Jazz & Blues : Do they sound the same ?

Rigsby

Got this idea from the "Genre Organisation" thread in the "Music" forum (have a peep there first maybe). Thought it might make for an interesting discussion. In the other thread it was stated that they were completely different. Leaving aside their close relationship history wise, we are talking here about the music itself.

The word I have a problem with is "completely". I agree that blues has it's own unique structure, but artists from both genres can overlap sometimes. John Mayall's "Bare Wires" album is an example. On that album you can hear how close the two are. Another example is Alexis Korner's "Blues Incorporated" album with Dick Heckstall Smyth on sax.

Here's a clip by Miles Davis that shows what I mean. I rest my case.

and another

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPq47C3WwRQ&feature=related



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFTp2O0ywyw

18AD

The two tunes you've linked to are 12 bar blues with some minor alterations. So they're definately gonna sound like the blues!

Heinlein

As a jazz fan I often feel offended when jazz and blues go together in catalogues, listings etc Let alone "offence", when looking at gig listings for example, I'm left guessing what's blues and what's jazz to just skip the former.

Same story with classical music, for example Bach and Strauss usually go under "classical" everywhere, yet Strauss is very shallow, easy-listening pop music of its time, while Bach is Bach, you know. The difference is huge in terms of musical ideas per minute Same with jazz vs. blues. For someone who considers real jazz music his/her food, blues is nowhere near with its repeating patterns and shallowness.

Oh, of course there are exceptions, there are always exceptions everywhere. There are some good blues musicians out there and some jazz may soound more like blues, not to mention their common historical roots. Ok. I'm just talking about gig listings: someone interested in jazz wouldn't be interested in blues and I think the other way around is true, too.

Rigsby

18AD wrote: »

The two tunes you've linked to are 12 bar blues with some minor alterations. So they're definately gonna sound like the blues!

Yes, and this is taken from one of the most famous "jazz" albums of all time.

Rigsby

Heinlein wrote: »

As a jazz fan I often feel offended when jazz and blues go together in catalogues, listings etc Let alone "offence", when looking at gig listings for example, I'm left guessing what's blues and what's jazz to just skip the former.

Same story with classical music, for example Bach and Strauss usually go under "classical" everywhere, yet Strauss is very shallow, easy-listening pop music of its time, while Bach is Bach, you know. The difference is huge in terms of musical ideas per minute Same with jazz vs. blues. For someone who considers real jazz music his/her food, blues is nowhere near with its repeating patterns and shallowness.

Oh, of course there are exceptions, there are always exceptions everywhere. There are some good blues musicians out there and some jazz may soound more like blues, not to mention their common historical roots. Ok. I'm just talking about gig listings: someone interested in jazz wouldn't be interested in blues and I think the other way around is true, too.

Cant understand why you'd be "offended" with them being lumped together. Contamination worries maybe ? :P If you dont like blues, I can understand your disappointment at not being able to know which band is which. In fairness though, most venues list what a band plays, or they would feature jazz or blues on a given night like JJ Smyths.

I disagree completely about not being able able to enjoy both. I am a huge jazz fan, but I also love blues. Lots of people I know are the same.

Heinlein

Rigsby wrote: »

Cant understand why you'd be "offended" with them being lumped together. Contamination worries maybe ? :P If you dont like blues, I can understand your disappointment at not being able to know which band is which. In fairness though, most venues list what a band plays, or they would feature jazz or blues on a given night like JJ Smyths.

Oh yes, when I arrived to Dublin, it took some time to figure that jazz is happening at JJ's only on Sundays with some exceptions. Spent a few boring blues nights before I figured that. Contamination?.. Well, no, just a waste of time

damonjewel

I think most jazz bands\musicians would have one or two blues based tracks in their catalogues (like the type mentioned) and early jazz may have borrowed a lot from Blues (boogie woogie etc) but for everyone blues based jazz number there are a thousand other tracks.

I agree with Heinlein that if jazz is generaly lumped in with Blues and when going to a Jazz gig\club that it can be very dissappointing to what you might get.

As a musician I played blues for years and only in the last year or so have been trying to play jazz. from a players perspective blues and jazz are completely different

Setun

I love both genres, but I often lean towards jazz when I go to put a record on. Stanley Turrentine's tenor sax playing is incredibly bluesy in style, but when he plays on a lot of "jazz albums", it totally fits in with what everyone is playing.

A big surprise for me recently was Sun Ra's early music - Jazz in Silhouette. You can really hear the blues roots of jazz in this album.

stevejazzx

you can't have one wihtout the other...!
well historically anyway..
blues in a lot of contexts is quite dull for me..however there are some great proponents of the genre..they're usually expert jazz musicians!:)
There's a guy who gigs around a lot Nigel something..sings the Gerswhin songbook and plays some mean blue guitar (more crossover) very bluesly but entertaining and he mixes it up quite a bit.
Jazz obviously evolved out of the blues so it a feels weird to me that some people can be happy banging out 12 bar blues alll night with lashings of repetitive pentatonic scales...Jazz is very challenging and always changing so it's much more exciting and entertaining for me but it is almost necessary to grind through the blues songbook if you're learning jazz improvisation. I think the two are inseperable even if Jazz has somewhat moved on.

Rigsby

stevejazzx wrote: »

There's a guy who gigs around a lot Nigel something..

That 'd be Nigel Mooney. He's been around the music circuit for a long time. He did not always lean more towards jazz. He had a band back in the 70's called the "Gripewater Blues Band". In Nigel, you picked a great example of jazz and blues "fusion", and how the two are so closely linked musically.

AFAIK he still plays in JJ Smyths from time to time with his band "Nigel Mooney's Hip Operation". Great name for a band.

Hermy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bccryiQFKk

equivariant

Rigsby wrote: »

The word I have a problem with is "completely". I agree that blues has it's own unique structure, but artists from both genres can overlap sometimes. John Mayall's "Bare Wires" album is an example. On that album you can hear how close the two are. Another example is Alexis Korner's "Blues Incorporated" album with Dick Heckstall Smyth on sax.

Interesting thread. I think that there is defintely music that could be categorized either as jazz or as blues - some BB King stuff, for example. However, I do think that jazz is (in the musical sense anyway) a much broader term than blues. There is a case to make that blues is just a particular form of jazz.

By the way, there is a very interesting recording of Leonard Bernstein talking about jazz and musical elements that make up jazz. He talks a lot about blues and I think he explains very well some of the subtleties of blues music. Definitely worth checking out if you are interested in this thread. The CD is called "Bernstein Century - Bernstein on Jazz"