Smooth Jazz - Public Reception

Public Reception

The Allmusic guide article on "fusion" states that "unfortunately, as it became a money-maker and as rock declined artistically from the mid-'70s on, much of what was labeled fusion was actually a combination of jazz with easy-listening pop music and lightweight R&B."

Music critic Piero Scaruffi has called pop-fusion music "...mellow, bland, romantic music" made by "mediocre musicians" and "derivative bands." Scaruffi criticized some of the albums of Michael and Randy Brecker as "trivial dance music" and stated that alto saxophonist David Sanborn recorded "rivial collections" of "...catchy and danceable pseudo-jazz". Kenny G in particular is often criticized by both fusion and jazz fans, and some musicians, while having become a huge commercial success. Music reviewer George Graham argues that the “so-called ‘smooth jazz’ sound of people like Kenny G has none of the fire and creativity that marked the best of the fusion scene during its heyday in the 1970s”.

The over-30 audience in the US enjoys the melodic nature of the music, its frequent revival of Pop standards and its freedom from histrionic vocal lines). The appeal of smooth jazz is also developing in the late-teen and 20s age groups in East Asia (especially Japan) and in Europe. In particular, late-night coffee bars play smooth jazz in order to create an enticing late-night, non-alcoholic social atmosphere where conversation is encouraged.

In the United Kingdom, British jazz performer Digby Fairweather, before the launch of UK jazz station theJazz, denounced the change to a smooth jazz format on defunct radio station 102.2 Jazz FM, stating that the owners, GMG Radio were responsible for the "attempted rape and (fortunately abortive) re-definition of the music — is one that no true jazz lover within the boundaries of the M25 will ever find it possible to forget or forgive."

Read more about this topic:  Smooth Jazz

Famous quotes containing the words public and/or reception:

    Are we bereft of citizenship because we are mothers, wives and daughters of a mighty people? Have women no country—no interests staked in public weal—no liabilities in common peril—no partnership in a nation’s guilt and shame?
    Angelina Grimké (1805–1879)

    But in the reception of metaphysical formula, all depends, as regards their actual and ulterior result, on the pre-existent qualities of that soil of human nature into which they fall—the company they find already present there, on their admission into the house of thought.
    Walter Pater (1839–1894)