Learn from a Legend

Top 10

Greg Osby — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:25:00 -0400

Top Ten

I remember when I first started going to jazz festivals as a fan and eventually as a participant. I was in my late teens and early twenties when I made the observation that, each year, the same personalities and groups were appearing on all of the festivals. I'm talking late 70s and early 80s. The lineups would then consist of maybe Ella Fitzgerald, Joe Williams, the MJQ, Tony Bennett, Dave Brubeck, Nancy Wilson, Oscar Peterson and others that I, being a young (and impatient) up-and-comer who was eager to hear things a bit more modern, inspiring and less nostalgic, had absolutely no interest in seeing and hearing - especially year after year. It was a formula that only got even worse. There was no variety and I didn't feel as if my interests or tastes were being considered where the programming was concerned.

Throughout the 80s the lineups steadily became a bit lighter, audience-friendly and more pop-oriented. Artist like Al Jarreau, George Benson, Spyro Gyra, etc. were in heavy rotation. Many "serious" artists were displaced in order to make room for these "guaranteed seat fillers". I was annoyed that I couldn't see Joe Henderson, Jack DeJohnette, Woody Shaw, McCoy Tyner, etc, or any of what I considered truly innovative and inspiring artists at any of the big festivals. All they seemed to book were crowd pleasers, Grammy winners and artists who topped in the annual magazine music polls. Later on, it got even worse to the point that these days, pop artists completely dominate the bookings, along with the jazz "top 10" artists who appear on ALL of the festivals. I won't post any names or acts because it is in poor taste to do so, not to mention that most of them are friends of mine. In fact, I don't blame the artists for this deterioration of variety in programming. I blame the booking agents and festival promoters for their failure to provide the public with a broader presentation of the richness that the jazz scene offers.

So, there is a very real problem which should be addressed, which is that the representation of the entire creative music world has been reduced to the output represented by a handful of artists who have, and never will change or modify their music for fear of alienating the fickle tastes of the people who booked them in the first place. Unfortunately, the promoters don't have any real idea of what is truly progressive or provocative "on the street" because their information is solely gotten from the content of magazines and polls. I never see any of the festival promoters in the clubs scouting for the "next" new artist. I do, however, see musicians pop up all of a sudden on every festival every summer - and I wonder where in the world they came from, and how did they emerge from total obscurity to getting major bookings without having "paid dues" or having cut their teeth with an established veteran? This phenomenon continues to weaken the ranks and cheapen the integrity of the scene as a whole and unfortunately, I see no end to it.

Ladies First

Greg Osby — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 09:38:00 -0400

Where are the Ladies?

I've been on a personal campaign for several months focusing on one subject in particular but not limited to that one subject exclusively. It's a common topic of discussion that I have with my students and friends which concerns an issue that plagues the music, not necessarily from the perspective of the performers (but then, again, perhaps it does...) and sometimes influences the choices that the musicians make in performance and programming. However, unlike many issues that are of importance to the music community at large, this one has a simple and clear solution.

On a few occasions, I've openly vented from the bandstand at a few of my shows about how difficult it sometimes can be for me and my mostly male band to play for rooms that are exclusively populated by males. One of the most startling images that I've ever had while performing was one time when I was playing a ballad, attempting my best to be tender, honest and emotive - only to finish my solo, open my eyes to witness a room full of beards, hairy legs, unclipped toenails and several pairs of old-ass Birkenstocks and sandals worn by a room full of dudes. With the exception of the wait staff, there wasn't a single woman to be seen anywhere in the place. The images AND the moment were equal parts startling, horrifying and overwhelmingly discouraging. And, as this had happened so frequently in the past, I felt obligated to take action and address it.

I felt it necessary to end the tune early and picked up the microphone and asked, to no one in particular, "We sincerely appreciate your patronage and support, but does anyone in the house have any females in their lives who would enjoy an evening of live, improvised music? Are there any women in your lives that you could POSSIBLY have asked to accompany yourselves here in an effort to bring some balance to this gender-disppoportionate audience? Perhaps a landlady, Mother, sister, female cousin, bag lady, roomate, friend - with or without benefits, maybe even an EX, ANYONE! We're trying our best up here, but this boy's club mentality has to end now! It's a tall order for anyone to expect us to perform non-testosterone- infused music for a room full of scruffy guys all night".

Silence......

In short, I've spoken to a number of friends, most of whom are all in accord that the one-sided gender imbalance (where patronage is concerned) is one condition that has helped to prevent the music from moving forward. Many male musicians are hopelessly preoccupied with "flexing and profiling for their boys" instead of engaging in artful storytelling or attempting to reveal the less testosterone-driven aspects of their character. During performances, some musicians proceed as if it is not considerd masculine to be fragile, sensitive or to employ a broader pallette of dynamics in their work. This type of thinking and performing, along with the lack of a strong female presence at concerts, has done a great deal of harm to the general perception of the music at large and is detrimental to it's image and it's ability ot be more universally accepted.

