impossible - that's fine, I have no problem with disagreement - I just, at one time, spent a fair amount of time listening to old school, I have a drummer who is really into it, and I just jump and skim, listening, though I could not cite chapter and verse - to me it's got the same limitations as the drone-guys stuff, or 90 percent of what I see reviewed in Signal to Noise or the whole electronic movement - one idea and little else, no sense of real presence beyond a quick expression of idea which is generally not very interesting to begin with. These guys all tend to confuse a gimmick with an idea, mannerism with style. That's just my take, of course. But I think it's a function of just how easy it is to produce sound in the digital age, and it breeds a real formal laziness.
as for:
"Two labels that don't give a shit what you guys feel about Robert Glasper or a hip-hop/jazz hybrid. Not to mention the hundreds of mixtapes that flow throw the Internet every week. You guys can analyze the music all you want, and imagine this ideal that you can't quite actually imagine, but people are going on about their music whether or not it is jazz enough for you. Surprised as you may be, the term hip-hop probably means as much as the term jazz at this point. "
irrelevant, I think, for the critical disussion at hand - it's like saying, in the political form, "well the Republicans don't give a shit about what you think about them...they reproduce constantly, sorry if they are not politcally correct enough for you." It doesn't preclude us from talking about it and criticizing it.
I constantly read articles about hip hop which turn out to be much more interesting than the actual music. I'll check out those labels, however. The "writing" in hip hop tends toward doggerel; I don't find it as strong and intricate and layered as that of the blues tradition or even the old-style 19th century folk/minstrel things written by people like Alec Rogers.