Talk:Jam band/Archive 1

great job, brandon!...
...really well written (still needs some editing...), though i would take exception with the parenthetical 'progressive bluegrass'; some bands (i.e. leftover salmon, sci, etc... use that element to one degree or another; however, there is more to it than that, obviously...i know you (brandon) have a handle on this, that jam bands ESPECIALLY are the MOST eclectic of all genres...

10yrsafter/gd4ever,

24.50.139.172 21:16, 15 September 2005 (UTC)ahnotuh

p.s. - seth, win any spelling bees lately? also, i hear they're doing a sequel of "clueless" with a male phish burnout in the starring role; perhaps you should try out... ;}

Re-added "types of jamming"
OK, so while the "types of jamming" was first analyzed in a seminal bbs post on a phish site, the use of the terminology has definitely extended to other bands with the growth and diaspora of phish fans during and after the band's extended breaks.

Net, fans now use type I/II/segue not only on phish discussion but also in discussion of string cheese incident shows and others. Hence, I added it back to the site.

Taking relevant information out of the world's greatest encyclopedia doesn't makes sense, especially when it isn't included elsewhere.

---JamBandFan

NOT SURE HOW TO CREATE A NEW SECTION HERE, SORRY

I apologize in advance for not knowing what the hell I am doing in editing(i.e. - I don't think I am creating a new heading, but placing this in as a comment on someone else's comment - oops) - this is my first contribution to Wiki, so if I screw something up, please feel free to let me know.

I was surprised to come across references in this article to Hootie and the Blowfish and The Samples. Hootie and the Blowfish, to my knowledge, are a pretty straight ahead pop-rock band, who include guitar solos in their songs, but do not, to my knowledge, engage in extended improvisation along the lines that one would use to define "jam band." They are referenced as an influence on the jam band, as if they were somehow original in their use of musical structure, incorporation of instrumentation, etc. I find this to be patently untrue.

I don't have anything against Hootie or the Blowfish, but they were far from original. They played formulaic anthem rock at a time when no one much was playing it on the radio. "Hold My Hand" appeared on the charts in 1995 vs such acts as Boyz to Men, TLC, and Sheryl Crow's first album, none of which qualifies as anthem rock. In that "lightning in a bottle" way, they could be considered original in that they were the first to capitalize on a return to more traditional rock sensibilities within the mainstream. But they are (I can't think of a way to say this without sounding condescending, so I apologize for the insult when I don't really intend any) entirely deriviative. See REO Speedwagon, Poison, Aerosmith, Peter Frampton, The Eagles, Styx... Again, this isn't to criticize Hootie et al, but they influence Blues Traveler and String Cheese Incident the way a doctoral candidate influences Stephen Hawking.

The Samples are Ska, are they not? Did I miss something? Not that the two are mutually exclusive, but The Samples are not "jam band" so much as "beloved by the same crowd of people that goes to jam band shows." Kind of like Bob Marley, Primus, Paul Simon, Joni Mitchell, or Burt Bacharach - I wouldn't classify any of them as jam band, but wouldn't be surprised when I went to see any of them to see a crowd of wookies at the show.

The people who listen to jam band music, and go to see jam bands, are often self-professed "music junkies," and will listen to a lot of different kinds of music, and go see shows of a lot of people who don't necessarily fit the bill of jam band.

Again - sorry about any newbie mistakes, feel free to e-mail me

UncleCheese 17:05, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Needs work
I'm not sure about this term (new to me) or perhaps it's just the article. But it's very unclear to me what it's supposed to mean. Are jazz bands that improvise heavily "Jam bands"? From the article, they don't seem to be considered as such. I don't believe there's any point in trying to distinguish between rock improv and jazz improv, take Ginger Baker in Cream for example. Maybe I'm missing some important distinction here, but I don't feel the article manages to make one. --BluePlatypus 04:17, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Cream as the first jamband...thats interesting. I dunno...this article has promise, but needs some work, for sure. MSherrick 20:13, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Cream?
I think they were more rock and roll oriented, not jaming. They should be removed from the list. Also, is there a link between jaming and dakota fanning?--Geppy 22:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * They did jam heavily and even the Grateful Dead recognize them as one of the first rock bands to take on jamming. I will find the mention in one of my Grateful Dead books and put it here. --Moeron 01:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Would you have any shows or cds you could send me or trade?--Geppy 03:49, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure. I am a little backed up now, but I will leave you a comment on your user page sometime soon. The bulk of my Cream shows are from an audio vine at the Trader's Den. HERE is the link to that thread over there. --Moeron 04:23, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

TypeI/TypeII
Although the basic distinction between Type I and Type II jamming is useful and relevant, I find the explanation given in the article to be sophomoric. The article seems to suggest that when "Jam Bands" engage in "type II" jamming that they are becoming more and more like "jazz" and perhaps less like "rock". But in reality, very little jazz involves Type II jamming. Jazz musicians, just like improvizatinal rock musicians, most of the time are improvizing with variations of melodic themes over a known chord progression. In general, I would say that "type II" jamming is very rare in all styles of music. When the Dead did it, it occupied a special place in the concert called "space". On the other hand, I don't think that "type I" jamming is as unique to "Jam Band" music as the article suggests. Improvization in the context of a chord structure and some recognizable melodic themes has been characteristic of both jazz and rock music all the way back to both genres' shared origins in The Blues, and is a part of any kind of music where the musicians think largely in terms of "chords" rather than in terms of specific notes.

I think what sets "jam band" music apart from other kinds of rock is a) the emphasis on LENGTHY instrumental jams   b) the level of sophistication with which jam bands play with "energy" in the music, and with the audiences response to that energy, and the level of sophistication that the audience has for participating in that feedback loop.