So guys, please bring a date. Go Dutch, if necessary. Just bring SOMEONE sometimes other than your "bud". Of course we have no problem playing for whomever will support us, but our ability to express ourselves would be fully realized if we had the support of both sexes.

Sounding "Young"

Greg Osby — Wed, 26 May 2010 15:52:00 -0400

Here's my answer to a young saxophonist who asked me to evaluate his playing at a competition where I was a guest on the judicial panel.

(He didn't win, by the way.)

"Concerning your playing, I have very few recommendations. You pretty much got every judge's approval at the semi-finals and we all had you hands down as the overall winner. Basically, you lost points during the finals because some of my co-judges felt that you weren't assertive enough during the straight-ahead/swinging part of your presentation . I guess they were looking for more fireworks and visually-projected dedication. But to be honest, I would have played it exactly as you did. I don't believe in excessive body movements, squealing, circular breathing, growling, multiphonics, unnecessarily long-held high notes or any other types of showboating. These are affectations and tricks that less skilled players resort to in order to get "house". Uninitiated listeners usually eat this stuff up, but it is trickery at it's best and is shameful behavior for true artists, such as yourself, to resign themselves to. Research any video of the icons of this music and you will observe that most of them played with Zen-like focus and stood quite still. All that moving around creates subtle changes in the position of your mouthpiece and will alter your intonation as well as your grip and hand position - thus affecting your accuracy and articulation.

Personally, I listen for how a player develops his story and how coherently they get their ideas across with detailed phrases and concise statements. I'm from the super clean technique school. Many players get by solely on slurring everything, playing with really loud volume or with a series of crowd pleasing licks. I don't support this approach to improvisation. Fortunately, you are not plagued by these types of issues. Basically, I think the main thing is for young players not to give away their age when they play. This is a common subject of discussion with older players. It seems that younger players tend to crowd each bar with an enormous amount of content when simpler statements would be more effective. Young musicians also always tend to play far too many choruses during a solo. This is the giveaway that they are either in a rush to "say it all" or that they don't gig enough and it makes them sound "young" and unrefined. I know about this because I used to be one of those players. It takes a while to develop the ability to know when to lay back and when to dig a little deeper.

So, stand a bit more still and don't overplay (AKA sound "young") or you'll be out of tune and will bore everyone to tears.... "

Share on:

Twitter

MySpace

Facebook

Live the life first.

Greg Osby — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 01:39:00 -0400

I recently returned from a great tour of Italy with my band. It was both revealing and triumphant on many levels. While we were out, an Italian friend read and translated to me a review of one our concerts. The writer commented that the band sounded somewhat uninspired and misdirected, or something to that effect. Without making any excuses, defending the band nor opposing the writer's impression of the show (he was partially correct, by the way) I always ask myself, "How are statements like this useful and to whom do they serve - especially AFTER the fact?" We drove almost 8 hours to arrive directly to the venue that day without so much as a decent meal, shower, change of clothes or any worthwhile rest. Traveling in an 8-seater van through the Italian roads was no less than absolutely brutal, and we did it all on very little sleep from each previous night. There was rarely any room for recovery, as this was practically our daily pace for a couple of weeks. It is quite common for traveling musicians to perform in a semi-delirious state resulting from lack of decent rest and nourishment. Again, no apologies or excuses - these are simply the facts of the touring lifestyle for those of us who have chosen to dedicate ourselves to taking the music directly to the people.

With this in mind, I've always figured that wouldn't it be great if, in order to be a certified music journalist, a writer would have to earn his or her bones by actually traveling with a band on tour for several weeks or longer- just to experience firsthand what life on the road really entails? How else would anyone know what "the life" really demands of us? It's not all fun and games by a long shot and for those of us who don't have adequate representation, financing and a solid business structure, it's certainly no pleasure cruise, and there's little to no time for leisure during our daily hectic schedules. Every day off has to be paid for by the leader, so in order to reduce expenses, it is common for groups to work every single day, which takes it's toll both physically as well as musically.

Imagine, if you will, the tremendous demand on one's personal energy reserves that it takes to command your body and mental focus in order to function properly during a tour without adequate sleep and nutrition for days or even weeks at a time. Traveling to exotic countries and experiencing foreign cultures may sound glamorous and exciting... well, it is normally, but most of the time when on the road we're required to visit a different country or city every day or two in order to meet the tour overhead. Each day off drains the budget, so a touring band must keep moving. I'd love to have a journalist onboard just so they could accurately chronicle the day-to-day schlep that we must endure in order to make it to each destination. It's not always fun, but it's definitely a fact of the business.

