Definitions: "jam band"

[nat whilk II]

We need occasional threads to tease out definitions of new words and phrases emerging from "those who make up the new words and keep the definitions secret" whoever they are....

 

so I see Medeski Martin & Wood, my favorite jazz B-3 trio, dubbed a "jam band of sorts" in some reviews, like "jam band" is some new life-form newly flown in from wherever.

 

Does "jam band" mean anything more than an instrumental band that finds a groove and, well, jams? If so, this is NOT a good label for MMW at all - those guys are serious jazzers.

 

So what does "jam band" mean these days to those in the know???? What bands, if any, define "jam band"?

 

nat whilk ii

[Redsand187]

From my understanding, it's just a group of guys getting together for nothing serious. They are just jamming, wether it's just a groove they get started or some favorite covers. I believe Camp Freddy and the Cardboard Vampyres have been called jam bands, which in reality, they are just a covers band. But when you are a rich and famous Rock Stars you can label yourself however you want.

[Lee Knight]

Jam Band = Hippies. No songs. Carrying on the tradition of the Greatful Dead. Birkenstock. Macrobiotic. No songs. Berkley. No songs. Lot's of solos. Sell lots a tickets to shows. Don't sell any CD's. No songs. Realllllllly looooong solossssss. Do drugs. No songs.

 

Medeski Martin & Wood aren't that.

 

P.S. VW Van with Dead stickers as band van... and no songs.

 

Edit:

[Johnny Storm]

The "Greatful" Dead had no songs, huh? HAHA! What a supreme load of bull{censored}.

 

Spending your time worrying about which label to apply to music is total waste.

 

MMW and the Dead are (were) both great bands who exhibit(ed) a lot of improvisation, or "jamming" - I have no interest in labelling them. I just like to listen to them.

[nat whilk II]

in my planet we use words to like y'know - communicate. Handy things, words. Come in handy to distinguish things according to their actual characteristics 'n stuff.

 

No one here worrying as far as I can tell - just seeking understanding and free food.

 

 

nat whilk ii

[Johnny Storm]

That's cute, but I never said words were bad. I simply said it's a total waste of time trying to label music.

 

You're free to spend your time productively or not. Of course, arguing on internet forums isn't very productive, now, is it?

[Steve LeBlanc]

"jam band" = nothing word that people use to promote themselves

 

Hendrix jammed

[nat whilk II]

Originally posted by Johnny Storm That's cute, but I never said words were bad. I simply said it's a total waste of time trying to label music. You're free to spend your time productively or not. Of course, arguing on internet forums isn't very productive, now, is it?

 

 

Sorry, I'll drop the cute stuff. But I really don't see how anyone can summarily declare that it's a total waste of time to label (or define or classify or analyze) music. Music is not so spiritual as to be totally undiscussable - it's, as whoever said it - organized sound., and lends itself - to a point - to discussion and so on.

 

Arguing, sure - usually a waste of time. And getting all exercised about pigeonholing things into artificial categories, sure - boring. But, seriously - no sarcasm at all - nouns are just labels and it helps me to know what people are talking about when they use one I'm not familiar with.

 

nat whilk ii

[Johnny Storm]

Again, I never said there's anything wrong with discussing or analyzing music. I just think that spending more than a few seconds thinking about how to classify a band's genre is a total waste of time. And often, pigeonholing can ultimately be bad for a band's career.

 

Of course, I have no problems with discussing music. Heck, right now I'm spending time discussing the discussion of music!

[MorePaul]

I think it can be a valuable exercise

 

I mean, it allows us to compare/contrast -- look at context, challenge our own preconceptions and perceptions, challenge us to organize our thoughts

 

 

We don't have to be victims of the analysis -- the analysis itself has a context. The "pidgeonholing" comes from that (often not exploring the exercise fully, but simply making a surface judgement), not the analysis itself.

 

In the same way, Mr. Knight made some negative comments - well, that can cause the ole amygadala to start a firin'

our IFF goes sensitive and we might even start classifying Knight and Nat together...but if we explore our classification further, we may see a difference in demeanor, intent, etc..so we revise our IFF

[nat whilk II]

I couldn't agree more especially with the part about slacking at work.