I am new to wikipedai and I am not sure what the process is for actually changing an article, but I suggest that whoever makes these decisions should consider what I've discussed here. —This unsigned comment was added by Gregdreams (talk • contribs).
 * This is a section that needs to be nixed, trimmed down, or reworked, I agree. It might be in the best interest to remove it all together. This entry is basically talking about bands, not the specific type of jamming they do. That should be reserved for jam or jamming. Consensus? --Moeron 04:31, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Here here. Let's cut it out until we have something better. Boofox 15:55, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Dave Mathews Band is not a jam band
I deleted Dave Mathews Band as an example of a jam band. Who disagrees with me? I am very interested in hearing a counter argument. -boonestock 20:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

--I agree. I was considering deleting it too, although they do 'jam'. Most pop/rock bands do not jam, but I don't think that is criteria enough to be considered a jam band. Also, anyone who thinks that being at Bonnaroo is enough should consider Radiohead, Ben Folds and all the other bands at Bonnaroo that clearly aren't jam bands.

If everyone agrees, then we should remove DMB from the Third Generation section too.

There is mention of the debate on the DMB article. This probably deserves a good looking-in to. Boofox 17:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

NEW POST:

Hey everyone, this is my first time posting on Wikipedia, so I apologize in advance if this article is not formatted in the proper manner. Also, most of this post was taken from an essay that I am working on for my Social and Political Philosophy class, so I would greatly appreciate any feedback (including counter-arguments and suggestions) that you might have!!! Please respond to this post with your feedback. Thanks guys!

Sincerely,

Laura, a college student and music fan :)

My Argument: THE DAVE MATTHEWS BAND IS INDEED A "JAM" BAND, in the best sense of the term!!!

I have to say that I think you guys are using an excessively narrow and reductive definition of "jam band" when you assert that the Dave Matthews Band is not, in fact, part of the jam movement.

First, I feel that the most fundamental and essential element of the "jam band" definition is the incorporation of "freestyle" musical improvisation into live shows and albums, usually in the form of extended instrumental jams. Anyone who has ever attended a DMB show knows that this extended live improvisation is THE CENTRAL COMPONENT of a Dave Matthews show! Regarding length of time, some of these jams extend well over the 20-minute. Regarding structure and composition, most of these jams feature complex, multi-layered structures in which all of the musicians play an important improvisational role. Indeed, the improvisation that characterizes jam bands implies the involvement of the entire band, not simply the band's drummer and guitarist, for example. I must say that the DMB displays this instrumental inclusivity to an impressive degree. Almost all of the DMB's live jams showcase the talents of each band member, and usually, each member offers solo jams numerous times throughout each show. These jams feature the bluesy saxophone work of Leroi Moore, the folky-fiddle sound of violinist Boyd Tinsley, the bass of Stephan Lessard, the drums of Carter Beauford, the truly haunting vocals (and the admittedly mediocre guitar playing) of Dave Matthews, and the stellar and complex riffing of guitarist Tim Reynolds, whose singular, frenetic style is reminiscent of Leo Kottke's playing. Furthermore, regarding the corporate aspect of music marketing, the DMB has consitently included these improvisational jams on their live albums. For evidence, please note the double-live albums "Red Rocks" and "Luther College," both of which feature numerous extended improvisational jams that include impressive solos by each musican.

Secondly, I feel that the next most important characteristic of a jam band (second only to extended jamming) is the embracing and fusing of various musical styles, genres, and influences into an organic and original sound. I use the term "organic eclecticism" to describe this necessary feature of a jam band. Organic elcecticism begins with a respect for the artistic value of all musical genres. Next, it implies a "fusion" of several diverse genres of music and several different styles of instrumentation (hence the term "eclectic"). Finally, it implies that the final musical output will be a uniquely original and entirely non-derivative sound (thus the term "organic"). Indeed, the jam band movement grew out of the most celebrated "fusion band" of all time: the venerable Grateful Dead, whose music was defined by a fusion of folk, rock, blues, bluegrass, and jazz (AND, in their later years, reggae). Likewise, the DMB definitely exhibits an eclectic fusion of various genres of music (blues, jazz, world, American folk, African folk) and numerous styles of instrumentation (for example, note the variety of styles that Boyd Tinsley applies to the violin). Perhaps most importantly, the DMB has fused these diverse influences together into a distinctive and organic sound that is all their own! For example, the 7-minute studio version of the song "Crush" has been noted as one of the best examples of "blues-jazz-pop" fusion in recent years; this song features incredible work on the saxophone by legendary blues man Leroi Moore. Also, the DMB have fused many bluegrass influences into their sound; note the frenetic, folksy fiddling of violinist Boyd Tinsley on the early DMB albums, especiall "Under the Table"; also note the use of bluegrass great Bela Fleck as a guest mandolinist on various tracks of the DMB album "Before These Crowded Streets". Perhaps most famously, the DMB has incorporated South African folk influences into much of their music. (Dave Matthews was born, and spent his early years, in South Africa.) This African "global" influence can be heard on the songs "Pantala Naga Pampa" and "Stay," and in much of Carter Beauford's drumming. Also, much like Jethro Tull, the Dave Matthews Band has drawn on classical music to enhance the uniqueness of their sound. Their violinist is the classically trained Boyd Tinsley, and several of their songs feature amazing work by the violists from the Kronos Quartet (especially "Stone," which begins with a 1-minute violion solo by one of the members of Kronos).

I hope that I have shown that the DMB exhibits the two most essential elements of a so-called "jam band":

1) improvisational, extended, live jamming... AND...

2) eclectic fusion of diverse genres and influences into an organic sound (this second element is more difficult to describe).

Other jam band characteristics that DMB exhibits but that I don't have time to describe are as follows:

3) The DMB maintains an incessant (or at least extremely frequent) touring schedule!

4) The DMB built up its fan base from the years 1990 to 1994 by CONSTANTLY touring and by encouraging fans to tape and trade their live shows!

5) Ahhh, this brings me to the fan base of DMB. Although a band can not be defined solely by its fans, I feel that the core fans of a band speak volumes about the band's origins and true character.  Indeed, the hard-core, long-term fans of DMB have long exhibited a passion for tracking and reviewing the live jams of DMB shows (please see the website www.antsmarching.org).  Also, these long-term fans helped to build the DMB phenomenon in the early 1990s by recording, trading, and selling live DMB shows.  I feel that the characteristics of the DMB long-term fan base display the characteristics of all true jam band fans.