Experiencing this kind of torturous pace, as we do regularly, would be the best indicator of what our daily trials demand, and how we must rise above them in order to deliver our best performances regardless of our physical or mental state. Musicians are always told that in order for their art to be considered authentic, they must deal with certain realities that the art form imposes on them. If this is indeed the case, then the same set of standards and criteria must be engaged for anyone who considers themselves enough of an authority to comment intellectually on our craft. We're not always perfect and are expected to occasionally deliver under extreme and extraordinary circumstances. It would be ideal if some of these factors would be considered before a reckless dismissal of our work occurs because unfortunately, once it's been documented, it can't be undone.

Share on:

A Shift Has Taken Place

Greg Osby — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 18:36:00 -0400

I'm noticing that a lot more younger people are attending our shows all of a sudden. A couple of weeks ago week I did the Vanguard in trio format with Paul Motian and Jason Moran. Each night the place was populated by an under 30-ish crowd by at least 50%. Not only was it refreshing to perform for a room of eager and attentive new patrons but it also served as a representative beacon of hope that the music is again reaching and affecting younger sets of ears. Perhaps the tide is turning once again and audiences are responding more favorably to music that requires a bit more than the average listener's attention span, which sometimes can be quite short.

Share on:

Quiet Fire

Greg Osby — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:10:00 -0500

I played a week at Birdland with Jim Hall recently and on some nights, as a result of Jim's direction, a large part of our sets was played very softly - almost to a whisper. It was an effective choice for many reasons. Not only did the audience find it to be captivating and were naturally drawn in by the dramatically reduced volume in order to hear every minute and subtle nuance, but as a musician, I found myself confronted with an entirely new set of challenges, given the volume impositions. Some of my most treasured and reliable ideas and approaches were simply not effective when played at hush tones and I had to adjust and compensate on the spot, in the moment. In short, it wasn't as simple as I would have thought, even at this point in my career and development.

Interestingly enough, I used to have tremendous issues with saxophonists in particular and all musicians in general that played with what some of us called a "no-balls" approach, which was our description of anyone without a huge (loud) sound. Many a player's effectiveness was (erroneously) determined by the sheer brawniness or bravura in their sound, and we were misled into believing that volume and power were the ultimate definitions of "a big sound". I've since realized just how much content during a jazz set is fatalistically obscured by the sheer lack of dynamics. And as a player, it has become tiresome for me to continue to try to put my best musical foot forward within a perpetual wall of relentless sound. I have lost interest in musicians who are obsessed with the utilization of loudness as a beaconing of strength or as a measure of superiority - I'll leave that to musicians whose egos require constant reinforcement, gained when drowning out other members of their ensembles or when creating such a dynamic imbalance that all but guarantees that all ears are on them at all times - by default.

I feel that it is imperative that we should consider a broader range of dynamics in our music (now more than ever before) as a measure that will more accurately represent our truest intentions as artists. Our music is far more rich and complex than the very erroneus placement of triple fortissimo/lack of dynamics approach on every single performance or the stigma that has been attached to us by those who think that playing recklessly and loud is all that we're capable of. Playing softly appropriately and effectively is just as difficult as playing fast tempos or negotiating alternative meters (notice that i didn't write "odd", which perhaps suggests that there's something wrong with it). It is entirely possible to maintain intensity and passion in a performance without a sustained, wild, raging and oftentimes, immature failure to communicate, musically speaking, happening throughout.

This subject reminds me of many fond memories that I have from listening to Billy Higgins play in New York in the early 1980's at Bradley's and other Greenwich Village clubs. Never inordinately loud or inappropriate, his touch was impecceble and he played with refined grace, finesses and power, yet he never fought the natural dynamics of the groups and there was never any question that he knew that his role was to elevate the music as a whole and to make everyone sound and play better. I was in my early 20's then and I would watch and listen in awe at how he could drive the band so effectively without drowning anyone out. My friend, author and journalist, Stanley Crouch and I used to call it "Quiet Fire" and we would often have lengthy, and sometimes heated, discussions concerning who was or wasn't adhering to volume and accompaniment principles. I miss those wonderful musical moments and also, the arguments. Good times.

And so it all has come around full circle, this subject, which again raises the question of what defines great playing and ensemble interaction. is it all simply a matter of taste, interpretation, good decision making and musical judgement? Maybe one remedy is to simply play a little softer, please.

Share on:

Articulate!

Greg Osby — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 15:17:00 -0500

Just a small observation: I find that many saxophone players have very little or no punctuation process in their playing. For some, there isn't a well enough defined attack at the beginning of phrases and sustained tones - at least to my ears. Sometimes complete lines are slurred throughout, which does little to detail the separation between statements. Listening to this kind of playing is similar to reading text written by people who construct sentences without commas, periods, question marks, exclamation points, or any other important punctuation elements. Everything tends to run together.

