Well........
Hammond jazz is jazz in which there's a hammond organ??
Can't hammond jazz be dancefloor jazz as well?!
(Or have I mis-understood?)
OK - I take the point about improvisation etc.
But are you telling me that Booker T et al. sat down and wrote their tracks
in a 'planned' way - ie. without improvisation?
Also - what about jazz in which improvisation is -at most- negligible? I
think I remember something about that in the same book you just
quoted......... it's *still* jazz though isn't it?!
I mean - weren't the MJQ big on that 'classical-style' jazz.......
I'm not trying to be pedantic.... just hoped someone might have a more
'definitive' explanation.............
Guess it's all a little blurry - as I thought......
Just still can't quite understand what's meant by an instrument being
'soulful'............ at least - I think I can! But isn't Miles Davis'
playing rather soulful for example (at least Brian probably doesn't think
so!!)
The other thing is....... what about - for example- Otis Redding singing
blues numbers......... is that a blues or a soul track then?! Or is it a
blues with soul(ful) vocals??
Blues - unlike jazz of course - refers more specifically to the
structure/notes of a piece of music..... but what I mean is - without Otis
it wouldn't be a 'soul' track really would it......
I just always thought 'soul' referred more to a style of singing that to a
particular 'style'/structure (or whathaveyou) of music...
Confusedly..................
Paul
PS. I'll drop it now....... I'm just getting silly!!!
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