6) Just as a band can not be defined entirely by its fan base, so it can not be defined solely by its touring partners. However, the DMB has consistently sought out touring partners and musical collaborators that share the DMB's commitment to creating unique, eclectic music and delivering equally unique, often improvised live performances.  These artists and bands read like a Who's Who of the jam movement: Phish, Trey Anastasio, Widespead Panic, Eric Clapton, Leo Kottke, Stringcheese Incident, Disco Biscuits, etc, etc.  Moreover, the following "jammy" artists and groups have directly contributed to the studio albums of the DMB: Bela Fleck, Trey Anastasio, and Orchestra Baobob (of South Africa).  Finally, several up-and-coming jam bands have received increased exposure because they have officially opened for the DMB on their frequent tours.

7) As many observers have noted, the jam movement of the late 1980s, 1990s, and early 2000s has recalled many elements of the revolutionary period of the late 1960s and early 1970s. One of the most important of these elements is a dedicated commitment to environmental and social progressivism.  The DMB, and Dave Matthews in particular, strongly exhibit this social and environmental consciousness.  For example, the band's charity, Bama Works, works to preserve Amazonian rainforests and to improve the public school systems of several American inner-cities.  (The recent "bus-dropping" controversy that transpired in Chicago was the work of a disgruntled tour bus driver employed by the DMB; he has since been fired and is currently being sued by the DMB. I do not feel that this event reflects negatively upon the DMB's commitment to environmental preservation.)

8) I feel compelled to address the always provocative issue of drug use within the jam band community. Let me leave you with a quote by Dave Matthews himself, in which he satires the conservative policies and the relentlessly one-sided anti-drug propaganda of the Reagan era:

"Instead of Just Say No, how about Just Say Yes, just once, and then decide for yourself!"

Thus, I hope that I have made a substantial argument for the permanent inclusion of the DMB into the jam band movement. Personally, I would argue that the DMB has been a major force and a crucual influence in the jam movement, in terms of the music they play, the characterics of their live performances, and the culture with which they identify.

However, I am not so deluded as to set the DMB on the same high plateau as Widespread Panic and Phish, but I would probably place them on the same respectable level as Stringcheese Incident, Gov't Mule, moe., Umphrey's McGee, etc, in terms of influence on jam music and importance within the jam movement.

_____________________________________________________________________

I am currently working on a 15-page essay for a Social and Political Philosophy course on the intersecting subjects of the jam band movement, with a focus on the ways in which the DMB illustrates and/or violates the primary characteristics of the jam movement and community.

Most of this Wikipedia post has been taken directly from my essay... Thankfully, the essay is not due until mid-May... Thus, as I mentioned above, I would GREATLY APPRECIATE any comments, counterarguments, or suggestions that you may have regarding the above writing sample!

In my essay, I will be exploring the characteristics, the community, and the social, political, and economic implications of the jam band movement. The essay will cover the following topics: the music itself; the live shows; the emphasis on improvisational performance; the influence of the Grateful Dead; the influence of several forms of American folk, especially jazz and blues; the question of whether the term "jam band" is essentially reductive; the economic implications of online music-swapping; the internal culture of the jam band community (including the bands themselves, the fans, the online traders, etc); the divisions within the community; the question of whether the jam band phenomenon can be classified as a "musical-social movement"; the jam movement's influence on American culture and art; the political and social implications of the jam movement; the movement's similarity to the musical-social movements of the late 60s and early 70s; the question of whether musical trends, phenomenons, and/or movements can spawn or at least influence full-fledged social movements; etc.

I will be using the DMB as a recurring example in the exploration of several of these topics. For example, I will explore WHY and HOW the DMB has become a divisive issue within the jam community, and the results of this divisiveness. Why are so many people so vehemently opposed to the DMB? Is this opposition rooted in the DMB's increasing popularity in mainstream America? How have the anti-commercial, anti-materialistic values of the jam community impacted those jam bands who have become commercially successful (even when those bands have NOT deliberately courted such mainstream popularity)? What does this say about the values of the jam community? What does it mean to "sell out" in terms of music, art, and politics?


 * Agree, see Phish for the true sense of what a jam band is--Geppy 06:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Disagree, You seem to have addressed everything above with the exception of the music itself. You also seem confused and contrived in several instances. Why do you see those who deny DMB as being a jam band as people being opposed to the band? I'll think you'll find that if you talk to some of the more active members of the DMB community at some of the larger message boards that the general consensus is that DMB are not a jam band. This is not because they're not active members of the jam band community, and that they're music isn't derived from elements of jam band music, but because they're studio and live music simply doesn't have the make up of a jam band. To answer the points you lay out above;


 * 1) They do 'jam' and improvise live. However, this jamming is almost always contained within the confines of a particular melody or riff, usually played by Dave. The improvisation in Tripping Billies, for example, often features Boyd playing solos around a similar melody (compare the album solo with the Gorge 2002 live CD solo) whilst Dave plays the same riff underneath. The soloing, whilst truly improvisational, does not break out structurally from the song itself, which is an important distinction between a solo part of a song, and a true jam band jam. DMB are a band who have a strong rhythm section, a guitarist who writes distinctive riffs with a unique acoustic style, and two soloists who "fill in the gaps" so to speak; if the two soloists had guitars, these would be all the elements of a staple rock band. I think because they are a violinist and a saxophonist, people then make the leap to them being a jam band, which they are not. Dave Matthews has stated himself that he doesn't feel the band are a jam band, as can be referenced in the book "Jam Bands" by Dean Budnick. I do not believe the Red Rocks '95 album is a truly good example of Dave Matthews Band as a jam band anyway, and does nothing more than exemplify the points I've made above. And as for Live at Luther College, this is Dave Matthews and Tim Reynolds on acoustic guitar, and not only is Tim not a member of DMB but I don't think the solo's on L@LC show anything more than the fact that Tim is a great guitarist.


 * The rest of your points do nothing to single out DMB as a jam band. Combining musical styles and grueling tour schedules, whilst admirable and indeed important elements of a good live musical act, don't describe a jam band. Developing a good grassroots fan base, performing with musical guests, dedicating much of your time to important charitable works and recreational drug usage do nothing to describe DMB as anything more than a band in its most generic possible sense. Whilst these are all elements that jam bands often share in common, they are also all elements that all bands, and indeed the majority, could share in common.


