Dividing 20th century pop music into 2 distinct eras: Interpretation vs. Originality

[N_Singh]

I think it's two fundamentally different eras, even the terminology is different. *Standards* vs. *Covers*.

Covers are frowned upon, that's what run-of-the-mill local bar bands do. We live in an era where bands have trademarked names, and these trademarks must be preserved at all costs. Look at the uproar when band with trademarked name hires a new singer. "How dare they perform these songs without so-and-so!" is the outcry. Look at the stupid outrage here that Jon Anderson is not allowed to sing in Yes--incidentally, have their trademarked the word "Yes"?

Sure, there's plenty of good songs. But the signal-to-noise ratio is largely miniscule.

The standards era was one of the professional songwriter, in which everyone was invited to give their interpretation to a song. Listen to what Coltrane did to *Out of This World* and compare that version with the Gerry Mulligan Concert Band. Or Chris Connor's vocal version with Ella's or Frank's.

In a way, the time periods are apples and oranges, largely incompatible. It may be a gross over simplification to say that the point of the post Elvis era is to be original at all costs, but the end result is often, paradoxically, mass conformity and generic-sounding music and paint-by-numbers tunes. How many different ways can you arrange a song that consists of electric guitar, bass, and drums, when you explicitly LIMIT the harmony of the tune and greatly simplify the melody?

This is the long-and-winding-road, that has lead us from Kurt Weill to Kurt Vile.

[Baribrotzer]

It may be a gross over simplification to say that the point of the post Elvis era is to be original at all costs, but the end result is often, paradoxically, mass conformity and generic-sounding music and paint-by-numbers tunes. How many different ways can you arrange a song that consists of electric guitar, bass, and drums, when you explicitly LIMIT the harmony of the tune and greatly simplify the melody?

This is the long-and-winding-road, that has lead us from Kurt Weill to Kurt Vile.

But so many of the standards-era songs were strings of cliches, too. How much of a jazz musician's education is endless woodshedding on every possible variation of the ii-V7-I progression - every possible substitute and extension, in every key? A lot. And there's a reason for that. Look at a Real Book, and you'll see how many of those classics were endless strings of those same ii-V7-I's, often extended with an added iii-iv or V7-of. "Rhythm changes" are popular and enduring precisely because they contain every stock standards-era progression strung together, and can be effortlessly soloed upon by the skilled player.

We remember the greats - Jerome Kern, Weill, Gershwin, Cole Porter, Ellington and the many jazz musicians who followed in his footsteps, Richard Rogers, and more; but we don't remember the many one-hit hacks who also charted quite so well, unless we're 90 and it was the music of our youth.