June 2025

Jazz, Streaming, & the Soundtrack to Aging Gracefully

From LPs to playlists—when the jazz never stopped

Jazz doesn’t just age well—it matures, like a fine wine or a favorite old coat. It gets more comfortable, more familiar, and yet somehow more meaningful. And if you’ve been listening to it for a few decades, it becomes the soundtrack not just to your evenings, but to your life.

Some of my friends like the old pop classics because they have the lyrics memorized and can sing along. I like the old jazz classics because I can anticipate the changes in key as well as the changes in mood. These never get old or tiring.

Back in the day, hearing jazz wasn’t just about taste—it was about commitment. You had to have a good quality turntable and sound system, which took time and money to put together—something I didn’t have a lot of during college. After I got out into the working world, I upgraded my setup a great deal. You had to go find the music. From bin-digging in record stores to checking out shows at small clubs, every new discovery was a little victory. The Blackhawk and Purple Onion in San Francisco. Then later, The Manne-Hole and The Lighthouse in Hermosa Beach. Mixed in was the occasional jazz night at the Hollywood Bowl or Greek Theatre.

I didn’t stumble into jazz—I chased it, followed it, made time for it. And in return, it gave me something pop music never quite could: depth, sophistication, human connection.

These days, though, I don’t chase it—I summon it. Spotify, Amazon Music, Pandora—all ready to play Stan Getz, Dave Brubeck, or even some obscure Swedish combo that somehow nails the vibe of a smoky Greenwich Village venue. And while part of me misses the chase, the other part is grateful I can still hear new jazz artists I would have never found in a record bin without the effort to stalk record stores.

That’s one of the paradoxes of streaming: it gives us access to everything but can dull the edge of discovery. There’s no friction, no search party, no surprise liner notes tucked into an album sleeve. Still, what we lose in tactile experience we sometimes gain in range and reach. I may not go out to jazz clubs much anymore, but I still find joy in hearing something fresh, unexpected, and brilliantly played.

  • Miles Davis: American jazz trumpeter, composer, and bandleader who was a major influence on the genre from the 1940s onwards
  • Dave Brubeck: For making odd time signatures feel smooth.
  • Sarah Vaughan: For putting velvet in every phrase.
  • Stan Getz: For proving that tone is everything.
  • Diana Krall: For carrying the tradition into the new century.
  • Grace Kelly: For surprising me with fresh energy that still feels like home.

I’m not chasing music anymore. I’ve made peace with that. But I’m still listening. And the jazz? It’s still playing.

What’s changed most is how jazz fits into life now. It’s not about finding the time and place to settle into a comfortable chair to catch up on the latest tunes or impressing anyone by staying in-the-know. It’s about comfort. Familiarity. Letting the rhythm carry you into a good headspace. For me, jazz has become the perfect accompaniment to mornings with coffee, late afternoons in the garden, or evenings when I just want to sit, breathe, and listen.

Streaming has made it possible to keep that connection alive. Not just to the legends like Ella and Miles, but to the next generation of musicians carrying the torch (see sidebars). I may not know all their names, but the music speaks for itself. And that, I think, is part of aging gracefully—knowing when to listen, appreciating the moment, and not needing to be first to the party. Just being glad you’re still dancing.

New Names on My Playlist

Over time, my collection of jazz favorites has grown—not just from my original stack of albums, but from discoveries made through streaming and recommendations. These artists found their way into my playlists and earned a spot alongside the greats:

  • Grace Kelly – award-winning saxophonist, singer, songwriter, producer, arranger, and bandleader
  • Kenny Garrett – a jazz saxophonist
  • Wynton Marsalis – an American trumpeter, composer, and music instructor, currently the artistic director of Jazz at Lincoln Center
  • Brad Mehldau – known for lyrical piano playing and a deep understanding of harmonic structure
  • Roy Hargrove – celebrated trumpeter known for his soulful playing and emotional connection
  • Christian McBride – a highly influential bassist celebrated for rhythmic drive and rock-solid musical foundations

Still in Tune

Music has a funny way of following you through life. It doesn’t age the way we do—it just changes context. The songs that once played in the background at beach parties now surface during quiet dinners. That solo you heard live at a smoky club fifty years ago? It still hits just as hard through a pair of headphones on a morning walk.