 * I like to think of DMB's unique musical style and development, along with Dave's unquestionable ability to write truly great lyrics, don't describe DMB as being a jam band but single them out as being truly unique from all other bands.


 * Ukdmbfan 23:50, 28 April 2006

I Agree with Ukdmbfan, DMB isn't really a jam band. I think the best example of this is their association with mainstream music instead of the jam band scene. A lot of Jam Bands have a cult following of hippies who sometimes follow the bands for an entire tour. DMB seems to attract a different scene. Aside from that, I guess their music could be considered jam band material. My only problem with the article is that DMB is listed along side phish as one of the two influencial jam bands of the ninties. I strongly disagree with this. I think that phish needs to be listed as the most influencial, and DMB should move to the supporting cast listed later on in the paragraph, here is what i propose:


 * The most notable second generation jam band could be considered Phish though other bands, like the Aquarium Rescue Unit, Beanland, Primus, Blues Traveler, and Dave Matthews Band also took part.

Instead of:


 * The two most notable second generation jam bands could be considered Phish and Dave Matthews Band though other bands, like the Aquarium Rescue Unit, Beanland, Primus, Blues Traveler also took part.

I think this may be more accurate.


 * It can be argued about the DMB being a jam band at its outset, such as when it would play frat parties and clubs like CBGB's and the Wetlands. I think that that is the point that is trying to be conveyed, that when they started out, they were more of a jam band, but progressed into pop music. I know it is hard to source it, but I agree that the sentence should read something like:--MOE .RON  talk  05:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The two most notable second generation jam bands that emerged were Phish and Widespread Panic, though other bands, like the Aquarium Rescue Unit, Beanland, Primus, also took part. Bands such as Blues Traveler and Dave Matthews Band also began their histories in the same "scene", though they evolved more into pop as they became more of a mainstream act.

I think that is a good median.
 * Djarnum1 05:21, 24 May 2006

Pop?
I could certainly by biased here, hence the fact that I am not making edits, but offering my views on the talk page. I certainly appreciate the work that you all have been doing here, and there seems to have been a lot of it of late (this is the first time I have looked in a while).

I have to take issue with the various statements made that Blues Traveler is not a jam band. I find it curious how they somehow lost their street cred within the jam scene because they wrote a couple of songs that had mainstream appeal.

Pop music is not a genre in the sense that we are discussing here - at its root it means "popular" - as tastes change, so does the music. An artist whose primary mission is to produce pop music - Janet Jackson, Duran Duran, or KajaGooGoo - is someone who is making music designed to appeal to the common convention at the time. The fact that Blues traveler have written some catchy tunes that have mass appeal is certainly true, but to proceed to the next step and somehow deny them their place in the jam band scene is, well, wrong.

If you don't believe me, go see a Blues Traveler show. I saw them a whole bunch of times "back in the day" - at Wetlands, and Mondo Cane, and Nightingales in NYC - and <>dude, they jammed < >. I went to see them last fall (Fall 2005, at House of Blues Orlando), and they still jam.

For those who were around, When Blues Traveler set up the HORDE tour, it was a way of them passing along the Pop success they had with Run Around to the rest of the community they had "grown up" in - that northeast frat and bar circuit I mentioned above - the Haunt and the Nines in Ithaca, that place in Poughkeepsie, Nectar's, Iron Horse in Pittsfield, Bogies (and before that JB Scott's) in Albany, Woodbury ski and Racquet - my memory is not so good anymore (heh. Heh, heh.), but lots of people out there must remember these places (or maybe not, I guess most people probably have some artificial gaps like mine). Blues Traveler's heart and music are firmly entrenched in the very core ethos of the jam band scene, and the fact that they have found more mainstream acceptance (and have even pandered to it some (i.e. Hook)), doesn't, in my eyes, diminish that grounding in the slightest. Does the fact that some of the Dead's earliest jams were centered around songs written or performed by Wilson Pickett, Muddy Waters, or Martha and The Vendellas make them a "blues band?" Does Phish's early grounding in Zappa make them more of a "prog-rock" band? (Or however the hell you categorize Zappa?)

I guess what I am saying is, the whole "dissection", and "deconstruction" of "jam band" is fine and good, but if it makes you come up with a definition that doesn't include Blues Traveler, then it's a bad definition. The bands and the music are amorphous and defy categorization, thus there might be some problems in categorizing them. There is some quote - I think I first read it in Godel, Escher, Bach, about how logic and theory must be used, but if they lead you into a stupendously ugly conclusion, you might want to consider other methods.

I suppose I could be in a minority here, it just seems like this article is really dismissive of a lot of the pre-1992 or 1990 work that was done in order for a scene to develop. Zero toured for how long? Max Creek is still together I think, and they have been playing since the 70's. No mention of Jefferson Starship, Jorma, Dylan, Ten Years After, Moby Grape, Santana (Oops - he is in there once), Clapton's various post-Cream incarnations, TRAFFIC, Sea Level, the Dixie Dregs, or Janis,  - it's like the Grateful Dead went to a Cream concert and decided to invent "jamming" in some cultural vacuum and performed it on their own until Phish came along and magically picked up the torch. It feels disrespectful to all that went between.

This is not to belittle Phish's accomplishments or stature as, in fact, probably the third most important jam band (personal preference for the Allmans inserted here, unh!), but to argue for the inclusion of more historical material other than some lists of the types of music - Miles Davis' electric bands of the 60's and 70's were huge influences on this scene, but beyond the vague mention of "incorporates elements of jazz and blues"...

Okay, I'll get off the soapbox.

Any other "old-timers" out there (Jeebus, I'm only 36!)?

UncleCheese 02:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

edited cause i forgot to mention Traffic, myself, and because I went back and re-read this and there is a mention of Santana.

UncleCheese 19:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Memory stick?
Can we get a source on "memory stick"? That's a Sony proprietary format media card, and it'd be odd to use that specific type especially if the band isn't signed to Sony. Perhaps a more generic "Flash memory" or "USB Flash drive" would be more accurate and less of an ad for Sony.

