Originally Posted by con struct
I wonder that myself at times. No, I don't see it happening but maybe it is happening, it's just that it hasn't blossomed yet, I don't know.
What's troubling to me is the adherence to functional harmony, to the old standards and to the tried-and-true chord-scale approach to improvising that's taught in every jazz program in every school everywhere.
It could well be that to expect the sort of innovations that rocked jazz in the past is to be chasing rainbows. You can't get any more "inside," and I don't see how you could get any more "outside" either.
When I see jazz performed I enjoy the musicianship but to be honest I'm never hearing anything new. Is it possible to do anything new and still call it jazz? :)
Jazz is a funny thing that way. It's so codified, you know? Everyone knows what it sounds like. But I guess all genres of music are that way.
I'll be waiting for you first piece of serialist jazz. Actually, La monte Young was doing something like that, taking musical cells and creating pieces through improv. He still owes John Cale money. :P