Jazz, for me, isn’t a genre—it’s a companion. It’s traveled with me from city to city, format to format, and moment to moment. And while the way I listen has changed—from albums and radios to streaming and smart speakers—the feeling hasn’t. When the horns swell or the piano drops into something unexpected, I’m still there, still listening.

So here’s to the music that doesn’t just stay with us—it grows up with us. And if you’ve got a favorite track or a memory it brings back, don’t keep it to yourself. Share it. That’s how the music keeps playing.

Emerging Voices Worth a Listen

While I still gravitate toward the traditional jazz artists of the ’50s through the ’70s, there are some emerging voices that stand out and are worth a listen:

  • Shabaka Hutchings – an award-winning multi-reed player who shifts seamlessly between saxophone and clarinet
  • Kamasi Washington – draws on both hip-hop and jazz traditions to create expansive, expressive work
  • Nubya Garcia – one of the UK’s fastest-rising young jazz musicians
  • – a self-proclaimed “beat scientist” pushing jazz into the future
  • Kendrick Scott Oracle – drummer/composer blending post-bop jazz with R&B and hip-hop flavors
  • Joel Ross – a rising star on the vibraphone and an exciting new voice on the Blue Note roster

Jazz, Streaming, & the Soundtrack to Aging Gracefully Read More »

Why Music Was Better When

When DJs picked the playlist, jazz clubs whispered magic, and discovery took time

When I was in high school, most of the kids were glued to the pop charts. And to be fair, that era—late ’50s through the ’70s—produced some of the best music ever recorded, much of which is still being played today. But thanks to a lucky break during my sophomore year in high school, I was given a free ticket to Jazz at the Philharmonic, a touring group of jazz performers. There I was introduced to something entirely different: Dizzy Gillespie, Ella Fitzgerald, and a world of sound that wasn’t topping the charts but was quickly grabbing my attention. That one night launched a lifelong love of jazz, even as everyone else seemed to be surfing to the Beach Boys.

Don’t get me wrong, I still loved the pop and folk music of the time. During college, you listened to what the majority was listening to. But my collection of jazz albums was growing and I could get my fix in my room. Later, while living at the beach in Southern California, beach music wasn’t optional if you wanted to be socially acceptable. The Eagles, Bread, Mamas and Papas, Crosby, Stills & Nash—even the Carpenters had their place in the sun. But on weekends, after the sand cleared and the crowds thinned, I could head to places like The Lighthouse or The Manne-Hole in Hermosa Beach for something deeper, more textured. Real jazz.

While my friends were collecting 45s of “Surfer Girl” and following American Bandstand, I was subscribed to the Columbia Jazz Record Club (such a deal! Sign up and get 10 albums and only had to buy one a month for the next year. Do that for a couple of years, and your library would grow to 40 or 50 albums for not a lot of money). Every month, new albums arrived—sometimes Miles Davis, sometimes George Shearing, occasionally something delightfully obscure from artists I had not yet heard of. My tastes didn’t follow the charts; they followed the improvisations and inventiveness of musicians who never seemed to play the same way twice.

Back then, music came to you on someone else’s schedule. The DJs and record producers decided what played. You could change stations to shift the flavor a bit, but it was their show. Some of my friends had decent collections of 45s that we’d listen to at gatherings, but if you wanted jazz? That was on you. I was fortunate to live in the Bay Area and then later in Los Angeles where radio stations were plentiful, but few, if any, played jazz. That meant finding time and space to play my own music.

Truth is, I wasn’t much for standard two- or four-beat music. Either the rhythm moved me or it didn’t. Dave Brubeck proved that odd time signatures could still groove with “Take Five” in 1959—one of the few jazz tracks that cracked the pop charts. A lot of pop was just background to me, though folk and edge-country caught my attention. The Kingston Trio, Peter, Paul & Mary on one end; Ray Charles and the Rolling Stones on the other—they had something to say and played it well. But jazz… jazz said something without words—except for Ella, Diana, Sarah.

In the 1970s and ’80s, my musical world morphed again. Pop began to sound increasingly processed and shallow. I often refer to the ’80s and much of the ’90s as a wasteland of popular music. Can anyone make sense of why rap is popular?