EDIT: Here's an article where the fans downloaded to USB Flash drives (aka pen drives) which come from any number of manufacturers: http://www.internetretailer.com/internet/marketing-conference/56349-minutes-after-concert-ends-fans-download-soundtrack-from-web.html

Crimson117 05:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and reworded that third section under 21st century jam band downloads. However the first paragraph reads like an ad for archive.org. How does it being "one of the latest websites" make it deserve any more mention that a link at the bottom of the page?

Crimson117 05:31, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Potential Improvement to Lead Section
While the first paragraph defines the term "jamband", I feel a few more typical characteristics could be added. Considering that not all rock bands using improvisation are associated with the jamband scene, I feel that we should consider mentioning the following six attributes which I believe are common to jambands in the lead section:

•	Setlist variation (i.e. bands frequently go 2-4 shows without repeating a song) •	Taping of concerts allowed •	Performing at festivals •	Live improvisation •	Blending of multiple genres •	Frequent/constant touring

It is difficult to cite sources with much of this topic. I cannot find a source detailing these six characteristics as necessary to be considered a jamband, but I believe we can all agree on this. Does everyone agree that including this in the lead section would strengthen the article? Can anyone help me find a good resource of information on this term so that I can source something like this? Dasharpster 09:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Additionally, I believe it would help the flow to keep the "seminal groups" discussion to the history/origin section. Dasharpster 09:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Misc
"Early jazz musicians both pioneered the idea of improvisation and coined the term 'jam', though these 'jam sessions' tended to be completely free of constraints, whereas bands in the jam-scene tend to use the pretense of being confined by the boundaries of the song they are 'jamming out'."

"Pretense"? Sounds rather biased to me...

Vorpalbla 2/4/05

Excellent read, thanks80.171.73.179 15:39, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Types of jamming is about phish not about jaming in genreal needs to be changed or removed. --Seth slackware 23:06, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Is it possibly to establish at what point the term jamband was created? Meaning, did first gen jambands ever refer to themselves as jambands?Dasharpster 09:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Bias in last sentence of Taping Section
''One would think with the volume of freely traded music circulating that record sales would be lack-luster, and yet the opposite is true. Fans of these bands are more supportive than one could imagine. They will travel 1,000's of miles to see their boys play. They will own every album, every DVD, and whatever merchandise is available. There is no music fan more dedicated in this regard, period. (major label music execs take note)''

While this is all true, and pumped me up, it is very opinionated and discredits the article. I think we should brainstorm on more objective, and citeable, ways to portray the dedication of this fan base. Considering Phish played to over 80,000 on several occasions, we can find a better way to say this. Dasharpster 10:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh yeah, definitely; there's a much better way to word this.  A ng u la R  03:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Contemporary "Jam Scene"
I just created an additional section in the main article. I have probably only exacerbated the need to clean up and integrate this article, but that is not something i want to take on, at least not right now. -boonestock 20:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I approve of the "Jam Scene" addition--a nice distinction between genre and fan base.
 * I wish that we had more types of jamming listed. As it is now, I don't think that Phish's style should get a whole section.  I would be happy to add a bit about Keller's looping technique, if others added other bands' styles. Boofox 18:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I added a large addition to the Umphrey's McGee page on the "Jimmy Stewart" method of improvisation. Sometime i'll edit it down to be appropriate to this page. -boonestock 20:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I added it to the section under Fourth Generation jam bands and melded it with a section further down in the article because the focus of section written seemed to focus on fans at this present time. I think it might be a good idea to include a "Jam Scene" section for each generation to give prespective of how fans were at that time. As for "types of jamming", I agree that the Phish section should be moved and/or cleaned up, but it is really going to be a sticky situation to describe/include every type of jamming that has gone on and is going on. Off the top of my head, I can think of the following types of jamming: psychadelic (GD), Southern (Allmans, WSP, Gov't Mule), Jazz-oriented (Phish, MMW, B/R Duo), progressive rock (moe., UM), bluegrass-oriented (SCI, YMSB, HBRSB), electronia/bisco (DB, New Deal, STS9, Lotus), acoustic/loop (Keller, Martin Sexton, Xavier Rudd). (also, if you leave comments, try and leave your signature by typing four tilda's "~") --Moeron 19:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I think this section ("Jam scene") aught to be the lead section partly because the term has a cultural connotation and also because it is a term that is roughly only 15-20 years old and does not accurately retrofit prior bands.


 * "Origin" of the term should follow this section and include history of term itself (which currently does not exist). I also think that this section ("current scene") if described as a "generation" should be the "second generation" not "fourth." What is currently being called "first " and "second" in this article are actually precursor to the "jam band scene." The term most likely did not exist in the early (or even mid) 80's and it is disputed as to whether the term should be applied as a historically contrived category. In other words, would a music historian categorize any band at all from the 60's,70's and perhaps 80's as "Jamband?" I'm thinking perhaps if the historian was born after 1977. Anyone born proir will most likely contend that it is the current scene that is most significant regarding use of the term. Also significant to me in this section is the description of Phish and Grateful Dead influence which I believe correct and could use further emphasis and ellaboration... and this is where my bias truely shows... but at Jam band's core is the continuance of the Grateful Dead culture and aesthetic. Today many past bands are being labelled Jam band that really are not related to The Dead at all except that they are, or were rock bands that improvised.  - Steve3849 talk 21:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Changing sections around?
Above I replied to the people who inputted the "Jam scene" section. My apologies if I've said too much, but I thought this idea deserved its own topic heading. What about making most of the text under "jam scene" the initial text for the article? I think it is pertinant because the term 'Jam band' has a cultural significance that does not apply to prior decades. Also then, could it please be considered to change the currently described "first" and "second" generations to be "precursors," or "early influences." As an example from other genres: "first generation ska" actually was called "ska" when it was happening. You can actually label Bob Marley as a Studio One artist: "first generation ska." However, Allman Brothers, Cream, Jimi Hendrix (or The Grateful Dead) etc were never called "Jam bands" in the 70's that I know of. - Steve3849 talk 22:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Bias in history/origin section
These bands are some of the few newer generation jam bands around that keep this legendary music alive.

