Why Doesn't Contemporary Jazz Get Any Respect?


I am a huge fan of Peter White,Kirk Whalum,Dave Koz,Warren Hill,etc.I have never understood why this flavor of music gets no respect.Not only is it musically appealing,but in most cases its very well recorded.Any comparisons to old jazz(Miles Davis etc.) are ludicrous.Its like comparing apples and oranges.Can anyone shed some light on this?Any contemporary(smooth)Jazz out there?I would love to hear from you. Thanks John
krelldog

Showing 1 response by peterbj

is this smooth?http://www.soundliaison.com

I find the albums accessible but maybe there is a little too much depth to the music to be considered smooth jazz.
Carmen Gomes Inc;''Thousand Shades of Blue'' is a fantastic live in the studio album.4 instruments;voice,guitar,upright bass,and drums(cajon replacing the drums on the lovely title track).Everything is there great separation,stereo imaging,depth and balance.
The version of Bruce Springsteen's I'm on Fire is a musical and audiophile masterpiece,check out how the snare drum and the haunting guitar voicing complement but never cover up each other.
On the 2nd album,Poul Berner Band's lovely Elvis Presley tribute: Road to Memphis,
you've got tr.6 ''the Colonel''Michael Moore's sax enters oo.45 with just the sound of air,as if he is right there up close in front of you,so intimate.
Again only 4 instruments; guitar at 8 o'clock,sax at 11,bass at 1 o'clock and 2nd guitar at 4 o'clock.the sound stage is almost 3 dimensional.
On the 3rd album Torn,best described as a blues ballad album,you got everything an audiophile album should have (i.m.o.)placement, depth,separation,naturalness,the feeling of being there with the band visible in front you.And musically I find it a great album as well,a beautiful mix of covers and very well composed originals.