Just what our music needs - nearly 18 minutes of national airtime to ask the same tired question. Is jazz dead? Or does it just smell funny? Sorry, but this amounted to a long-winded and thinly veiled whine. I cringe when I hear the combination of honest, earnest admiration for jazz music and the bitter taste of arty condescension. Sinnett could not be more wrong about the prospects of jazz. When Michel asked if he was a hater, she nailed it. Interview over. Dissing popular culture is the not a way to win friends and influence people.

Sent by Josh | 5:08 PM ET | 04-10-2008

Claiming that your music is too complex for the "masses" to understand and appreciate is silly. Jae Sinnett's music is simply boring. It's smooth jazz and smooth jazz is boring. Everybody knows that. But jazz as an art form is alive and well and doesn't need saving. Look at the popularity of artists like Ken Vandermark, John Hollenbeck, Anthony Braxton, Marc Ribot, Bill Frisell, Hamid Drake and John Zorn just to name a few. Jae should quit whining and explore some more of these current, innovative musicians to revive his musical soul!

Sent by Andy Jenkins | 5:10 PM ET | 04-10-2008

I think Jae was way off when he said, "There isn't that much jazz in New Orleans." I don't' get to go very often, but I when I do there are plenty of shows to be seen. I found 8 listings, just now, for jazz in the Off Beat website.

Sent by Mallary | 6:08 PM ET | 04-10-2008

Michel,
I was so happy to hear Jae Sinnett's voice on your radio show. I used to live in his listening area and took in his show often. I even took a jazz appreciation class he held for regular folk. He has a keen insight into the art form and serves it well through his show, his music, his promotion of jazz appreciation and his love. When Sinnett is in session, you do well to listen. Thanks for the flash back as you and he talked about the future of jazz.

Sent by Robert | 8:59 AM ET | 04-11-2008

Hey Michel,

Great show yesterday, especially the Jazz segment. I love Jazz and believe we need to preserve this art form. But, I want to comment on your opening statement in your blog about there being 2 sides to every story at least or not...I believe there are always at least two sides but the sides don't necessarily mean right or wrong. That is too black and white and we tend as people to try to make everything very black and white. We don't account for the all of the gray. The different sides are really different perspectives, different viewpoints that don't have to be right or wrong just that point of view. They as you say could all be 'right' or 'wrong' but somehow a decision still has to be made.
I believe if we begin to respect other viewpoints and do a better job of articulating our own viewpoints, honestly, the decision becomes evident all by itself. It is not easy and usually involves compromise, but can be accomplished. The discourse on the interment of illegal alien families that cross the border into the US was a great example of this discourse. A very difficult situation but a good bit of agreement. Thanks Michel for this wonderful forum.

Sent by Tanya Radford | 12:40 PM ET | 04-11-2008

To the commenter who noted "everybody" knows smooth jazz is boring. I guess the "everybody" term does not include me. Granted, it's not the most popular dial on my radio but it is a pre-set one for those hectic days only a soothing sound will do.

Sent by Moji | 4:54 PM ET | 04-11-2008

If we decided to boycott Olympics because something the host country's government has done or hasn't done, should we also boycott the 2012 London Olympics because the British involvement in the Iraq war, or for that matter, boycott the future Olympics in the US because our invasion of Iraq?

We and the British invaded Iraq for no good reason, and I must confess that I supported it in the beginning, like Senator Clinton did. It caused the death of hundred of thousands of Iraqis, and the dislocation of millions, not to mention the death of more than four thousands of our service men and women. What about these people's human rights? They obviously don't have any, they are not even human anymore, they are dead. But should we relate their deserved human rights to the Olympics?

Imagine in this summer's Beijing Olympics, standing on the medal podium our athletes, in front of them, the arising Stars and Stripes accompanied by a banner reads "Free Iraq!" or "Americans Out of Iraq!", how will you feel? I will be extremely saddened, and even outraged. But this could very well happen, if we insist mix politics with Olympics.