"These bands" refers to Blues Traveler, Dave Matthews Band, Ben Harper & The Innocent Criminals, Primus, and the Spin Doctor's making the sentence inaccurate. It implies that those bands are the main bands today keeping the genre alive. While moe., Umphrey’s McGee, Yonder Mountain String Band, Widespread Panic, SCI (until the breakup is complete), the Disco Biscuits among many others keep the genre alive, the bands the sentence is referring to certainly are no longer relevant to the scene.

their concert playing tends to still be as "jammy" as any of the third and (especially) fourth generation jam bands.

This sentence reeks of a jaded vet. It is obviously biased and has no place in this article. Please do not let the DMB argument manifest itself in the actual article. Does anyone have an objection to removing this entire paragraph? Dasharpster 10:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


 * If Primus was actually listed I think its great you removed them. Les Claypool has been quoted as not considering himself fully accepted in the "Jam band scene" until his Frogs project (and of course Oysterhead). He thought even his Frogs work was initially too quirky for the Phish-heads... then they got used to him. If anyone knows where that quote is it might help differentiate use of the term in this article. I think it was Relic (one with him on the cover last year).  - Steve3849 talk 22:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Live Dead.jpg
Image:Live Dead.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget the Butterfield Blues Band
I'm surprised this article does not mention The Butterfield Blues Band. Their live performances in the mid 60s on songs such as Work Song and more significantly East West and the subsequent studio versions of these songs on the album East West definitely qualify as jam band material. This band paved the way for future jam bands. Please see:

[ http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:hifexqw5ld6e]
 * I agree that East-West counts as jam band material, but the whole of their repertoire contains less jam material. Jam band usually have many jam songs and most of the Jam Bands have most of their members play improvised parts or solos. To be fair, we should take a look at the criteria to count a band as a Jam Band.Silas619 08:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Zappa and the Mothers were not a jam band
"The first generation of jam bands, which developed in the mid-1960s and early 1970s, sprang from the lengthy improvisational sessions of the seminal groups like the Grateful Dead and Cream. Other first-generation jam bands include: The Allman Brothers Band, Frank Zappa & The Mothers..."

I think it's inappropriate to list Zappa in this section. While it's true that he had a significant impact on a number of jam bands, I just can't support the statement that he was in any significant way influenced by the Dead. Zappa had delevoped an early distaste for the Dead because of his belief that their audiences were only there for the "Kool-Aid bonus at the end of every show." (The Frank Zappa Book)

As far as Cream is concerned, I don't think that's a significant influence either. Freak Out! and Fresh Cream both came out in '66, and the most notable Zappa influences at that time were the works of Edgar Varese and the variety of R&B/pop acts coming out of motown (and the subsequent thefts by "more commercially viable" white musicians). (The Frank Zappa Book)

Additionally, although I realize the distinction of what is and what is not a jamband is difficult, I would say that Zappa's work focused far more on songwriting and composition than on jamming. Although the band certainly did jam out during live shows, various Zappa quotes indicate that this was equally for time-filling purposes as musical exploration. For example, though Zappa is well known for his extended guitar solos, he treated them rather casually, saying he would [wiggle his fingers and hope something happened] (paraphrased from The Frank Zappa Book)

PhilChristensen 16:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Use of the term "jam band" in the last 5 years is broadening and as it is so is its use retroactively; this is why I think history of the use of the term should be a primary part of the article. ...and "first generation," when did that start up anyway? It seems quite convoluted to me. Its very difficult to decide who is and who isn't... it's nearly arbitrary and a "who you know" kind of thing, or who are the favorites of jam band media and festivals. Led Zeppelin for instance did 3 hour gigs, jamming, including "space" and "blues" (therefore cross-genre). Who knows, maybe in a couple years they'll be "first generation" jam band too! jam band = band As far as Zappa goes he has actually received Jammy awards posthumously accepted by his son. So he probably aught to stay in the article clarified by a history of the term. Maybe Jimmy Page will get his Jammy award posthumously as well.   - Steve3849 talk 19:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

History of the term itself (and more on Zappa)
Early bands like Cream (Power trio) and Allman Brothers (Southern rock) are Classic rock undisputably, which itself is a term devised around 1980. Having grown up in the 70's I honestly do not remember the term "Jam band."

It is important to have a history of the use of the term 'Jam band' in this article. I don't personally recall use of the term until the 90's. Those 90"s to current bands would be suredly categorized as such. Often it is said Neil Young was a precursor, or grandfather to grunge. Often, too, it is said that Velvet Underground and New York Dolls were precursor to, or influenced punk. In neither case are these bands referred to directly as grunge, or punk. Atleast, not usually.

As for Zappa. His was certainly cross-genre as much of his work was maticulously written and even the current tribute bands often attempt to play his works note-for-note (including famous guitar leads)... clearly NOT jam. Please, with respect to the artist... he perhaps would have been fine placed under the larger umbrella use of the term, but he would most likely have disagreed with being foremost and decidely "Jam band."

Lastly, there are many refined current artists who play a combination of planned (written) and varying degrees of improvisation within one piece (sometimes jazz influenced) who themselves have no interest in the term "Jam band" because as applied to them it is such an umbrella term that doesn't define much. Yet, they are performing at Jam band events.

Most importantly to me the focus of this article should be decidely on the "scene" that is self described "Jam band" starting most likely in the 90's. Any prior band, or band on the periphery such as the more jazz influenced (ie Garage A Trois) should be stated as such eg playing-on-the-jam-band-circuit, but not actually being labelled a "jam band." - Steve3849 talk 20:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I see now that Zappa has actually received Jammy awards. See my reply in Talk:Jam band for further elaboration. - Steve3849 talk 19:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

cross over
Oh, yeah -

and with the strong mentions of Galactic and Medeski, Martin and Wood, in here, I thought I would throw in votes for mentions for Deep Banana Blackout and the Greyboy All Stars.

"The Church is the club and the hymns are the songs..." - Deep Banana Blackout

UncleCheese 03:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Is cross-over to be included? If so, 'Jam-band' is then a large umbrella-term and non-specific. This would make use of the term more cultural, or perhaps even merely slang for "current live improvisational music." Is anyone who has ever toured on the Jam band circuit a Jam band? Galactic and Greyboy All Stars are usually referred to as funk aren't they? - Steve3849 talk 20:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC) - Steve3849 talk 13:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Writing needs a clean up
This is an ugly, ugly article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.248.196.19 (talk) 00:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Infobox?
Why does this article have a genre box? Jam band is not a genre. The genre box should only be used for actual genres. Terms like British invasion and Arena rock do not have a genre box since they aren't genres. Jam band should comply with the same format. Peter Fleet (talk) 04:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:"post-jam"...
...which should have it's own article, btw...village voice was the 1st journal citing term... see http://www.villagevoice.com/2006-11-21/music/sliptease/ ; i added the info but don't know how to do it properly, sorry; someone more savvy should fix it...