I was fortunate living on the Peninsula in Northern California to discover KCSM, a radio station that played jazz all day and sponsored events throughout the Bay Area. This was pre-internet, pre-streaming, and it was a welcome and consistent source of both traditional and emerging jazz performers.

When I moved from California to Nevada in 2005, radio became a challenge. I drifted even further toward jazz—and to my surprise, toward country music. By then the internet offered multiple new sources. Country had better singers, stronger stories, and—most importantly—clarity. You could understand what they were saying. That was not always the case with the big hits of the time.

These days, I’ve ditched the turntable and tapes, but not the tunes. With Amazon, Spotify, and Pandora, I can summon Stan Getz or Grace Kelly with a voice command or build a playlist around the soulfulness of Sarah Vaughan. I still get my jazz fix, and sometimes I ask Siri or Alexa for something new in that same spirit. But the thrill of the hunt is gone. It’s all too easy—which, honestly, is fine with me. I’m too tired to chase. I just want the good stuff to show up.

In the next article, I’ll look at how streaming services have changed not just what we listen to, but how we listen—and what jazz means when you’re not trying to impress anyone, just trying to enjoy something real.

What Beach Music Sounded Like When It Was Cool to Get Sand in Your Toes Around the Volleyball Court

  • The Beach Boys: “California Girls,” “Surfer Girl,” “Good Vibrations”
  • The Eagles: “Take It Easy,” “Peaceful Easy Feeling,” “Desperado”
  • The Carpenters: “Rainy Days and Mondays,” “Close to You,” “We’ve Only Just Begun”
  • Bread: “Make It with You,” “It Don’t Matter to Me”
  • Crosby, Stills & Nash: “Suite: Judy Blue Eyes,” “Love the One You’re With,” “Southern Cross,” “Our House”

These were the soundtrack to bonfires, board shorts, and beach parties. But after sundown? The jazz came out.

Why Music Was Better When Read More »

Robots on the Job—But Who’s Really Doing the Work?

Support Systems, Ethics, & the Road to Real Help

Let’s say your robot vacuum bumps into a chair, backs up, spins, and navigates around it. Smooth, right? Maybe. But who taught it how to handle that chair? And what if the chair has a new leg design tomorrow? Will it still figure it out—or will it call for help?

That’s the crux of today’s domestic robot reality. The robots may be visible, but the infrastructure behind them—the people, the data, the design choices—is still mostly hidden. In this final part of the series, we pull back the curtain to look at the invisible scaffolding that keeps robots upright, working, and (mostly) useful.

Many of today’s robot devices are partly self-learning. A Roomba, for instance, remembers Many of today’s robot devices exhibit semi-autonomous learning. A Roomba, for instance, uses sensors and algorithms to build a map of your space, learning where obstacles are and how to navigate around them. If you move a chair, it doesn’t recognize the object per se, but it will update its map through trial and error over the course of future runs. Most of this learning happens locally, though the system can also receive improvements through cloud-based firmware updates and app-based user input. By contrast, robot lawn mowers have a simpler job—trees don’t move.

Robots Don’t Work Alone

For all the headlines about AI and autonomy, today’s robots rely heavily on human input and cloud-based support systems. Many robots are essentially elaborate remote-control systems with a fancy user interface. Even those with “autonomous” labels often depend on massive libraries of prior examples, plus real-time cloud data to handle unexpected events.

Teleoperation is common. For example, robots in pilot programs may be guided remotely by humans—sometimes just to collect training data, sometimes because the robot still doesn’t know what it’s doing. Even chatbots like Alexa or Replika often escalate to human-curated pathways when responses get too complicated.

In factories, robots have tightly defined jobs with predictable environments. In homes, things are much messier. That messiness still requires a lot of human cleanup—often by support teams halfway around the world.

The New Invisible Labor

Robots may never sleep, but the people behind them do a lot of overtime. Consider just a few roles:

  • Training Data Curators: People label images, tag voice samples, and classify commands to teach AI what to recognize.
  • Teleoperators: Remote workers who step in when a robot gets confused, often without the user knowing.
  • Maintenance Coders: Engineers who patch bugs, reroute routines, and troubleshoot on the fly.
  • Behavior Designers: Specialists who script interactions and tune emotional responses for digital assistants.

