(Aug 12 2025) Tradition VS Innovation, What’s Better?
Over the last couple of decades it seems as though jazz has been going through yet another divide about what the definition of the word actually means and the music it represents. On one hand you have numerous artists forging new paths, integrating new technologies and approaches into their music who identify with the word jazz, while you have others suggesting that the definition of jazz should be restricted to styles of the past. Neither is right or wrong and both present incredible positives to the world of music. Unfortunately, in this field both approaches seem to clash far too often as if one has to be the victor when in reality there is enough room in this world for both viewpoints to coexist. While this is quite a large topic to step into, I’m going to dedicate this particular entry to a much smaller niche, specifically the world of large ensemble arranging.
At one point in jazz history, the big band was considered an innovation. Yes I know that seems like ancient history these days, but back in the second half of the 1920s and 1930s, the big band was a new vehicle for jazz. It presented a shift from the previous outlook, namely that of Early Jazz, filled with small ensemble sizes, group improvisation, and all of the other glorious characteristics that helped form the start of jazz. At first, the big band wasn’t like what we know today and was primarily formed out of a slow inclusion of more instruments. The saxophone joined the lineup (there are definitely some accounts of saxes being used earlier but they didn’t become the mainstream and replace the clarinet until this time period) and then a few more brass were added. The tuba then changed to the string bass and the banjo to the guitar. Small shifts made by dozens of ensembles across the United States, all of which eventually came together to become the staple instrumentation we now use.
With more instruments and different textures came new approaches to writing music, and larger ensembles meant there was now a greater demand for written arrangements. Within the span of a decade, a whole myriad of approaches were experimented with and quite quickly the most popular became the foundations for big band arranging. These included techniques such as using block voicings in the horns, something which went against the favored classical composition approaches of the time. However, due to musicians such as Duke Ellington not having a formal background in music composition, these techniques found themselves implemented in large ensemble jazz settings quite quickly. Other notable mentions include Don Redman who split the saxes and brass in his arrangements for the Fletcher Henderson band and pretty much established the foundation for big band orchestration throughout the Swing Era.
Eventually, all of these components worked together to pretty much remove the emphasis of improvisation in swing music. Yes there were still many bands which championed improvisation, but the majority of bands focused on dance arrangements with short improvisation sections, a far cry from the previous era of jazz. Was one approach better or worse than the other? These days there are a lot of people who love swing music from the 30s and 40s, and if it wasn’t for this period of time it is likely that jazz as we know it today wouldn’t exist. However it also marked such a drastic change to what Early Jazz had established that at the time many saw it as not a form of jazz at all. Regardless, shortly after another innovation in jazz presented itself in Bebop, and with it came the same sort of arguments as to whether it was jazz or not too.
Shifting the period back to modern day, we live in a time where we have access to more information than any other time in history. As such, there are even more viewpoints of what is correct and incorrect, and unfortunately the system which grants us access to such an abundance of knowledge, the internet, also provides everyone with equal footing to argue about it. Personally, I love the fact that organizations such as Jazz at Lincoln Center are bringing more attention to music of years past but at the same time I love that other ensembles and artists such as Maria Schneider are pushing large ensemble jazz in a new direction. We wouldn’t exist today without the innovations of prior generations and it is deserved that we can enjoy the fruits of those actions. But at the same time we must also realize that life isn’t stagnant and that even if we are not the one’s innovating, that someone else in the field is off experimenting and will likely bring in the next era of popular techniques that define the coming years. Seldom as a society do we sit out on yesterday’s approaches, otherwise we would still be using horses for transportation or perhaps lighting our houses with fire.
Well last week I said I was going to try and stick to a somewhat regular schedule with these newsletter entries but next week I’m going to have to take another week off. That’s because I’m going on an intense 7 day archive trip where I’ll be submerging myself into the original scores of Machito, Fletcher Henderson, Don Redman, Ellington and more. Looking at the schedule, I don’t think I’ll be able to fit in any computer time to write an entry so you’ll just have to wait an extra week for the next one.
Until next time,
Toshi