Gypsy Jazz is too niche for what it is

Mitu · November 7

It really scratches back of my mind how people don't know about Gypsy Jazz, it's such a good genre with so much passion put into the music.

Jazz in general is really underrated and I really don't see why, I understand that it was related with the Mafioso kinds and what not, but I don't think that should banish it to make it a underrated choice of music. I personally find it hard to comprehend why some people listen to the music being released today, I will admit that there are a few good songs I jam to too some times when they come on the radio, but most of it is very... I can't find a word to explain it but it's not very good.

I think gypsy jazz should be more mainstream than what's played on the radio these days. Somebody needs to remind the world that music isn't about boasting about how much money you churn out every month or crimes and such, rather it should return to just passion; that's something you don't see every day in this century.

What do you think?

Russell Letson · November 7

Over on the Jazz Guitar Forum, the popularity and cultural status of jazz is a recurring topic--in fact, there's a nearly decade-long, 28-page thread (697 posts) hashing over the question "Why isn't jazz popular?" We've all taken a swing at it.

https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/everything-else/49435-why-isnt-jazz-popular.html

The simplest, shortest answer is, "Because not enough people like it." Which is not the same as any answer that references its inherent value. As Yogi Berra observed, "If the people don’t want to come out to the ballpark, nobody’s going to stop them."

flaco · November 7

One thing I think that’s worth discussing is that you can’t compare Gypsy jazz to pop music, because one is instrumental and one is vocal. If you look at how popular instrumental music is overall it has to be much lower than pop music.

Russell Letson · November 8

While it's true that many contemporary audiences prefer vocal tunes, there has been plenty of very popular music that was mostly instrumental. Of course, those traditions were strongly rooted in dance--big-band swing**, lots of fiddle music, musette, samba/tango/salsa, QHCF. If people are just sitting and listening rather than out on the dance floor, they might like to have something to engage the linguistic circuits to make up for the lack of physical movement (and courting behavior)--and the human voice is always pretty compelling.

** The singer with a big band was a periodic feature rather than an every-tune component.

paulmcevoy75 · November 8

I spent a little bit of time in the Magdalen Islands, it's a really remote little island chain off Prince Edward Island. I was really into fiddle music at the time. There is one TINY island that's English speaking (all the others are predominantly French). Amazing little place.

Anyway, there was a little dance hall there and I asked if they still had dances and someone was like "no, that went away as soon as we got TVs". Which I found enormously depressing.

B25Gib · November 8

We've bought GJ recordings through the years that include a few vocals so why not sing a few in live gigs where some of the age customers can appreciate the human voice contribution like Mr. Letson posted above referencing the 40's dance band era. Songs like Sweet Sue, Russian Lullaby, Avalon, and Laura's song(Some Where My Love) all are well appreciated! If you sing on key, these simple mid temp rhythms are very much appreciated!

billyshakes · November 8

I think we need to consider the audience in this discussion of popularity. While the "canon" of songs we play come from the Great American Songbook, we have to consider that during those times, that tune would be recognizable. There might not be a singer on the stage, but when Stephane or Django was playing the head to Honeysuckle Rose or Sweet Sue, etc, those people knew those songs and knew the lyric in their head. They would go to the dance floor because they liked the tune and wanted to dance to it. So jazz music or the instrumental versions of those popular songs were equally popular because they were familiar to the audience or at least receptive to the interpretation.

Because most of us that play this genre know those songs, we'll hear a band play a song we like and we'll enjoy following their version and hearing their choices. We are listeners with educated ears. But, to a lay person, it will all start to sound like boom-chicka-boom over and over again. Now, if they do a version of Pump Up the Jam like the Lost Fingers below, it doesn't sound much like the original but the vocals (not particularly virtuosic at that) are there to guide their ears. And then it becomes a blend of the jam energy of the band over a known platform. And it would likely captivate the audience, whether they like jazz or not. Because it is taking something known and giving it a fresh twist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CRMT0WMkGE

It is to me the same thing with sampling on hip hop hits. You take a song like below, which is just repeating the Steve Winwood hook over and over.....and over.....and over....and over again. But everyone knows it so it serves as a vehicle for the rhythmic and sonic variations that the DJ overlays. And now you're hooked. I guess that's my way of saying I think it would be helpful for more currency in song selection from some acts. I did see Jimmy Grant and Eva Slongo playing Nirvana at DiJ this year. I think they are on to something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qetW6R9Jxs4

Gojdan · November 9

Popularity has always been driven by cool personalities, and gypsy jazz just doesn't have any cool representatives. Im sure almost nobody under 50 watches Denis or Robin on Youtube. There is no gypsy jazz on TikTok or on Twitch. Jazz in general is just not cool for the kids. So until some hot young big streamer makes gypsy jazz cool for the young ones I think we're lucky to survive as a niche genre.