO and ELP both on one bill was common.. but what's you're opinion on whether artists who didn't do Prog or JR/F per se should be added to the site;  i.e. Herbie Hancock who did fusion of all sorts involving jazz, world, funk, experimental, ambient, rock, etc. but who was not seen as a 'Jazz Rock/Fusion' artist the way Di Meola or Bruford were..?


 
I am mixed on Herbie.  I don't see the rock component there; I see him more funk-influened as in Sly Stone or Ohio Players or EW&F.  But as I just posted in another sub-forum if he's here I don't have a problem with that, but ya better start looking at Keith Jarret as well (the masterful solo albums especially).
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 43939
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 23:07
Clap

guess Keith will be next on the firing line after HH. LOL

however....as I posted earlier... there is a subtlety to the additions and proposals so far.... 

anyone sharp enough to pick up on it.. and where Jarret is in the same mold as a very famous... prominent though . controversial fixture of the J-R/F sub-genre

bonus points for being close...  and yes... he would  be a great addition...


Edited by micky - August 22 2008 at 23:09
The Diet Coke of Evil....
Back to Top
jammun View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3447
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 23:24
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Clap

guess Keith will be next on the firing line after HH. LOL

however....as I posted earlier... there is a subtlety to the additions and proposals so far.... 

anyone sharp enough to pick up on it.. and where Jarret is in the same mold as a very famous... prominent though . controversial fixture of the J-R/F sub-genre

bonus points for being close...  and yes... he would  be a great addition...
 
I'm just thinking of the big four keyboard players that came out of the Miles bands:  Corea, Zawinul, Hancock, Jarrett.  Probably get me in trouble, but one for all and all for one.  These guys basically wrote the book on fusion keyboards in the '70's.
Back to Top
timesignature View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: April 29 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 52
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 23:28
not quite sure what i would say about that, but so that i can get an understanding would any of you call joe satriani prog?
Back to Top
jammun View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3447
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 23:31
Originally posted by timesignature timesignature wrote:

not quite sure what i would say about that, but so that i can get an understanding would any of you call joe satriani prog?
 
Being a keyboard player, I generally pay no attention to what's happening on the guitar end Wink
Back to Top
timothy leary View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5050
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 23:32
I saw yes and the eagles together in richmond virginia way back when, can the eagles get on and .......nevermind
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 59081
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2008 at 23:38
Originally posted by timesignature timesignature wrote:

not quite sure what i would say about that, but so that i can get an understanding would any of you call joe satriani prog?


Satch came up about about six months ago.. I believe the feeling among members and Collabs was that he was excellent instrumental rock and albums as Time Machine, Engines of Creation (maybe others as Extremist) were indeed progressive, certainly compared to his more commercial stuff, but not really prog.. but as things evolove here, you never know...Wink


Back to Top
ShW1 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2005
Location: Sambation
Status: Offline
Points: 282
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2008 at 01:35
1. I guess Jazz-rock has always something that 'falls between the chairs' in terms of categoration...
I'm not a Jazz rock expert, far from that, but I would suggest that complex structures of jazz-rock would considered to be belong here, while more simple structures would not... the rock elements are less important here IMHO (thank you Ivan for the Vann diagrams... Smile
 
2. While deeling with this issue I have a question that I think of a long time, I'm not sure this is the right place to ask it, but I'll try nevertheless, and I hope some of the experts/collabs will answer: Why is Chick Corea, and few of his albums are not included here? I do not mean the pure jazz albums of course, but Ilbums such as 'Spanish Heart' and 'mad Hatter' are got to be here IMHO ...
Back to Top
BroSpence View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 05 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2614
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2008 at 02:36
I don't understand the difference between Progressive Jazz Fusion and Progressive Fusion Related. I feel that a majority of the groups that are in the Prog Jazz/Fusion category fit more appropriately with the term Progressive Fusion.

Groups that are clearly in the rock idiom, but display much technical understanding and showmanship.   

Jazz-Rock and Jazz Fusion (or Progressive Fusion as I believe it to be) are completely different in my book.

One is jazz based with rock influence (like middle era miles, Tony Williams Lifetime, early Larry Coryell, maybe even John Abercrombie's Gateway albums) the other is in rock form but takes a portion of influence from Jazz music. (Jean Luc-Ponty, most Return to Forever, Colosseum, Al Di Meola solo, Jeff Beck, Brand X, etc).

Then there is a whole other level that could be considered Jazz or Rock fusion. A group that is based in one form or the other but takes influence from many sources, not just jazz or rock. Like Jon Hassel, Weather Report, Mahavishnu Orchestra, a good amount of McLaughlin's solo material...