All this labor is mostly invisible to the end user. But it’s essential. And it raises a key ethical question: If your robot depends on unseen workers, shouldn’t they be protected, compensated, and acknowledged?

Privacy: The Price of Convenience?

A robot that learns from your habits needs access to your habits. Your daily routine. Your voice. Your emotional tone. That’s a lot of data—some of it quite personal. And while many companies tout their commitment to privacy, the reality is murky.

Smart assistants in particular blur the lines. When your voice-activated assistant reminds you to drink water or take meds, it’s helpful. But where is that data stored? Who owns it? And how will it be used tomorrow?

We need robust answers to:

  • Who gets access to personal robot data?
  • Can users delete what’s been collected?
  • Should companies profit from behavioral data without sharing the rewards?

Until these questions are settled, every domestic robot comes with fine print—and some tradeoffs you may not see.

Support Doesn’t Have to Look Like Rosie

Here’s the twist: the future of domestic robots might not be humanoid at all. Many of the most effective support systems are software-based or embedded in appliances and devices.

And they are already being deployed—not just in tech-forward households, but in elder care, chronic condition management, and home mental health support. These tools don’t clean the house, but they support people in ways that matter every day.

Consider:

  • Alexa and Google Home: Voice assistants that manage calendars, monitor household devices, and answer questions
  • Smart watches: Health monitors that detect falls, track sleep, monitor stress, and nudge users to stay active
  • Medication apps: Pill reminders that integrate with pharmacies and doctor appointments
  • Companion bots like ElliQ: Tools that help combat loneliness and offer conversational structure to those with cognitive decline
  • TV-integrated companions like Joy: AI-driven software designed for seniors that offers daily check-ins, memory games, and therapeutic interactions without requiring a new device

These systems don’t walk, talk, or cook—but they listen, prompt, and engage. And they do it with low cost, high consistency, and growing personalization. For many older adults—especially those living alone—this hybrid of cognitive support and companionship may be more useful than a humanoid robot still struggling to pour a glass of water.

Real-World AI Companions for Seniors 

ElliQ – Developed by Intuition Robotics, ElliQ is a tabletop companion designed specifically for older adults. It engages users in conversation, offers health prompts, plays music, and even suggests activities. Designed to combat loneliness and cognitive decline, it uses context-aware dialogue to keep interactions fresh and meaningful.

Joy – A virtual caregiver built into the television, Joy provides reminders, memory games, and companionship without requiring a new device. It’s particularly promising for seniors with limited mobility or tech reluctance, using a familiar screen and simple interactions to help keep users mentally active and emotionally supported.

Both of these tools are part of a growing class of AI-powered social companions aimed at addressing isolation, supporting cognitive health, and providing a daily sense of connection—especially for those aging in place.

The Future of Help: Flexible, Ethical, Human-Aware

So what does “real help” look like in the next 5–10 years? Not a fully autonomous Rosie, but an expanding hybrid of smart devices, lightly-trained bots, and cloud-based assistants backed by support teams. The dream of the standalone domestic helper is alive—but it’s being rebuilt with a lot more nuance.

What we need next:

  • Transparent data practices that protect users
  • Fair compensation for the humans behind the curtain
  • Infrastructure investments to make support faster and more affordable
  • Flexibility in how robots and smart devices are deployed—form doesn’t matter if the function works

And we also need to ask the hard question: Who gets paid when AI makes money?

The training data used by smart systems comes from somewhere—often scraped from social media, digitized research libraries, hospitals, labs, and public records. But who owns that information? Who verifies its accuracy? Who ensures it’s updated? And who funds the digital highways that deliver it on demand?

As AI systems continue to create real economic value, we need new models that recognize the vast ecosystem behind them. From patient data in clinical trials to memory-care routines, from voice interactions to daily use feedback—someone created or contributed that knowledge. Should they share in the value if their work fuels AI-generated support?

That’s the reality check. The robots may not fold your socks next year. But they might notice you’ve been still too long, remind you to move, and gently ask if everything’s okay.

That’s help. Maybe not in the form we expected—but maybe in the form we need.

Robots on the Job—But Who’s Really Doing the Work? Read More »

Verified by MonsterInsights