Where are the innovators?

Ando

The "why is no best US guitarist" thread was bizarre and entertaining. Controversial threads are nice because they knock things loose, so in that spirit, let's ask who the real innovators are in gypsy jazz today. Who are they?

The speedsters? I admire all the speedsters and can't match them (don't have the time, for one thing), but I don't look to them for wit, profundity, or raw emotion. I look to them for reassurance that acoustic guitar culture still has balls. Speed means young guys are pumping musical iron, which is good. Speed and precision allow other things to happen -- or they can become ends in themselves, the musical equivalent of bodybuilding. Cool, but not the whole enchilada.

Where should we look for innovators? This picks up the earlier thread. To the question of "why there are no great gypsy jazzer from the US who could headline the Atelier Charonne?" I'd answer, because, for the sake of silly argument, the musical cultures of the US have little to nothing to do with gypsy jazz. Most of our jazz guitar comes from Charlie Christian. Different branch, different growth, with different incentives, all not conducive to extending a tradition that didn't begin here.

To fan the question of place further, let's turn it around and ask why Europeans are so chronically concerned about hierarchies. Is it because that's the only way to play the game in Europe? Have Europeans ever become democratic, or do they deep down love their aristocracies and traditions more than the creative chaos of democracy? Why are Europeans so musically uncreative in this genre? The most creative ones are those happy nerds in Caravan Palace and that nutcase in Italy, Simone Guiducci. The rest are decoration on a cake.

And last, what constitutes "innovation" in gypsy jazz? New tunes -- er, in the same style? New instruments -- er, playing the same heads? Mash-ups of genres, which means blowing up gypsy jazz as a genre in itself? It's unclear to me what "innovation" means. And besides, to me at least, innovation isn't a desire. I like hearing QHCF combos playing tunes I like. What I *really* like to hear is a new, distinctive *voice* in that idiom.

Whose voices can you recognize a mile away in this music? I can think of a handful. Others?

Michael Bauer

Alright, I'll bite. First, I totally agree with you about Charlie Christian's dominant role in American jazz guitar. He's our Django, and every bit as important. Django had more innovative licks; Charlie swung harder. Not trying to be controversial with that statement; it's just my personal take on it.

I am pretty burned out on the speed merchants, but then, I never really loved them to begin with. Alot of those guys have some mighty tasty licks, and some really clever ideas, but I have to wade through a lot of dross to get to them. My personal taste runs more to Tchavolo (pure joyous playing), Patrick Saussois (elegant sense of melody) and their ilk. They aren't the only ones, of course.

Innovators? How about Les Doigts de L'homme? Some of their tunes are thoroghly original, but the roots in Django's music are still there. How about Stephane Wrembel, who has really gone back, and reconnected gypsy jazz with its Indian roots, while still bringing a totally modern and original feel to it? There's even a dollop of Frank Zappa in Stephane's playing! He's writing his own songs these days, as is Olivier with LDDH. And in there own crazy way, even the Lost Fingers are bringing a breath of fresh air into GJ. George Cole has injected some Django into his very Frank Sinatra-like original tunes. It's a favorite CD around our house, because the wife loves it as much as I do.

My friend Scot Wise, who is very aptly named, made the observation in this forum some time back that gypsy jazz has become a folk music. It certainly is more orthodox than it should be. I remember when Wrembel played some amazingly creative stuff (GJ with a wah-wah pedal!) at Django in June several years back. It effectively got him banished from the event for several years. It's just not acceptable too veer too far from the center lane, especially at an event where most of the attendees were just beginning to learn the orthodox. Tcha Limberger was accepted with open arms this year, in spite of his very unique style. Perhaps he just wasn't as close to the edge as Stephane, or perhaps the "D-in-Jers" have become more comfortable with "different". Perhaps it was just that Tcha is half-gypsy, so his roots are tough to argue with.

There is some original, creative stuff going on, as mentioned above. But the weight of numbers is still with the very orthodox. I don't see that changing any time soon.

Jazzaferri

The American guitar legend that acknowledged a significant influence by Django is Les Paul

I hear lots of innovation from the Paris group and I hear Stochelo going through some changes in his playing now....