Many of my current students come to me directly from other teachers who actually discourage any type of tongue articulation whatsoever. I won't criticize this approach, but my opinion differs entirely and I feel that it can be debilitating in some cases. Many of these very students have a great deal of difficulty in playing certain passages which require more defined attacks. So I feel that instructing them to eliminate ANY approach is wrong and limits their ability to execute specific articulation requirements. Long story short, I feel that it's a teacher's job to present a variety of materials to students and then allow them to process the information and make good use of the material while in development of their individual voice. I don't consider it to be my job to force them to comply with my ideas of what's right and wrong - and by that I mean telling them NOT to address things which may be necessary for them to master in order to be a contender in this competitive world of music performance.

So, to any student that has articulation problems, please make a point to inquire to your teacher about specialized tonguing and finger coordination exercises which will help your timing, attacks, breath control, evenness and phrase definition. Every teacher has their methods and if you feel that your progress is slow or if you don't find their direction and instruction to be very helpful, don't hesitate to go elsewhere for other opinions from players that you respect. No one knows everything and if your teacher were a doctor and you weren't satisfied with their diagnosis, you'd probably want a second opinion as well.

Share on:

Freedom of Choice

Greg Osby — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 04:41:00 -0500

To my surprise, the original Jazz Bums blog entry set off a mini-firestorm online as it obviously touched the nerves of a few who are offended by the very idea of looking decent while performing, as well as others who are offended by the sound of my playing and/or music. At this point in my career, I am entirely aware of the fact that some or most of my work will not be considered favorable by many, and as that is a reality of the life of an artist, I accept it as a part of the journey. I will continue to create and offer what I think is quality work-borne of sincerity and integrity. I know that I simply can not please everyone. I also know that my views or solutions to the many problems that face the music are not the most popularly accepted ones either. Again, I will attempt to encourage discussion and welcome any that are interested into traveling the road towards resolve in the best way that I can. There will be many detractors and opponents who will also take advantage of (or even abuse) various internet capabilities to espouse their opinions and ideas. This is also an unavoidable part of the reality.

Trumpeter Sean Jones and I had a dialog running concurrently about the dress and style issue. It was but one of many problems that face the music and by no means, the most important one. There were many welcomed responses to our position - most of them favorable, some not. It's reasonable to assume that there will be opponents to just about every opinion and ideology that exists. However, there were a number of posts from some cat who used his 15 minutes as an opportunity to bring up a truly dead issue - an old and unimportant blindfold test that I did over 20 years ago (!) where some unfavorable and erroneous comments about Eric Dolphy that I allegedly said were printed. For some reason he took those comments, (which I did not, and never would say) as some sort of misguided affront to HIS playing or life or something I can't be entirely sure of since he, like myself, has surely never even met Eric Dolphy. It amazes me when people take personal issue with statements that don't wholeheartedly support their favorite musicians. Some get downright hostile and unnecessarily offensive. Frankly speaking, I could care less what someone thinks about another artist, or about me, for that matter. Everyone has preferences and opinions.

Since I have this opportunity, courtesy of Indaba Music, to publicly correct those misstatements, let me state for the record that the Dolphy comments were recklessly printed without any of the support statements that I generously offered nor did it include any nods toward my actual set of influences on my instrument (Earl Bostic, Johnny Hodges, Benny Carter, Louis Jordan, Cannonball Adderley, Lee Konitz) It was actually printed in order to incite, and it succeeded, because to this day, people still never fail to bring it up. I have never felt that I should be obligated as a musician to respond favorably or to blindly accept everything that my predecessors have done, merely because it may be expected of me as a musician to do so. Simply stated, there are a great many artists that frankly do not have the same impact to me as others and I don't feel compelled to worship them as many have chosen to do - just because they played with or were favorably endorsed by "so and so". They were human beings, and I don't worship anyone - especially to the point where if someone doesn't "like" them as much as I do, I should find their inability to acknowledge that artist's greatness to be personally disturbing. Nothing could be more ridiculous. People should be able to make their own decisions.

Could it be possible that I just dont "hear" Dolphy? That very well could be the case. I recall how Steve Coleman repeatedly used to try to get me to check out Von Freeman, Henry Threadgill, Sam Rivers and several others. I didn't have a positive reaction to them initially and actually was very resistant to their approaches to playing and composing music until I finally "heard" what they were doing in my own time, without being "forced" into liking them. After living with their music for a while and investigating it on my own, I was then able to comprehend the genius that lay within. I just didn't need someone telling me I "had" to dig them because it was my duty as a jazz saxophonist to do so. That's a sure-fire formula which will almost guarantee that the target will hate what they're being force-fed entirely. Ask any child who was forced into music lessons.

