Smooth Jazz is Not True Jazz

 This has been a week of celebrities dropping like flies - from rock and roll icon Ozzy Osbourne, to Malcolm Jamal Warner (who played Theo on the old Cosby Show) to wrestling legend Hulk Hogan, it just seems surreal that these individuals, who were practically household names in my younger years, are gone.  Yet another I found out about was "smooth jazz" pioneer Chuck Mangione, who passed away a couple of days ago.  While Mangione was a virtuoso flugelhorn and trumpet player, he was not a classic jazz musician in the mold of legends like Theolonius Monk, Duke Ellington, or Gerry Mulligan.  The music Mangione was noted for - which in itself was not unpleasant, but was just not true jazz - was a continuation of a form of instrumental music that started in the 1960s with people like Herb Alpert and would later evolve into what is called now "smooth jazz."  However, in comparison to hacks like Kenny G who came later, Mangione had a level of taste and sophistication that could be appreciated, as he was a talented musician.  May rest eternal come to him, and Light Perpetual shine upon him at his passing at the age of 84.  

I know of Chuck Mangione's music somewhat when I was younger, as my uncle Junior listened to a radio station of soft rock at night which often played other things too, including the one Mangione record I am familiar with, "Give It All You Got."  This hit the pop charts sometime around 1978 or 1979, and while not as well-known as his other famous recording, "Feels So Good," it was pretty well-known for its time.  Most of the junk that played on Junior's radio at night - his bedroom was next to ours, so you could hear his radio all over upstairs in my grandmother's house - was stuff I frankly hated.  However, for some reason, when Mangione's "Give It All You Got" came on, I sorta liked it, although I was not by any means a fan of what was essentially glorified Muzak.  It took a number of years before I even knew the name of that record, but I found out later what it was.  Mangione's record was an early foray into flirting with the sounds that would later be considered jazz, but once I was exposed to real jazz, Mangione fell by the wayside with me, and I don't frankly have any desire to like him anymore in all honesty.  When one tastes a filet mignon, you don't go back to eating hot dogs, in other words.  And, compared to classic stuff like Thelonius Monk, Gerry Mulligan, Dizzy Gillespie, Charlie Parker, and Miles Davis, there is no comparison to the knock-off stuff Mangione played. So, the question arises - what is the difference between classic jazz and "smooth jazz?"  For starters, let's give a little music history of the latter.

Smooth jazz evolved out of what was called "light music" in the 1940s and 1950s, especially that played by large orchestras such as those of Mantovani and Andre Konstelanetz - in other words, it was sort of sterile background music that was at the time passed off as "classical."  By the early 1960s, it turned into the later recordings of Ray Conniff, as well as individuals such as Peter Nero, Ferrante and Teicher, and Bert Kaempfert.   This would later become what was known as "elevator music," or in more mass-produced forms by obscure ensembles, Muzak.  In the midst of this were a series of instrumentalists who capitalized on this genre, and after adapting pop rhythms and even cheap knockoffs of well-known songs, they consisted of individuals such as trumpeter Herb Alpert and his group called the Tijuana Brass.  While some music historians would dispute it, I would have to credit Herb Alpert with being the grandfather of what would become "smooth jazz," because it was a somewhat inferior imitation of the real stuff.  From Herb Alpert, and as the 1960s morphed into the 1970s, what became known as "smooth jazz" began to be picked up by performers such as Spiro Gyra, Al Jarreau (who frankly sucks as a musician), and of course on the better end, Chuck Mangione. From that, "smooth jazz" grew into a genre, and new and even less-impressive individuals like the notorious saxophonist Kenny G would come later.  So, in essence, "smooth jazz" has become Muzak with a backbeat in recent decades, and why on earth entire radio stations would be devoted to broadcasting it.  In recent years, "smooth jazz" has devolved further into what is essentially a more toned-down, instrumental form of R&B, and there is really no difference between "Soul" music and "Smooth Jazz" except the latter is more prominently instrumental.  And, true aficionados of classic jazz have nothing to do with this stuff called "smooth jazz," as they are different animals altogether.  There are some who try to link "smooth jazz" with jazz fusion made popular by individuals such as Freddy Hubbard in the early 1970s, but there is no comparison - even with the more rockish flavor of jazz fusion, it is still jazz, and even Freddy Hubbard's 1970 classic album Red Clay is still part of the classic jazz idiom and in no way is remotely similar to schlock like Kenny G. And, except for perhaps being both Black, "smooth jazz" artist Spyro Gyra has nothing in common with even the most outlandish jazzmen like Sun Ra - as eccentric and hard to figure out as Sun Ra can be sometimes, he is still definitely part of the jazz legacy. Spiro Gyra, on the other hand, is basically a failed soul singer who could not make it with the big dogs on Soul Train, so he rebranded himself to make a fast buck playing bland, boring, and frankly silly junk in the idiom of "smooth jazz."  So, what does this have to do with Chuck Mangione?  Let's circle back to that.