Gonzalo and others. As was stated, there aren't many game changers in any genre. Django did it for jazz guitar. Les Paul more for recording than guitar though he was a great player. CC had far too short a life...I sometimes wonder what he would have left had he lived to a ripe old age....how much more for Django too.

Michael Bauer

Charlie left enough, even though he was gone too soon, and even though he was restrained in Benny Goodman's bands. That "Topsy" solo at Minton's might be the greatest guitar solo I have ever heard (It's certainly in the top 2-3 for me), and he was what? 21-22? I keep thinking what a jam Django and Charlie would have had if they had lived long enough to meet.

Jazzaferri

Oh man...that would have been the jam of a lifetime.

Jon

Ok, firstly, there are heaps of innovators, if that's what you want - Gonzalo, who's neo-classical compositions are like nothing else in the genre, while still identifiably gypsy jazz; Adrien, Sebastien etc, who are starting to bring some of the linear complexity from modern jazz into it (although none of the rhythmic, conceptual or textural); les Doigts - enough said. There are heaps of these bands.

One thing about innovators though, is that they are rarely troubled by the notion of style. If you want to innovate, and are interested in music - period - then you should be looking a lot further than the fairly narrow confines of a genre that is quite open about it's traditionalism. While Django wasn't at all backwards looking, the fact that he was pretty much instantly deified proves that everyone who has followed him certainly has been. Innovators don't make gods out of their forebears. They respect them, and move on.

This style is folk music now - very much unlike American jazz, which has always been about evolution, and has evolved into many bizarre and glorious shapes, many unrecognisable to its early exponents. If you guys haven't heard Ben Monder's solo pieces - get onto it.

The thing I love about this music though, is how people find voices within the style. They still play Django licks, but no one could ever mistake Tchavolo for Django, or Romane for him, or Bireli, or Angelo. This is not innovation, but personality, and identity, which is more individual, more realistically democratic, and just as valuable. Not everyone is new and interesting, but everyone has an identity of their own, and I think this music give credible voice to that fact. Beautifully so.

Jon

Passacaglia

Beautifully said Jon, thanks.

Scoredog

Did not see if Julian Lage was placed as innovator in the American thread but I would choose him pretty much above anyone I have come across, of course he is not purely GJ but isn't that the point.

kevingcox

When you innovate within a genre you slightly depart from the central premise(s) of that genre, so the problem becomes one of classification and not musical expression.

I grew up in the late 80's and early 90's, when most everything in the mainstream was called pop, rap, or "alternative rock"--which basically encompassed anything that didn't fit the other two categories, even when it often did. The differences (or "innovation") within alternative rock were pretty vast in terms of sound if not composition. However, if two bands within GJ were to be as different as, say, Bjork and Soundgarden then it would pretty much explode the definition of the genre.

How many consider the madness created by Boulou and Elios Ferre to be GJ? Some do, some don't. It comes down to what you allow within a style... a few years ago I gave up on using the "genre" column in iTunes to help me with anything but identifying playalong tracks.

Jazzaferri

I would say that GJ has become very much like bluegrass. There are the traditionalists, who stay pretty close to the roots and the NewGrass players...who to those on the outside sounds like bluegrass.

Both have a tradition of a high level of improv skill..even if BG is harmonically and rhythmically less complex.

Just after the turn of the century I went to a Missy Raines and the New Hip concert. The guy behind me was a traditionalist who complained audibly to his wife that it wasn't bluegrass....but I did notice he was tapping his foot on the up tempo numbers .

wim

Ando wrote:

Why are Europeans so musically uncreative in this genre? The most creative ones are those happy nerds in Caravan Palace and that nutcase in Italy, Simone Guiducci. The rest are decoration on a cake.

:shock:

I like caravan palace too, but it's a naive statement to say they're among the most creative ones in Europe. Not even right to put it "in the genre" really, I think of them more like dance music which is using some jazz manouche sounds. It's fairly simple/repetitive in form and structure. Not a candle on the creativity of, say, Olivier Kikteff's compositions and the more recent stuff from other guys in LDDLH. And that's just one example, maybe you haven't dug deep enough in the scene?! Admittedly there are heaps of guys that are only interested in dressing up django tunes, but .. *shrugs* comme ça