You do know that the now classic Miles Davis albums with the Shorter-Hancock-Williams line-up in the mid-late 60's initially sold in the range of 25-30 000 copies. That at a time when records were still selling; Coltrane did similar numbers with the exception of "A love supreme". Furthermore, it took "Kind of blue" decades to go platinum; a certification numerous rock/R&B/Hip-Hop/whatever albums have reached within days. And those were the biggest "real" jazz-acts.

Not saying that jazz isn't on life support but using "interest" as some sort of measurement of its relevance/status is a bit off; it's *been* on life-support for 50 years with some exceptions like fusion, it's not really relevant per se.



>Contemporary acts like Robert gals per have to mix in hip hop
>r&b and everything else just to stir up enough interest to
>generat some concert money just to survive

Just like fusion 40+ years ago then... Nothing new there...

>
>If it was a viable thriving art, this fool could have gotten
>actual musicians in the studio, but he didn't he got
>samples...why? That's all that's out there
>

Please...