Despite being identified with the sterile, soulless "smooth jazz" idiom, one thing that stood out about Chuck Mangione is that he is actually a top-notch musician.  The difference with Mangione was that he started his career playing with one of the most stellar jazz legends, drummer Art Blakey.  Therefore, unlike so many of these "smooth jazz" hacks, Mangione at least had a background in real jazz.  So, what in hell happened then?  I think the question can be answered by one word - money!  My guess about this is that Mangione clearly had the talent, but let some tone-deaf record producer talking him into selling out, much in the same way many pop musicians have done in the past 50 or so years.  Had Mangione stuck with classic jazz instead of "going commercial," I think he would have had the potential of being a legend ranked with Louis Armstrong, Bix Beiderbecke, Dizzy Gillespie, Harry James, and other true jazzmen.  The more music becomes synonymous with money, the more integrity it loses.  That is what makes Chuck Mangione a tragedy in American music history.  The potential for being a jazz legend was reduced to just being nostalgic background music now at the local Walmart (this was spoofed by Mike Judge in his hit animated series King of the Hill, as the faux sophisticate Peggy Hill thought Chuck Mangione was high-class music - I mean, her character was so bad that she even butchered the Spanish language by uttering "poor favor" at Mexican-Americans!).  So sad!

Admittedly, it seems as if Mangione did try to summon his classic jazz roots in recordings like "Give it All You Got," as that recording became the theme song of the 1980 Winter Olympics, which also may explain its huge popularity later.  The recording does have a decent level of sophistication, and the potential is there for it to have possibly become a classic recording had it not become overly commercialized.  Oddly, it was a sell-out like Mangione who became the music icon, while his mentor, Art Blakey, was a true legend who is only remembered by dedicated classic jazz fans like myself.  But, that is the world we live in - we sell out to things that look so polished and shiny that often we overlook the real treasures in front of us.  We are built on a society that worships outer qualities but ignores or belittles more internal, lasting qualities.  So, instead of paying a few dollars more for authentic craftsmanship even when we look for items to buy, we settle for inferior shiny, plastic junk that is made in China by slave labor for pennies on the dollar.  There is a more subtle reason for this which makes even more sense though, so let me spell it out.

Cheap junk can be mass-produced, quickly sold, and is marketed widely to appeal to our desire for "convenience."  However, we find out soon that the cheap junk doesn't last long, and needs to be replaced within sometimes a matter of months.  This is by design, as the more of a product a greedy corporate oligarch can sell, the richer they get, so who gives a damn about quality?  The word is quantity, and as a Baptist minister named Marshall Maglothin said many years ago in a sermon, we are a society built on the "Nine M's of Yuppieism" - money, microwaves, minivans, and more, more, more for me, me, me.  Another Baptist minister I remember from my college days, Dr. Jerry Spencer, expressed this sentiment in a humorous but highly accurate quote - "It's a day of sex thrills, pep pills, crooked deals,  and you can't tell the Jacks from the Jills!"  The idea of both of these quotes is this - we live in a society that compromises greed for grace, and common sense for convenience.  The music industry these days is rife with this garbage, which is why in the past 40 years or so much contemporary music is bad - it is tasteless, useless, artificial, and frankly garbage, and that includes the junk called "smooth jazz."  Even some of my friends that like rock music notice it - they lament the fact that Ozzy Osbourne died not just because he was a pretty decent person (and surprisingly he really was in real life) but because that is what they say was "real rock" - they view Taylor Swift with the same degree of disdain that many of us jazz fans view Kenny G, and for the same reason.  I see it also with many friends and relatives who love classic country music too - they hate Garth Brooks because he is no Hank Williams Sr. or Johnny Cash.  People who have an ear and genuine taste for a certain genre of music tend to know the difference between cheap knockoffs and genuine talent, and for many of us who collect records, it is even more evident - modern music of all genres has lost something, namely its soul. The sad fact is that artists like Chuck Mangione were immensely talented, and had they valued their talent more than their bank accounts, it would have made a difference.  Chuck Mangione - God rest his soul and comfort his family as he was a fellow human being - was a musical sellout, and while technically not near as bad as his successors such as Kenny G, it is still tragic.  So, while we mourn his loss as sign of human decency, his music was a disappointment. 

I have went off on this soapbox before, and hope I did not repeat a lot of my long-held sentiments here.  However, if Western Civilization is to thrive, we need to respect our roots and not sell them out to the highest bidder for wealth and fame.  Thank you for allowing me to share with you again today.