 

nat whilk ii

[MorePaul]

hey...someone's got to do it

 

this work isn't going to get deferred by itself...

wait...

 

let's just keep that our little secret shall we

[jfricker]

The Jam Band scene is quite alive and well. Genealogically speaking, it's bands that have roots in the Grateful Dead, Allman Brothers, and/or Miles Davis (think birth of fusion).

 

Currently, there are festivals centered around the scene such as High Sierra in California and the Super Fly concert series during JazzFest. Oh yeah, Bonnoroo in TN brought out 100k or so people a couple years in a row. Huge festival.

 

Musically speaking, it's a pretty wide meta-category of music. Rock and Roll bands (like Moe. and Widespread Panic), solo acoustic acts (like Keller Williams), funk (like Spearhead and Karl Denson), fusion jazz (Living Daylights, The Slip), bluegrass (Yonder Mountain String Band), world beat fusion (Trilok Gurtu Band), and other weird niches fall into the scene.

 

I think the common distinguishing feature of bands in the Jam Band scene is that they are fantastic performers. I believe there are two general schools of music: composition and performance. Great composers sometimes are lousy performers and visa versa. Like Joe Cocker - his performances are known for his covers more than his originals. Nothing against him, he's a great performer.

 

Now Steely Dan is a great example too. Fagen and Becker are *great* composers but when I saw them live I was disappointed. It was an excellent concert, just like the CDs with extra solos and different band members. But compared to the Jam Band scene the show wasn't that "lively" if you know what I mean. If I wanted a one take studio performance, I would ask for outtakes on the CDs.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love Steely Dan. It's just the difference between leaving a concert and saying "Awesome that was just like the CD" and "Awesome they blew my mind and changed how I think about music."

 

 

That is the appeal of the Jam Band scene. It's live music that's pushing some interesting boundaries in the tradition of the Grateful Dead, Allman Brothers, and Miles Davis among many others.

 

Check out www.jambase.com for more about the scene.

 

Or just hit a festival and get the full experience.

[MorePaul]

So by "performer" you mean extem. performance?

[Hard Truth]

I think jfrickers definition "Genealogically speaking, it's bands that have roots in the Grateful Dead, Allman Brothers, and/or Miles Davis" accurately describes the intended meaning when people use the term to describe a band.

 

What's interesting is that the "jam band" label arguably says more about the audience than the bands themselves. The bands have very diverse sounds, but what they have in common is an audience willing to put up with extended improvisation that is outside of the jazz conventions.

[nat whilk II]

Hey, a wealth of info.....thanks jfricker.

 

nat whilk ii

[Johnny Storm]

Originally posted by MorePaul The "pidgeonholing" comes from that (often not exploring the exercise fully, but simply making a surface judgement), not the analysis itself.

That's a good point. I think I may have lost this argument. BTW, what does IFF mean?

 

I think jfricker came pretty close to nailing the definition of what a jam band is. It's true that the classification is a "pretty wide meta-category" which includes bands and artists who play many different styles of music.

 

One aspect I think jfricker forgot to mention, though, is the featured exhibition of improvisation amongst "jam bands." Most of these bands feature lengthy improvisational sections (called "jams") during their performances. Hard truth mentioned this in his post.

[Electric Catfish]

Originally posted by Lee Knight Jam Band = Hippies. No songs. Carrying on the tradition of the Greatful Dead. Birkenstock. Macrobiotic. No songs. Berkley. No songs. Lot's of solos. Sell lots a tickets to shows. Don't sell any CD's. No songs. Realllllllly looooong solossssss. Do drugs. No songs. Medeski Martin & Wood aren't that. P.S. VW Van with Dead stickers as band van... and no songs.

 

The Dead had more songs than all your favorite bands put together, guaranteed.

 

The fact that you apparently can't spell the word "Grateful" pretty much shows that you have no idea what the {censored} you're talking about.

 

Tell Robert Hunter he never wrote a song.

 

Steve

[jahozer]

In fact the Dead would play a 6 night stretch with no repeat "songs".

When Bruce Hornsby joined in 91, he needed to know a 300 song catalogue. That was in no means the entire rep, but just what they were doing on that tour. There were at least 3 tours a year for 30 years.