All of these styles while different are able to coexist in one lump. So, I think a split up would be a bit too much and feel that since the groups are all in the same place anyone is able to tell the difference between the different groups styles. I have absolutely no problem with the allowing of certain artists. Keep up the good work.
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 17173
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2008 at 02:46
*sigh*  ... I wish that one of the experts here could finally say something about the true question asked by Iván and myself:

"Is all of Jazz-Fusion Prog?"
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 28871
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2008 at 03:04
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:



no...  all fusion is not prog... that is what we have genre teams for.. they evaluate the music on it's merits.. and decide if it belongs on the site or not. 


As I recall back in the day, Manhattan Transfer was certainly jazz fusion and certainly not prog, if that thought lends any clarification...


Edited by Slartibartfast - August 23 2008 at 03:04
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 17173
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2008 at 03:44
Let's have a look at the current definition:

"Jazz Rock/Fusion definition: Sometimes includes progressive jazz. This style fuses traditional jazz arrangements, instruments, and performance style with elements of progressive rock. The result is usually instrumental jazz-rock with a somewhat more technical and complex edge. Very interesting to listen to - especially if you are a musician who marvels at the amazing virtuosity of some of these artists."

I think it would be really helpful if that definition could be expanded, explaining the difference between the kind of fusion that can be included here and non-prog fusion. Perhaps, to get things started, the experts of the genre could list some fusion artists/albums which should not be included.
Back to Top
mr70s View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 21 2008
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 121
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2008 at 07:16

Let's just throw open the flood gates to all jazz rock fusion. After all, there's always an element of rock, and it is progressive (by strict definition).  Wink 

Back to Top
Dick Heath View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Jazz-Rock Specialist

Joined: April 19 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 12618
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2008 at 08:24
Originally posted by jammun jammun wrote:

I've tried to articulate this before, perhaps unsuccessfully, so I'll try it again.

For those of us who were listening to prog in the late-60's/early-70's, it was virtually a natural progression that we would start listening to fusion (RTF, WR, Miles, HH), because just at the time that traditional progressive-rock was stagnating, fusion was growing its wings; and, lo, it had many of the same characteristics that we loved in progressive rock:  complex songs and way-competent musicianship, opening our minds to really endless new possibilities.  I remember seeing Mahavishnu O opening for ELP 'round about '72, if you get my drift. 


I can't tell you much about the people who frequent this site, but I can tell you that if they found their way here at all it is because they are inclined to like  'challenging' music, which I would think would include fusion and even traditional jazz.  (Jeez, I stumbled upon the site looking for a Rush review (hardly my definition of a 'pure' prog band)).  Hence there is a fusion category here.  I agree it is disorienting to see Kind of Blue there as the most popular album, but that will eventually fade and we'll see We Want Miles up there.Big%20smile



That what I was trying to write-but you are more succinct

History sez that during the time frame in question there was cross-pollination that made categorization next to impossible.  I understand the impulse to keep the site 'pure', but history tells us that music is an inveterate and lecherous cross-breeder (who woulda thunk that Robert Johnson would beget Led Zep).

The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS.
CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php
Host by PA's Dick Heath.

Back to Top
Dick Heath View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Jazz-Rock Specialist

Joined: April 19 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 12618
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2008 at 08:29
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

Let's have a look at the current definition:
Perhaps, to get things started, the experts of the genre could list some fusion artists/albums which should not be included.


Kenny G and Candy Dulfer are obvious, but while enjoying Yellowjackets they would squeeze on to the list - but I'm listening right now to their latest with Mike Stern guesting and suddenly more jazzrock.... Many of artists signed to GRP and Stretch Records in the last 20 years might be checked out for crediability
The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS.
CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php
Host by PA's Dick Heath.

Back to Top
Dick Heath View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Jazz-Rock Specialist

Joined: April 19 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 12618
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2008 at 08:37
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

 
Let's use the Venn diagrams  to make it easy: (Sorry for the quality of colors, I'm not an expert: Wink
 
 
In theory, we should only add to Prog Fusion the red section, the yellow one to Prog Fusion Related or maybe another variety of Fusion, and completely ignore the the rest, including simple Jazz Rock in blue..
 
Am I OK?
 
Are we doing this?
 
Iván


Good idea the diagram - although we probably need it to go into the 4th dimension to take care of the prime musical contributors. However, I've never seen prog as a major musical genre like jazz, rock, folk, world  folk, classical, etc. - hence to me prog is  the shaded zones when the major genres intermesh with rock. Hence for example  that early form of jazz fusion, Indo jazz fusion would be  formed by the intermeshing of jazz and world music/sub-set  Indian. In other words:damned complex to produce as a simple diagram
The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS.
CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php
Host by PA's Dick Heath.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.143 seconds.