Some of my friends absolutely love the music of Eric Dolphy and have also been offended, dumbfounded, even mortified, by my failure to wholheartedly embrace/worship his playing. Countless numbers of players have questioned me repeatedly about why I couldn't get into it. I have always tried to be respectful, yet detailed about my position. I have carefully transcribed and analyzed many of his improvisations from various points in his career (I actually happen to have a running fascination with his compositions, however. I do appreciate them very much. It's the nature of his saxophone playing that doesn't make it for me. Again, I have the deepest respect for anyone who choses to expand upon their idea of what they believe to be right. My opinions are most certainly not criticisms by any measure). My conclusions have always been the same and I have also unsuccessfully attempted to convert many, MANY musicians into appreciating some artists that have served as sources of great enjoyment for myself. I know how frustrating it can be when others don't "get it". However, I would also contend that the option of being able to choose one's artistic influences and the ability of being able to coral those favorable elements into a systemized style which reflects their influence, is exactly what makes music great, because I feel that no artist should develop from the exact same pool of influences as anyone else. As an educator, I see this to be a tremendous problem. (Most young saxophonists today copy every nuance of Kenny Garrett; guitarists, Kurt Rosenwinkel - pianists, Brad Meldau, etc....)

I have performed with a great many musicians who have, in one fashion or another, revealed their disdain for another artist's sound, compositions or purpose entirely. There have been those who have proclaimed outright that perhaps they didn't care for someone who I personally thought may have been an outright genius ( I try not to use that term very often). Unlike the scathing comments left online by a few angry souls who are in no position to criticize me OR my choices, I prefer to allow those who disagree with me the courtesy of having a different opinion. I wouldn't even expect anyone to be in full accord with my tastes in art and literature, which can be broad and entirely eclectic. I thought this was considered normal.

So, if anyone knows the location of the official mandate which declares that a musician must like and without resistance, accept everything that preceeded him, I'd like to be made aware of it. I was very specific why I didnt care for what was played for me. It wasnt an outright dismissal, nor was it done out of disrespect for the man's artistry. But I am well within my right to acccept or reject whatever I choose, especially when I have done the work in transcribing and analyzing the components of that work for myself - in an effort to figure out exactly why it doesn't work for me or why so many others like it. I have the same feeling for several other great players who simply don't ring my bell - and I'm referring to certain masters of the craft. I was taught that it was acceptable to have a firm opinion and to make strong decisions. I know far too well that many don't dig my work either and I totally understand and can deal with their choice. It's just the way things are. But with this in mind, how does someone who can't even play at all nor has any personal relationship with Eric Dolphy benefit by writing garbage about me on their blog, just because I asked an interviewer to move on to the next example? All I can honestly say is that I hope that the guy found satisfaction from what he wrote. No good will come from it and since I know there's a lot of work to be done, I'll focus my energies in those directions. There's a lot of great music that hasn't been written yet.

Share on:

Jazz Bums 2

Greg Osby — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 20:50:00 -0500

I'd like to offer a few last points here in order to clarify my position, then I'll be done with this subject. Please bear in mind that my opinions and offerings here are based on my own experiences and observations, and that I'm well aware that many will disagree with them. That said, to those who aren't receptive to my position, it isn't necessary for you to post mean spirited jabs in an attempt to make your point. Opposing opinions are fine, personal barbs won't be tolerated. If you have issues with my music, that's fine as well, but reasonable people know that it's impossible to have personal issues with someone that you've never met. Childish cyber-jousting with someone that you don't know personally or that you have no REAL beef with is crossing the line. I'd prefer that you address your issues to me in person, where I can deal with them accordingly, as a man would. Or, if you prefer, you can send me a personal email and we can handle it one on one that way. But to cower online with no real potential of contact or resolution is plain cowardice. Again, I can handle anyone not liking my music. It's the inane posting of insults that my students and supporters are forced to read - THAT is a serious problem for me.

That said, please allow me to clear a few things up before I find myself caught at a performance, sans suit, by a reader of this blog who might be looking for justified reasons to call me a hypocrite. First of all, of course the clothes that a musician wears don't affect the quality of the work. We know this. That wasn't my point. My point was to address the problems concerning the visual aspects of performance preparation and presentation. If you wish to close your eyes at live performances, it may suit you better to stay home and listen to CDs. I never thought I'd actually live to experience people defending musicians-as-slobs in such a supportive fashion, as if it should be the objective of any performer to deliberately look that way. It's far beyond reason to me to know that some folks believe that the ideal of musicians dictating what's hip is representative of "old folks music", a statement so recklessly offered by a previous post. Tell that to any orchestra member. Their music is WAY older and yet, they show up for work CRISP, and ready to deal. Why anyone would go so far to suggest that Jazz musicians should look like hillbillies on stage is beyond ludicrous.

And just to make myself clear, It's not just about the suits, per se. It's about the attitude and attention to detail by the musicians, who are unnerved when audiences don't provide them with full attention or the level of respect that they feel their sacrifices to present good music should yield. I personally don't feel respect is warranted when the stage is inhabited by a group of sloppily dressed bums who should do better than to present themselves in such a disrespectful manner. Let's face it, when you go to a quality restaurant you wouldnt expect your food to be served on a plate with remnants of a previous dish or smeared with fingerprints, would you? For a master chef, presentation is essential to the dining experience. The palette is primed by means of inviting visual stimulation.With this in mind, how can a live performance be considered complete when the musicians themselves havent primed themselves for VIEWING presentation? Of course opponents of this perspective will offer that one can't see how musicians dress on a recording, but that is not the focus of my argument. I'm not challenging anyone's right to dress as they please. I'm speaking from the perspective of a bandleader as well as from that of an ardent fan of live jazz concerts, and I feel that artists should present themselves appropriately for a paying public. Performing for an appreciative audience is a privilege, and I certainly shall, to the best of my ability, treat anyone who pays for my art with the utmost consideration and respect by means of a TOTAL presentation - and not just good music played while wearing jeans and dirty sneakers.

Let's parallel an evening of music to that of having a great a dining experience. Some people prefer, when eating out, to settle for sloppy Mom & Pop diners, fast food chains, and greasy spoon type establishments. They have no problem if their food is served on unwashed tableware, that the chef openly picks and scratches various body parts and NEVER washes his hands or any of the serving utensils, that the wait staff openly talks over the food or coughs without covering themselves, or bothers to dress in server's apparel. It's also no problem for them at all that the fried chicken tastes like fish because each was cooked in the same oil. It's certainly no problem at all that none of the chairs or seat cushions match and have holes in them where visible springs and tacks prick you where the sun doesn't shine. The fact that the place hasn't been painted or remodeled in decades doesn't factor into how the food tastes to them at all .... all they care about is the VIBE of the place and they would contend that, to them, the food tastes better in these types of joints than when dining in a well tended establishment, which is also known as having a dining EXPERIENCE - and not simply grabbing a sloppy meal somewhere. Yes, the food may indeed taste decent, but the preparation and presentation is highly suspect. People who eat at these places regularly are perhaps the same folks who also don't seem to mind to have their music served to them by jazz bums. To this I say, "Bon Apetit". For me, music, like food is a complete experience and I feel no obligation to close my eyes during a performance and to pretend that I'm listening to a recording. Performance ethics and concern towards appearance are not disposable factors where my idea of a total live musical experience is concerned. But that's just me. I don't expect everyone to agree nor comply with my taste in this matter, because I've realized how futile it is to debate with individuals who won't budge on a subject. We could volley back and forth forever and there will be those that will maintain their position that the manner in which musicians dress has no importance at all - and that's fine with me. I respect differences of perspective and opinion. I will maintain my position that I won't hire slovenly-dressed musicians that dress down my bandstand.

Bill Cosby told me once that in his circle of friends in the 50's, jazz musicians were considered the very definition of style. He and his friends would, as best as they could afford, try to emulate the look of the musicians on the covers of the lps. He said that his favorites were Miles (of course) and Lee Morgan. Unfortunately, many of the current musicians have somehow bought into the lame argument that the music is more important than garb. I would tend to agree, if all they ever did was to play inside their homes. Once an artist demands payment for his craft, then that product needs to be packaged properly. One doesn't buy food that is haphazardly packaged either. Proper presentation makes food taste better, just as it can enhance a musical performance as well. Of course, it's a matter of taste and preference. Some folks don't mind drinking fine wine from a mayonaise jar....

Here's a couple of links to blogs which feature other viewpoints.

http://www.cymbalholic.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36548

http://blog.owlstudios.com/blog/owl-studios-blog/0/0/dress-code-for-jazz

There's also a online blog of a truly bitter and misguided individual, that no one has ever heard of, who, along with his tired bunch of loser friends, has taken it upon himself to attack me PERSONALLY with his "writings". His problem with me has nothing to do with the current topic but rather stems from a series of sensationalized misquotes that I allegedly said in a jazz magazine from over 20 years ago(!). (Anyone who doesn't know that magazine articles are chopped up, edited and embellished beyond recognition immediately after the actual interviews have taken place truly doesn't know how the game is played.) I don't know who he is and he has every right to disagree with my views, but he's taken these web wars to an entirely different level. He claims to be a saxophone player and critic and yet no one that I know has ever heard of him or even heard him play. Many so-called critics and self- proclaimed authorities on music and art are little more than frustrated hack musicians who spread poison in online forums. Their writing offers little resolve or insight as well. Just pure hate and jealousy. That said, I hope that we never meet. I'll leave it at that.