Any musician who knew Jerry Garcia personally notes how amazed at the encyclopedic depth of his musical knowledge and how many songs he knew, from jazz standards to obscure 40's gospel and virtually every folk song ever.

 

Their songs frequently utilize odd time sigs, extended chords, key changes and exotic scales.

Branford Marsalis was a frequent guest. As were the Nevile Brothers, Carlos Santana, Spencer Davis, Steve Winwood, et al.

Not bad for a bunch of no song slackers.

 

The continued genre of jambands carry the tradition of playing their songs and taking them somewhere different when they play. Much in the tradition of Miles Davis and John Cotraine. That is why the followings are so loyal. They can expect excellent musicianship and something different each time they see them.

Go to www.archive.org . Much of the Deads catalogue is all there for free. Many crisp soundboard recordings from the seventies. The dead pioneered giving as much to their fans as possible and utilizing the most high tech gear available. After the Wall of Sound system grew too combersome in 1974, they sold it to pink Floyd. Phil Lesh still gives select soundboards of his shows away on his website. His recent collaborations include, John Scofield, Warren Haynes, and Jimmy Herring.

So yes the solos are long, but what is wrong with musicians playing their instumentrs, yes the fans are loyal, for good reason.

How big is your bands catalogue? Who do you play with?

[whamtone]

Hey, guys, give Lee Knight the benefit of the doubt.

Even though I'm a recovering deadhead myself, I can see his point.(Although a might have helped.)

After all, he did admit "sells alot of tickets to their shows"!

And in the sense of "Intro-verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge-verse-chorus-outro" all in three minutes, he might be right about "No songs". Jam bands are not famous for their radio-friendly hit singles ya know.

 

... but that's just my two wheatbacks...

[Lee Knight]

Originally posted by Electric Catfish The Dead had more songs than all your favorite bands put together, guaranteed. The fact that you apparently can't spell the word "Grateful" pretty much shows that you have no idea what the {censored} you're talking about. Tell Robert Hunter he never wrote a song. Steve

 

Just the kind of response I was looking for! Just joking... I'm not a fan of the genre, can you tell? I tease all the hippies I know. Old habits die hard. I'm "Grateful" for any chance to poke fun at this phenomenon...

 

 

[MorePaul]

Originally posted by Johnny Storm That's a good point. I think I may have lost this argument. BTW, what does IFF mean?

 

no winning or losing, we're just discussin!

 

IFF - short for "Identification : Friend or Foe"

[Electric Catfish]

 

Originally posted by Lee Knight   Just the kind of response I was looking for! Just joking... I'm not a fan of the genre, can you tell? I tease all the hippies I know. Old habits die hard. I'm "Grateful" for any chance to poke fun at this phenomenon...

[Steve LeBlanc]

 

What's interesting is that the "jam band" label arguably says more about the audience than the bands themselves.

 

 

most definitly and in general that audience is seen as selfish and weird by people who aren't part of the scene (y'know, like Scientology)

 

the musicians are mostly just taking gigs and playing music

[jahozer]

Yeah we can be a bit sensitive...

But as a musician, I can't help but defend the genre against a pervasive attitude from those not into it that it is not a valid form of musical expression. We tend to catch a lot of flack...

There are certainly those fans in the scene that are mere fluffers and lapp up anything their respective gods piss in their ears. But I know better and can fight the naysayers with theory. Believe me, I have done my share of heckling at Jerry himself. The improv spirit of this type of music journey can really set you up for a major fall, but only because you can potentially climb so high. In other words, sometimes it works and sometimes it don't.

 

I also know that it ain't for everyone. Thats for sure. You really do have to like guitar solos and looooong songs.

 

We also cut "the boys" a little slack when they screw up lyrics and whatnot, more so than a band that is executing the exact show over and over. There is more ebb and flow it all.

 

The structure really is there. Its just extended with long bits of improv.

Believe it or not the grateful dead taught me more about song structure than any other band. Before I got it, I was a big theory head, and much more "abstract in my aproach to music. Once I settled down and discovered that there certainly was form to their songs and that if I wanted to comunicate, I had to learn it. Only then would the "freeform" aspects have relevance and context, adding to the overall texture of the musical fabric and not just some blob of notes....