 * I've fixed the formatting. You did the right thing.  Just improve the article -- good references are always welcome -- and don't worry too much about the "markup".  Someone else can always fix that for you. — Mudwater (Talk) 20:28, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * thanks...actually, come to think of it, it's worded as if greenhaus/relix was first with this...i don't know what relix's lead time is, but it would probably be tough to ascertain if greenhaus read it in v v & then put it in his blog/relix?
 * (blog is dated 11-30) ps --- just found more controversy @ http://www.jambands.com/Departments/FromTheEditor/content_2006_12_27.00.phtml --
 * greenhaus is an editor @ relix)& is claiming originality on the term "post-jam" ...it's kind of a "conflict-of-interest" since that's what bernstein's been trying to do since buying relix in 2000; trying to turn it to an indie/modern (velvets/ny instead of gd/sf bent -- he's also bought two metal mags, plus the world beat mag...my subscription, which i'm not renewing for this reason, is up this month...truly "post-jam", eh? ...just listen to how they word things... "extremes", "noodling", "disaffected"...i/we LIKE "noodling" (btw, it's called JAMMING! ... this goes back to jerry/duane/carlos)...so don't call it "relix", which started as the gd tapers journal...to truly write the history of jambands, the last show by the dead (11 aug 2004)should be mentioned, maybe the bo rally (04 feb 2008)- minus bill kreutzman...pps jambands.com is also owned by relix...& dean budnick is also an ed. there...


 * When starting the new article be careful about its neologism qualities. - Steve3849 talk 21:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Before 1990
Regarding the paragraph that talks about pre-1990 - ummm... New Potato Caboose/ Zen Tricksters (nee Volunteers)/ Slipknot (the dead cover band, not the metal band(or whatever genre they are, I don't really know))/ Max Creek/ Blues Traveler/ Ominous Seapods (I may have the dates on this one wrong)/ Phish (obviously)/ The Mad Hatters/ Dickie Betts and Great Southern/ Gregg Allman Band/ Dread Zeppelin/ many many more .....

These are a few of the bands I can remember having drawing power in the Northeast club circuit and the New england and upstate New York frat and bar circuit (is there any slang similar to "Chitlin Circuit" for this? just curious) that existed in the mid-late eighties when I was "coming of age" (read - "old enough to sneak in to bars with a a really sh***y looking fake ID) in the Northeast.  While many of these bands were, in part or in whole, Grateful Dead cover bands (a heading which might require its own entry, BTW), there was a bar and club scene which supported improvisational music quite religiously throughtout that period.

I assume that there were other regional bands that had the same sort of impact on the youth of the day. My experience was in the northeast, but anyone from Colorado out there? Cally? Florida? DC?

Wetlands Preserve ("Sweatglands") probably deserves some sort of mention here, too.

Speaking of religiously, there was some guy (or gal, I'm not really sure which) who did a masters or doctoral thesis in sociology on the subculture of a dead tour - might be interesting to reference. The part of the conclusion that I was told about (I had a friend on tour who was one of the people interviewed) was that the shows functioned in much the same way that a church service does in more conventional society.

This entry by Uncle Cheese - see above regarding inexperience on Wiki to demonstrate why I didn't know I wasn't logged in...



132.170.160.86 19:59, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

--

Excuse my limited understanding on how to make comments here, I promise to learn more before my next post, but I wanted to get this out now.

I agree that the discussion of the early jamband scene needs a lot of work. I need to think on this some more before writing something up (and obviously learn how to use the system) but here are the points I would like to flesh out somewhat

1) The importance of the HORDE Fest in moving things from a group of small local/regional scenes into a more cohesive national scene.

2) The importance of the rise and fall of the Spin Doctors on the over all scene.  It may not seem that important now, but it was huge back then.  I also believe that it had a major impact on how later bands related to major labels

3) The split between the early jamband scene and the Aware scene in the mid-90s.  I think discussing this split goes along way to describing where the scene comes from and how it evolved into what it has become.  It also provides the perfect context to discuss how a band like DMB relates to the over all jamband scene (DMB were supposed to be on the first Aware comp, but RCA said no)

4) The rise of Leftover Salmon and the jamgrass scene within the larger jamband scene.

5) The founding of Homegrown and jambands.com (with a possible mention of the now defunct pauserecord.com) and their effect on the indie side of the scene.

Issues that I personally have with the article as it exists, but which I think need discussion before any changes are made.

1) The use of "psychedelic rock" in the opening.  I admit that I have no real experience with the scene as it exists today, but I seriously doubt it bares any resemblance to the current psych scene.  I think removing this term will go a long way to clearing things up like the Spiritualized/Warlocks question below.  At the current moment, I would recommend something along the lines of "bands that bare a heavy influence of either the music of the late 60s/early 70s, progressive rock, or earlier jambands."  That's off the top of my head though, and needs a lot of work.  Like I said, my issue is with the large differences between the current and former jamband scene and the current psych scene.

2) The inclusion of late 60s music as the first generation.  I understand the tendency to do this, and may be it is just me, but I tend to see the jamband scene as a separate entity that continues the legacy, but in its own distinct way.  As an example, bebop owes a great debt to the work of big band era jazz, but to say that the bebop era starts with the big band era, misses the elements of bebop which made it distinct from big band style.

That's all I've got off the top of my head. I'm tossing this out for discussion while I contemplate on the best way to discuss these matters in the article.

Just so you know I'm not some lone lunatic. I came into the jamband scene around '92/'93, but was very interested in the scene as it existed before I came along, which lead to several discussions with old timers. Most, if not all my comments, are coming from memory and are based on oral history, so I'll post a rough idea here to make sure people don't see things differently. For full disclosure, I bailed on the scene in the late 90s.