I'll conclude by suggesting that stage attire should be venue and genre specific. When I toured with Phil Lesh and the Dead, I wore jeans, sandals and appropriate garb for the gig. Actually, when i did wear jeans for those shows I considered myself to be dressing up for the gig because it was something that I would never do on my own. It was a stretch for me to even wear jeans on a gig. But that was what was expected and I went with the flow.

So do your thing and do it well. It wouldn't hurt to try to look great while doing it either.

Share on:

Late and infrequent posts

Greg Osby — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 01:11:00 -0500

I'd like to apologize to the senders of the endless stream of messages from those who would like to see me post on here more frequently. Unfortunately, I'm spread a little thin with multiple duties and responsibilities which prevent me from contributing as much as I would enjoy. I try to be as detailed as possible here and don't wish to offer senseless little "fill-ins' or meaningless little blurbs just to appear active. That said, I'll attempt to get back a bit more, in good time. Blogging by musicians who aren't seasoned writers isn't the easiest thing in the world to do - not by a long shot! But I'll continue to give it a go. I enjoy the exchanges and feedback as well.

Share on:

Jazz Bums

Greg Osby — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:19:00 -0400

Somewhere along the way, I haven't determined exactly when, it became acceptable for some musicians to think showing up for live (Jazz) performances wearing the same clothes that they wear anywhere else is the thing to do. These days it isn't that uncommon that a patron of the music, with hard-earned cash in hand, will venture out for an evening with hopes of enjoying some high art but instead will be offered a gig where some of the cats who perform will actually show up and get on stage with prominent holes and stains in/on their jeans, wrinkled and tattered t-shirts, dirty sneakers, visible underwear, greasy, unwashed hair (or bodies), dirty fingernails, or worse.... What the hell happened? When did it become acceptable for performers to look like they don't give a s--t? A quick look at any vintage photograph featuring the champions of the music reveals how much detail went into how they looked as well as how they sounded. Neither was any accident. (For that matter, look at the early photos of the Beatles....SUITS.) So why must the prestigious and noble face of the music be tarnished now with this mass nose thumbing at one of the more important aspects of performance etiquette? Irons are cheap and there's a dry cleaners on every other corner.

Now, don't get me wrong, in my private life, I'm just as casual and relaxed in my dress as anyone else. Sometimes I would even classify my look at home as "homeless chic". But once I step outside my house and venture into the world where simple minded people sometimes size you up immediately before you even have a chance to speak... well, let me just offer this to any of you who happen NOT to be a Black man who is always followed and eyed suspiciously whenever he decides to peruse the items in any retail establishment..if this was a constant part of your life that went back as far as you could remember, then you would understand why it is imperative to appear in public at all times as if you mean business. I certainly don't want to be mistaken for a thug, degenerate or anyone else who doesn't want to be taken seriously or respected. (Side note: Each and every time that I travel with casual wear , I am detained and searched thoroughly at airport security and customs. EVERY time.This is obvious character profiling, of course, but is definitely avoidable if my garb and external profile don't resemble that of a hellraiser.)

But where musical performances are concerned, jeans, baseball caps, sneakers and t-shirts and other extreme casual wear just doesn't cut it for me in terms of stage apparel. Not in my band, it doesn't. The exception, of course, would be some of the summer outdoor music festivals where we're often found performing in sweltering heat, or situations where we've had to rush to the bandstand directly form the airport after a day of hectic travel and near-missed flights. Sometimes there is absolutely no time that will allow for the band to "get it together" and one must perform "as is". But dressing as if you just woke up from falling asleep with your clothes on should not be an acceptable norm. I'm constantly surprised to find the number of Jazz musicians who feel that it's no big deal and argue that they're merely "dressing for comfort". I doubt very seriously that any member of any philharmonic orchestra would agree, or think for one minute that their job would be secure if they didn't appear for work dressed appropriately.

Once in or around 1983 or '84, during a break on a gig at a location that I can't immediately remember, Dizzy Gillespie, complimented me on the sharpness of my suit and relayed to me some stories about how meticulous some of the musicians had been about their "vines" (Jazzspeak for suits - hanging on your body like vines). He told me that a hip suit (and hat) were essential "the look" and that they would have never even considered performing in anything less. He concluded his story with the same phrase that I've heard said countless times when referring to the audience: "They SEE you before they HEAR you". I agree wholeheartedly with this and have to confess that I base my total enjoyment of any given performance on a multitude of factors - appearance and stage presence being two of them.

I would further contend that this slacker mode of dress has contributed to the devaluation of the music in terms of visual presentation and a steadily increasing lack of respect for an art form whose very participants sometimes don't appear to have much respect for anything other than subjecting their audiences to 10 chorus length solos and songs that last 30 minutes each - AND looking like derelicts while doing it!

