Can I assume that when we talk about consistent artists that we are strictly talking about people who actually create rather than simply perform. I bring this up after Stuart mentioned Keith Jarrett who I tend to agree is certainly one of the most consistent (if not entirely loveable) performers. But is he a consistent creator of art?

Especially for jazz guys this is an important distinction as Jarrett for one has seen many of his recent releases inlcude many works not written by Jarrett or anyone else in his trio. I understand that that by definition they are giving us their interpretation of the original but that's far from the creative process that I think the original discussion at Betty's had in mind.

And where do people like Maxim Vengerov, Martha Argerich and Hilary Hahn fit in to this discussion? Does someome who performs for much if not all of their adult life like a Perlman not count because once again they are only interpreting someone else's baby? Can we thus discount all classical performers (at least those who only play and not compose) and say that none of them are true artists?

Back to the point about musicians with longevity and quality I think we'd have to include guys like Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong.