The only thing I know for sure is if Burns even mentions Kenny G. or John
Tesh in this documentary I'm gunna be writing a letter....;P
Fred
From: "Jonny McIntosh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: [313] For the Jazz thread... Fw: The popularity of "jazz"
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:41:20 -0000
Sorry for the OT nature (I try to bring it back below), but enough people
seem to be interested in the Burns' documentary to make me forward this
from
the Saturn Sun Ra list. The gist of the argument over there is that Burns'
is using the argument that "jazz was more popular then" so he's only
interested in it's historically popular incarnation.
I like this post more, though, because it contains a valuable general
lesson
on the importance of making sure you can be heard, etc. (witness UR's
policy
of keeping stuff available - I'm glad someone makes sure they have the
means
to do that.) There are other jazz/techno parallels they have not told you
of
;) All IMHO, of course.
Jonny.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thelonious Sphere Monk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: The popularity of "jazz"
> >One of the figures being bandied about in the
> >orchestrated pr campaign for the series is that jazz
> >now makes up 2% of the market instead of the 70% it
> >had years ago. Commentators are using that as proof of
> >jazz's fall from popularity.
>
> When Zero Saturns are in print, Sun Ra gets 0% of the market.
>
> when some saturns are in print, he gets a certain % of the jazz market
>
> when ALL the Saturns are in print, he gets his fair share of the
market......
>
> and that applies to *every* jazz artist......
>
>
> more people are looking for albums to pop into print, and if they aint
in
> print, they aren't in *any* form of the market cept the rare used bins
at
> record stores on infrequent occasions
>
>
> my theory for jazz getting 'more' popular has everything to do with
albums
> getting more obtainable when stuff like CD's breathe old wine into new
> bottles, when the old bottles on vinyl are too scarce...... and when
record
> companies keep the slow sellers in print, long enough, they get to be
> stable bits of obtainable history available at any record store, ready
to
> be fruitful and multiply into the listening music of the future.....
>
>
> if anything the series might be good for getting everything Armstrong
back
> into print with his 'possible' 100th birthday. and improving the market
for
> more books 'on jazz', and the repercussions could be bit more interest
in
> record companies giving jazz a little more 'in-printdom'.......
>
> >But what exactly is being compared here? One would
> >figure that jazz making up 70% of the recording market
>
> And how much of that 70% is dance/swing music...
>
> and do we wanna compare the Music World of Tommy Dorsey to the world of
> Joshua Redman?
> do we compare the sales figure of Big Bill Broozy to Keb Mo, and talk
about
> the death of Acoustic Chicago Blues?
>
> I think the problem is that people like to use numbers like that because
> they're wanting to compare jazz to the latest and greatest factors in
> musical culture, not to mention the fads and pressures of record labels
to
> 'do something'
>
> I think what we should worry about is what is good music, and we'll let
the
> numbers and popular take care of themselves...... All you need are
record
> companies to allow the past and present to be *clearly shown* so there
>
> *is*
>
> a future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
