How far have we really come?
Monday, March 1, 2010 at 9:08AM Every time I listen to the Hi-Lo's or Singers Unlimited, it amazes me how much of what we think of as today's vocal jazz sound was already happening at the beginning, and how far we haven't really moved from Gene Puerling's sound and style. Perhaps it's not important that we do, as long as some number young people are "indoctrinated" into the vocal jazz world each year to keep the music alive as it is (and was). I imagine that barbershoppers (a subculture to which I don't belong, but I have a little understanding and a lot of respect) must have this conversation amongst themselves often. Maybe at the afterglow or the glimmer?
The number of major developments in writing techniques in vocal jazz, when compared with it's sister, instrumental jazz, is incredibly small. The music has moved and shifted around slowly, always with at least one foot in Gene's camp, and there are a number of potential reasons for this that I've been pondering.
1. Jazz essentialism, of the sort that has often been espoused by Wynton Marsalis, is deeply rooted in a major part of the vocal jazz education and arranging community. That is...if the music doesn't satisfy a certain number of a required essential elements, it's not vocal jazz, and shouldn't be performed by a "vocal jazz ensemble" at any level. Those elements are, commonly, swing, improvisation, seventh and dominant based harmony, a connection with the blues, a connection with African-American culture, lyrics (specific to vocal jazz, of course). School and professional groups who start to stray from the essentialist community's view of "vocal jazz" may risk condemnation and rejection.
2. The appeal of vocal jazz ensemble singing is limited to those who can understand the complexities of it on some level and have the talent and "ears" to perform it. With group singing, this can be more difficult than for group jazz instrumental playing (big bands), in which, at least, players can read music at every stage of the process and press down keys to produce the desired sounds. Vocal jazzers memorize for their concerts and must be able to sing dissonant intervals in tune, and slightly more than in instrumental ensembles, I think, vocal jazz groups rely on the strength of every individual, because one unfortunately cast singer one a mic can bring down an otherwise very good vocal jazz group.
3. School choral directors may be less versed in jazz by the time they start teaching high school or college than band directors, and so they may be less likely to start a vocal jazz program where it doesn't already exist than their instrumental counterparts would be to start a big band program.
4. Vocal jazz requires money for sound equipment, in order for a group to properly rehearse. Beyond that, it requires someone who knows how to operate the gear.
5. Vocal improvisation is sparsely recorded, as opposed to instrumental jazz, and so most student vocal jazzers have either never heard it done at all by the time they start singing in a group, or they've only heard it done by their peers, at a basic level.
There are many more possible avenues for discussion here, and I'm ending this blog entry simply because of time...I have to get to school and teach vocal jazz! But I may try to find time to write more on the subject later, and I'd encourage you to add comments below with your own contribution to the subject.
Our VOTD is, of course, from the Hi-Lo's....
Reader Comments (2)
I'm really glad you posted this entry. It's a subject that really needs to be discussed in depth by those in the vocal jazz community. As a whole, we're in this bubble where we think we're pushing the boundaries, and yet we still always go back to the same stuff vocal jazz was doing in the beginning. There is far too much prejudice against wordless vocals, and pop-jazz charts. Although, I should remind you that Folsom does INCREDIBLY well at competitions, and usually half their set is pop-jazz, with at least one wordless chart.
There also seems to be a tendency, at the college level, to think of jazz and contemporary vocal music as "non-base" music. The vast majority of colleges only offer classical voice as an area of study, even if they also have a well-established instrumental jazz program as well. For some reason, most music educators seem to think that you can not learn your fundamentals from studying jazz or pop, that only classical training can teach you the fundamentals of vocal technique. I completely disagree with that position, and I've found it to be extremely difficult to find schools which offer strong programs in jazz and/or contemporary voice.
I have a friend who is a jazz drummer, but also spent some time in a vocal jazz ensemble. He and I argue ALL the time about vocal vs. instrumental jazz. He contends that ensemble vocal jazz doesn't require nearly the level of musicianship that ensemble instrumental jazz does. He even goes so far as to say that most of the vocal jazz ensemble stuff out there isn't "real" jazz. I fiercely disagree with him, but it is because of the level of vocal jazz writing and education that's out there right now that he's even able to suggest that. You go to a festival, and there will be maybe a handful of good vocal groups there, and an abundance of incredible big bands and combos. Instrumentalists also have a tendency to be much more well-versed in the jazz idiom, better sight-readers, and better improvisers. However, I don't think this points to vocal jazz being "easier"; in fact, it may even point to vocal jazz being more difficult, because so fewer people are able to get a good grasp on the skills required to pull it off.
Jazz vocal is a small niche subdivision of the niche that is jazz. It can be expected that the pioneers will turn up in the instrumental jazz world. If vocal jazz isn't keeping up, we have to ask why.
The biggest restriction of jazz vocal writing is the practicalities of performing the music. Take a contemporary big band tune, you'd need some pretty experienced singers to pull it off. Chromaticisms and angular parts are much more easily played on an instrument with keys and buttons than sung. The more complex the harmony, the more difficult to sing. To be achievable, I think the writing has to be more conservative.
I have no truck with your jazz essentialism argument. For me, Wynton is the anti-jazz, trying to restrict jazz to a particular form and era, when by definition jazz is about creativity and progression.It's a shame he's become a bit of an establishment figure. If the 4/4 swing, dominant seventh harmony style of jazz is the standard (no pun intended), and directors never move past that, it's a shame, but understandable. Who are these composers who have such reverence for the rules? Don't they realise they're missing the point?
There are few vocal groups of note to inspire. For me, it's either Take 6 (kind of gospel but with jazz harmonies) or New York Voices (they've done a wide range of stuff, but probably still get most response for their more traditional things). Bobby McFerrin is a good source of creative vocal group music, and that's often not labelled jazz.
In the UK, there is no high school and university glee or jazz vocal group tradition. There are a few vocal groups who claim to sing jazz, but almost all of these are really from a classical or musical theatre background, and you can really hear it in the phrasing and diction (I'd include the Swingle Singers in this they're very good at what they do, I just think what they do is stylistically inappropriate)
I'd love you to hear my choir, the London Vocal Project, although we're as yet unrecorded. We're a collection of graduates from London conservatoire jazz courses, and the choir has come out of a vocal ensemble that Pete Churchill ran at the Guildhall school in London. We've been going a couple of years.
We have a few sets of repertoire: firstly a gospelesque set, groove and soul tunes. But since we're trained musicians, and have come from a jazz background, we do those things as well. A lot of the things we do are European jazz influenced. Last year we did a vocal suite by Kenny Wheeler (in London, regarded as the greatest European-style jazz writers). Pete's own charts often have ECM-type harmony and grooves, and are influenced by English folk and pastoral music. We haven't really touched much on American swing and bop-styled music. I really think we're doing something fresh.
B