In my own experience, I would have to admit that not only do I feel better about my presentation when I'm secure that everything is in place both with the music as well as with the business, but I also notice all too well how different I am treated and respected when I am dressed like a "grown-ass-man". In music, as well as in every other aspect of life, respect for oneself and the rich lineage that we've inherited deserves ample consideration and attention to every facet of the art form - not just being a "bad ass" on your instrument. So to those to whom this would apply: Clean up your act!

And for those of you who are members of Facebook, here's a link to trumpeter Sean Jones' online discussion that deals with the very same subject.

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=7762506156&topic=12383

Perhaps it's time for musicians to, along with the refinement of their craft, begin to reinvestigate the value and immediate benefits (WINK!) of being "clean" and "sharp as a tack" once again. I know, quite personally, a number of people who would support the music with a bit more enthusiasm if the musicians themselves didn't appear so aloof and disheveled. It's not so much to ask.

Thanks,

Share on:

Big Brother, Big Thief?

Greg Osby — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:21:00 -0400

I've recently been at odds about just how much I want to disclose publicly on online blogs, newsgroups and bulletin boards about my personal approach and composition methodology. Call it paranoia, or reverberations of shady dealings of the past, but it's no secret that Black musicians have been guilty of being generous to a fault - only to get shafted by the very personalities that they allowed into their circle of trust. Throughout history, time and time again, many innovations, brilliant ideas and glorious offerings have been adapted or outright stolen and used for insidious purposes that bore no reflection of the genius that initiated them or their true intent. Observation of such has made many, myself included, both wary and suspicious of alleged "information seekers" who grill me for my hard-gotten wares. This is most unfortunate, as most are genuine in their pursuit of informative higher learning. And yet, some are obviously on a quest for that "pot of gold" that will transform them from drifters with no true career objectives to overnight sensations who'll rock the world with a momentous eureka-type discovery that they had no part in the development of.

My current state of mind is not without precedent. In my developmental years, I'd often been in the presence of many great musical contributors who have been so jaded that they made me vow to never reveal the gems of light that they bestowed upon me. Several were of a generation and era where they were literally and unabashedly robbed of their gifts outright with no apologies. They commonly bore witness to seeing the careers of their white counterparts who miraculously, came out from nowhere and ascended to dizzying heights as beneficiaries of shadyly-acquired information. These practices, as commonplace as they were, makes it unbelievable that any information would have been shared at all. And yet, as I have also witnessed, it was a joyous occasion when these very personalities, through their suspicions, actually have "given up the goods" and untold amounts of questions were miraculously answered with the dissemination of a few choice verbal treasures and anecdotes. One simply can't buy information or experience of this sort anywhere - anymore. This is evidence that sharing is indeed important. I firmly believe in extending a lifeline to anyone who is sincere and earnest in their inquiries.

But before I fully comply with any such requests, I first have to question motives and intentions of those in want. I also have to think of what the result of my disclosures would ultimately mean on a broader scope. For instance, there's already a bit of grumbling going around about there being too many white artists representing and speaking authoritatively on behalf of the music. This, in reaction to the current documentary "Icons Among Us", of which I am also a participant. The criticism is that the Brothers have been systematically displaced in order to make room for a new generation of successful white guys who haven't payed any real dues - meaning that they didn't play with any of the greats, and yet are held in high esteem and dominate the bookings of all of the most prominent festivals and tours. It's not entirely how I feel, but I certainly have questioned how some current artists got to their present stature so quickly and easily, when their track records don't include having played with any important contributors in the music. I've never heard of several of them and certainly wouldn't classify some of their presentations as Jazz or even Jazz-based. Improvisational, psuedo-classical or experimental, yes, but containing almost no Jazz elements whatsoever. However, none of this is a criticism. Much of the same has been said of my own music.

But would I be wrong to fear that by maintaining an "open book" policy on the workings of my craft to anyone who inquires, I would be setting myself up for those very persons to use my discoveries for their own purposes and in the meantime, leave me in the dust?

Makes me wonder... but I don't want to turn into a musical Howard Hughes or Marlon Brando in the process. So, for the time being I'll simply try to step lightly and make wise decisions.

With this said, I may still have to sleep with one eye open - so to speak.

Share on:

First things first...

Greg Osby — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 17:42:00 -0400

I'd like to begin by thanking the folks at Indaba Music for encouraging me to offer a few of my personal thoughts and perspectives on modern music and it's processes via this blog. Keep in mind that my postings will be merely my own e-pinions, and are based on observations made whilst on the road, in the studio, in the classroom, or based upon a number timeless gems of information that have been bestowed upon me by a great many of the noble elders. So basically, the writings will emanate from the position of actually having been there and witnessed these things as opposed to something that I'd heard or read about. There'll be wide coverage, but I'll be limited to what I can actually respond to. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing what's on your minds.

Share on: