>
>
> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:46:37 GMT
> From: "Paul Secular" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Soul/Jazz
>
> 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!!!
>
Paul....Isn't the real question ,"Do you like it?". I'm going to see
Jimmy Smith tomorrow night. Should I ask him if he plays "Jazz",
"Soul/Jazz", or "Hammond Grooves"? What sort of
response do you think I would get with a question like that? After
the laughter died down I mean...
Dan