As an aside, as I was thinking of things that were missed in the early history of the scene I was having trouble remembering a band name. They were an early NYC group called Dream something. As I understand it, they were one of the central bands of the 80s NYC Vibe Tribe scene, and as such probably deserve a nod, but I can't remember their name. Anyone know who I'm talking about?

RESPONSE ON 1.): Agreed - The psychedelic rock comment stands alone and is not at all expanded upon.  I believe it causes the lead section to appear week.  The rest of the paragraph would be better suited in the history/origin section.  See my post at the bottom for further commentsDasharpster 09:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

RESPONSE ON 2.): Strongly agree - The Dead and The Allman Brothers are the obvious beginnings of this scene, but I believe each band should be examined on a set of criteria before we put them in there.  I personally feel that if the band didn't allow free taping and vary their setlist nightly, then it prohibits them from being considered a jamband!Dasharpster 09:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

ANOTHER RESPONSE ON #2: My best guess on the Band whose name you do not remember is God Street Wine. They were one of the main bands from the early years of the Wetlands. They also played the first couple Gatherings of the Vibes. They never "made it" as a true national act, but in some ways they were more important than Phish or Blues Traveller in creating the modern jam scene precisely because they were (for most of their run) an unsigned band. They were the first jamming non-Dead-cover band that played in a lot of bars and smaller clubs on the East Coast, helping to establish venues for small bands who came later, many of whom actually got bigger than GSW ever did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.20.130.14 (talk) 20:30, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Beards?
What? No mention of beards? I can't think of an example of a Jam Band that does not include at least one bearded member (and often all are bearded). Is this not an important part of the Jam Band scene? Can't the beard be seen as a sort of free-form improvisation of appearance? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.41.57.50 (talk) 20:15, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Clean up
Most of the problems are in the second half where there are large sections of text without any citations and where the language used is not encyclopedic. For example:

A fast growing, popular festival that is located in the beautiful Sherwood Forest in Rothbury, MI is the Rothbury Music Festival. Starting in 2008, it had a great start with many well known artists, and in 2009 it was even more impressive. As cited in the December/January 2006 issue of Relix magazine and a contemporaneous issue of the Village Voice,

This reads rather more like an advert than an encyclopedic entry, with WP:Weasel words and something that should be in a footnote and not in the text. Elsewhere WP:RS are needed to support the inclusion of many of the assertions.--''' SabreBD  (talk ) 13:04, 6 November 2010 (UTC)


 * That makes sense. Thanks for explaining. — Mudwater (Talk) 14:37, 6 November 2010 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. I have put it on my list of articles to clean up, but although I can fix the wording issues, the sources for the modern bits are more of a challenge for me, so if anyone can help with that it would be very useful.--''' SabreBD  (talk ) 18:45, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Phish does not represent all jam bands!
the first line "Jam bands are musical groups whose albums and live performances relate to a fan culture that originated with the 1960s group Grateful Dead and continued in the 1990s with bands like Phish." should be reworded. Granted The Grateful Dead did found the genre however since then a wide variety of jam bands have defined the genre. Phish should not get credit as continuing the genre just because they are the most famous. Jam band culture is just as strong with any other band. This also infers that the Dead are old news when deadheads are still staying strong with Further, Rhythym Devils, DSO and other Dead side projects. The Dead are still extremely relevant in jam band culture and this should be noted.--132.198.76.179 (talk) 15:25, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The inclusion of Phish in the lede is based on referenced material. The description is related to a historical popular use of the term. -  Steve3849 talk  16:40, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Genre
Just for the record, genre boxes are for what are clearly musical genres. Genres have a recognisable identity and internal cohesion. That is very different from what is being talked about here, which is a method of producing music. It is perfectly legitimate to have an article about Jam bands, but there should be no genre box.--''' SabreBD  (talk ) 07:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Questions
I'm not a fan of jam bands, so I came here to read more about them and understand them better. Got a few questions I don't think the article answers (sorry, I can't say I read it all, as the text is a little bit chaotic). But let's see: what's the typical repertoire of a jam band? Do they play own material, only other people's material, a mix of both? Is there any tradition in this sense, of playing rock standards or so? Do they record studio albums -- and if so, do they jam in them or are the recordings more tightened up, as one should expect? I also think the article lacks a proper definition of "jam", because it goes straight to defining "jam bands" (or trying to) and we don't get to know exactly what a jam is. Thanks - 187.20.71.73 (talk) 02:31, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Primus is Not a Jam Band
Les's later projects are, but not Primus. He even said so in an interview. They're experimental, funk, metal, alternative, and a ton of other things, but very rarely do they "jam." Mrmoustache14 (talk) 04:55, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Colour
The current colour of the genre infobox is green. You know what's also green? Rocksteady, reggae, dancehall, and dub. Someone should change that to either #0000D1 or crimson, because jam bands are not reggae/rocksteady/dancehall/dub-influenced bands. Could someone please find a consensus on colour? That would be of some help. Dude00007, Ph. D., Sc. D. (talk) 23:08, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Jam band. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090129101825/http://www.mockingbirdfoundation.org:80/setlists/1992.html to http://www.mockingbirdfoundation.org/setlists/1992.html#03-06-92

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:44, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Copy edit notes
Some thoughts on improving this article: I hope that this is of help. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:13, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Obviously, reference improvement. Material which is unsourced and has been unsourced for a while can probably be removed.
 * The article is repetitive in several places and could use some layout work. Stating the same thing in several places wastes the reader's time and makes for a boring, bloated article.
 * The section "Modern use and definition" does not logically belong inside History. It should probably have it's own L2 section and its scope restricted to avoid overlap with History.
 * There are many lists of bands and festivals throughout, which are repetitive and redundant with List of jam bands and List of jam band music festivals. These should be removed except where their mention is especially illustrative to the topic of that section. For example, in the History sections, there's no need to mention a band that wasn't notably influential on that period of jam band history.
 * There is some redundancy between the sections Taping and Business model and copyright law. The scope of these should be made more restrictive, or they could possibly be integrated together if it's felt that the subjects overlap.
 * When the article layout and content is stable, the lead needs to be rewritten, with no more than four paragraphs and no lists.