Sent by JIan | 6:16 PM ET | 04-11-2008

Very few of my adult (age 40 and up) friends, relatives and acquaintances listen to or purchase/go to hear jazz. None of the young adults (e.g. persons under 25) I know listen to jazz ... typically hip hop only. I too have often tuned into the so-called "smooth" jazz stations of late to hear relaxing sounds during the day but I must respectfully state overall that "smooth" jazz has not been helpful to the jazz form. Example: one of the local "smooth jazz" stations began including popular artists like Mariah Carey on their playlist making their sound no different than the local adult R & B station. Now that smooth jazz station is off the air along with the "straight ahead" jazz they did play. I can still listen to the full jazz range on NPR and Pacifica affilates, but for how long? In the 1990s, hip hop artists and jazz artists had been working together and released some very good work .... what happened to that trend? Younger listeners and musicians must be brought into the form? Actually, we need young people to become MUSICIANS who can play INSTRUMENTS and not only specialize in sampling and creating hip hop beats. You may disagree with Jae's presentation but there is a jazz crisis. Let's do something about it.

Sent by Akilah | 12:25 AM ET | 04-15-2008

Just to clear up one misunderstanding. Jae Sinnet, who I've just heard here for the first time, is not playing "smooth jazz" in that clip. Second, Jazz education is alive and well as never before in universities all across the country and in many parts Europe.

I taught at a jazz conservatory in a European city and I heard more touring American jazz groups there than I had heard living in NYC for a longer time. That's because it's affordable to go hear music there, and not only jazz groups but African music and every other type of music. They have different types of music venues that are very conducive to listening, which we don't have here.

The most important thing is that jazz doesn't get any television coverage here. Not even female vocalists. I know I'm not young but I've been listening to jazz for a long time and there was more jazz on television in the brief couple of years that Branford Marsalis had the Tonight Show band than in the whole history of television (I'm not including BET on Jazz, if that's still around). I'm talking about Betty Carter and Joe Henderson sitting on the couch with Jay, Tito Puente's band and Charlie Haden's Quartet West as musical guests, and a different guest musician sitting in with the band every night. If people are exposed to jazz more they will find musicians and singers who they like.

Jazz was the popular music of the country from the 1920s (and even earlier, if you include ragtime) until the end of WWII. Obviously, it will never be that popular again. Jazz music spread with the technology of the time which allowed listeners to consume music as individuals, not just as part of a concert audience. Piano rolls spread ragtime into living rooms, followed by the phonograph (the first jazz recording was made in 1917) and radio broadcasts (Duke Ellington from the Cotton Club, Earl Hines from the Grand Terrace Ballroom, etc.) Jazz was actually responsible for the spreading the technology of that era. The technology has changed, but still, jazz deserves some television coverage.

Sent by mike | 10:16 PM ET | 04-16-2008

WBGOs Josh Jacksons comments on my interview were so astonishingly arrogant and so far removed from the point of the interview that I'm puzzled why they were aired. If you're going to disagree then offer the intelligent opposing view. That unfortunately was no where to be found. To accuse me of being a jazz "hater" when I said that jazz is a highly intelligent and complex music...and for us to expect many folk to get it...might be asking a bit much...is just flat out stupid. The fact is many don't get it. Otherwise jazz sales would be more than 2% of the record sale market place. Please. Why are jazz formats disappearing? Straight up jazz and smooth formats. Why are presenters shying away from putting real jazz on so called JAZZ festivals? Hmmm...seems to me that if more got it we wouldn't be confronted with these problems. My jazz radio program is probably one of the few or maybe the only one in the country that raises more money than NPR news programs during fund raisers. Yes, that includes ATC and Morning Edition. I wonder if any show he has produced could boast of the same success? Two years in a row so I know a thing or two about the jazz marketplace and how to reach people. I also didn't say jazz is dying. NPR did. The interview was about why folk have problems with jazz but it was also about finding ways to get more to believing its a music worthy of more support than it currently receives. Why someone would take issue with that...to that degree...is beyond me. His rag was empty on meaningful content that did nothing to better refine, add to or expand on what he disagreed with...consequently not giving the listeners anything of worth or jazz for that matter.

Sent by Jae Sinnett | 2:22 PM ET | 04-24-2008