why is Diana Krall famous?

[dJEd]

seriously? she's terrible. she plays mostly standards and anything she plays on the piano is a bloody cliche. her voice isn't anything special. i think its because creepy old guys like her.

theres hundreds of way more talented jazz singers out there, so why is it that the cadillac queen of crap is big?

i guess i'm kind of biased because i hate all jazz singers. quit singing over my jazz, you wanks.

sigh

ok thats all

[Jaimoe]

What does marrying Diana Krall say about Elvis Costello?

[dJEd]

it says he hates jazz

hahahahahahaha

[StoneMtn]

I know what you mean. I had heard about her for about a year before I ever heard her music, and when I did I was surprised at how boring it was. I expected her to be really amazing and impressive. She's "okay", but I find she's nothing special at all.

[PassedOutGuy]

have you seen her legs?

[jazzinfivefour]

I dont know, something to do with:

Learning piano at age 4.

Playing in jazz clubs at the age of 15

Father who was a stride piano player

Granted Berkeley Scholarship as a teenager

Picked up by Just in Time Records & Verve Records

Spending 52 weeks @ #1 on Billboard Jazz Charts

Winning Grammys

And winning over young audiences @ Lilith Fair

I'm sure there's much more to "why she's famous" but you'll have to research it yourself.

Ps: Regarding volcals over jazz, most jazz songs have vocals written for them, but due to a lack pa systems (back in the day) and available vocalists, the players just played the heads of the turnes to excentuate the melody lines, giving us the jazz we think we know today.

[Jaimoe]

have you seen her legs?

What about the horse-teeth and the face to match?

Actually, she is an abomination to jazz mainly because she is sooooo middle of the road. Krall's smug face and arrogant manner while performing further forces you to notice her shortcomings; two that come to mind are lack of innovation and originality.

Krall surrounds herself with a good band and she herself is a solid pianist and a decent singer, but who fucking cares... other than Elvis Costello.

[PassedOutGuy]

sure Jaimoe... but this thread made me think of things that Chris Hood would say in this situation... and truthfully, ive been laughing my ass off!

[Jaimoe]

At least this isn't a Tea Party thread.

Edited May 28, 2005 by Guest

[dJEd]

Learning piano at age 4.

Playing in jazz clubs at the age of 15

Father who was a stride piano player

Granted Berkeley Scholarship as a teenager

Picked up by Just in Time Records & Verve Records

Spending 52 weeks @ #1 on Billboard Jazz Charts

Winning Grammys

And winning over young audiences @ Lilith Fair

what does it matter what age she learned to play music right out of the book?

she could have been playing in jazz clubs at 13 for all i care, its not like she's doing anything out of the ordinary.

her father's musical gifts pertain to this debate in what way?

Grammy? who cares? there are thousands upon thousands of incredible jazz players out there who will never see any recognition.

i just don't get it. and hopefully i never will.

and i'm glad there were never singers around for jazz songs, if there were maybe i wouldn't dig it as much. curious as to what type of jazz that comment refers to? surely not Modal, free, acid, fusion, bop, or avante garde. seriously, i'm curious.

edited to add: don't get me started on the freakin tea party

Edited May 28, 2005 by Guest

[hamilton]

Talented and famous are two different things. All of the reasons listed by jazzinfivefour really are the reasons she is famous... it's just that none of them are reasons why she is good. Because she isn't.

Most famous artists aren't that talented... and most talented artists aren't famous.

[jazzinfivefour]

None of those things I metioned "matter", but the question asked was, why is she famous? Those are some of the contributing factors as to "why she is famous" she has had oppertunities that we haven't, achieved by her own hard work. Her fathers skills and roots on the piano, lends to her own knack, that's why he is relevant to her success and in the debate. I personally don't like her either.

Before jazz was broken down into so many labels; free, modal, acid etc. there was just jazz. Bop was simply standards played at a faster pace. Quarter notes to eighth note via Charlie Parker, Coltrane then turned eighths into sixteenths etc. Most bop songs have lyrics because they are simply standards played fast. Hard bop or fast jazz, still with lyrics. Modal is also a birth of standards, rather than playing the key, only play one part or mode of the key then modulate your findings. Those modes all derive from lyrical traditions in modulation. Free jazz, via Ornetet Coleman, just scrambles it all up into one big stew of insanity, and alot of free jazz players now adays use vocalist as instruments, not singing phrases or melodies but using the endless sounds a voice can offer as an unusual tool of sound. Or singing a wonderful melody atop complete insanity, it's quite the mix either way.

I too prefer jazz without vocals. But, when I play a ballad and there is a beautiful smokey voiced sweetheart singing her heart out, I and most of the audience will melt. It changes the setting, placing the band in the back seat, grabbing the audience and lifting them up, then the band kicks back in, there is a genuine beauty to it sometimes.

[dJEd]

thanks man

[SaggyBalls]

Okay...I suffer from some of the same sentiments as you folks...but awhile back I came to a realization that would probably cause you less stress in the future.

Diana Krall is playing Pop Jazz. You're not interested in Pop Jazz. Pop Jazz is a great way for non-music savvy people to get into Jazz and not get confused and frustrated.

So what if she's playing Jazz you don't like. At least it's bringing notoriety to Jazz music and with the state of the recording industry, Krall is what we need right about now to keep some interest in Jazz.

I agree that she's not doing anyhitng to take Jazz anywhere new and exciting, but too many artists really try to do that and fail miserably. I've heard too much crappy jazz to honestly say that Diana Krall is shit because I'd rather hear her and her high priced band than some clever but over the top noodler.

there's a big difference between skill and talent, the former being innate and the latter being learnable.

I think Krall has a fair share of both, but she's no Miles or Coltrane. She's not a legend and that's what you're looking for.

[Jaimoe]

Diana may be playing pop jazz, but it's middle of the road and worst of all, it's calculated and safe.

If you want good modern pop jazz in the sense that it strives to have integrity, then look no further than Norah Jones. I realize she isn't purely jazz, but the comparison is just.

[Davey Boy 2.0]

Maybe she needs to do an album with Paul Anka

[bradm]

Others that are similar to Diana Krall but more worth checking out would be Carol Welsman (also Canadian, also plays piano and sings [but in several languages], and blows Krall away in vocal interpretation and sense of elegance) and Jane Monheit (who doesn't play piano, but is a great singer).

Aloha,

Brad

[Patchoulia]

the question asked was, why is she famous?

I've spent many a sleepless night pondering this very question...the only explanation I could come up with is as follows:

Why is Diana Krall famous? An iron-clad, blood-scribed, deal with the devil.

It would explain the dead, dead look in her eyes.

When they do the E True Hollywood story, they can subtitle it "The Zombification of Diana Krall: Her Deal With the Devil".

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

I can never latch onto musicians who never seem to smile.

[Kaidy Mae]

Maybe she needs to do an album with Paul Anka

WHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Nice one Davey! That I would like to see...just might be the kiss of death her career needs.

Speaking of career killers...someone told me on the weekend that Ms. Spears has a reality TV show out. ? Hilarious! I'm constantly amazed at the number of levels that southern bleach kit is able to whore herself out on.