A thread to politely discuss the merits of jazz

Why are we discussing this? The whole thread seems like an utter waste of time and server space. Dan won't budge on his stance no matter what. So why waste time trying to respond? Jazz is jazz, classical is classical. Both are two completely different concpets using the same 12 notes. Their like apples and oranges, both fruit, but two completely different fruits. So drop it everyone!

Nice subtle changing of the thread title by the way.

Originally Posted by Dan Gilbert

...you still aren't telling me what it is that these select few are doing which is so complex and genius.

As far as improvisation goes, how can a solo be as complex as premeditated composed music if it is composed on the spot?

Again...drop the 'complexity' thing. I don't give a shit about complexity...and neither should you. Reread my posts, you might be replying too fast before I get them finished.

------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by Justin Tokke

Why are we discussing this? The whole thread seems like an utter waste of time and server space. Dan won't budge on his stance no matter what. So why waste time trying to respond?

Because it's important to some of us.

Originally Posted by Justin Tokke

Nice subtle changing of the thread title by the way.

Thanks.

I know it's important. I think it would be nice to correct injustices to Jazz (which is not my preffered style but I like all the same). It just seems to dumb to waste your time with someone who will not change his opinion no matter what you say.

Dan, should I pull out an Ellington score and carefully analze and disect it for you? Will that help you shut up?

Originally Posted by Justin Tokke

I know it's important. I think it would be nice to correct injustices to Jazz (which is not my preffered style but I like all the same). It just seems to dumb to waste your time with someone who will not change his opinion no matter what you say.

Dan, should I pull out an Ellington score and carefully analze and disect it for you? Will that help you shut up?

Good grief... I don't think I'm wasting my time. Perhaps Dan is wasting his time trying to understand a genre he simply will not like. I'm just trying to figure out the underlying predisposition for some people to quickly dismiss a genre after a few unsatisfying listens.

Also, leave the Ellington score alone - I want to avoid more of this "jazz is complex, seee!! Look here: C7sus(b9)/Ab OoooH! FANCY! " ...it's bullshit.

Jazz is jazz.
Classical is classical.
Good music is good music...be it excruciatingly complicated or devastatingly simple.


[also, there's really no cut and dried line to distinguish jazz from classical anymore - there's a lot of genre-bending composers out there...perhaps a different place to start Dan, rather than the boppers. ]

Perhaps you just haven't found a jazz you like - there's so much out there.

If you're not hearing climaxes, points of interest or anything to perk you r ears, then you're just not hearing it...simple as that. You're either too embroiled in the criticisms and negative things you don't like and can't hear past them to the passionate and emotional music; or you're just listening to contrite shit with few creative points to be found.

...........

I'm curious, what have you listened to? There's some powerful music out there - It'd be a shame you missed it for a misconceived prejudice against wankers.

YouTube - John Coltrane - Alabama

Hear that? Pure, raw, honest music..... hear it? No? Maybe?

I tried, I really tried, but four the first four and a half minutes, I heard a scale. THEN it changed, but it just in texture and mood, not harmonically, except for a couple changes later on. And the texture and mood change didn't really do it for me - they certainly didn't cause me to feel the emotions they felt apparently reflecting on the alabama church bombings (as was apparently the inspiration). The second half just seemed so limited by the fact that it still had to be jazz... What's so honest about it? The emotions you feel when reflecting on these things are bound up into a 7-note scale? The only thing that made sense really was that it LINGERED, but with jazz, what else can you do?

...sorry for that one.

EVERYONE:

Artists on whom I'm basing my opinions, those artists who are apparently the lame-os of jazz who are shielding me from the worthy jazz:

Miles Davis,
Parker,
Coltrane,
Rheinhardt
Monk
Evans
Marsalis

Among others.

"an Ellington score" implies there is jazz which has a score, which was just what I wanted to ask. BTW, "Mood Indigo" - who can not like it?!?

To be clear in my question - is there some jazz that is not improvised making the defining characteristics of the genre the rhythm and harmony?

Originally Posted by Dan Gilbert

I tried, I really tried, but four the first four and a half minutes, I heard a scale. THEN it changed, but it just in texture and mood, not harmonically, except for a couple changes later on. And the texture and mood change didn't really do it for me - they certainly didn't cause me to feel the emotions they felt apparently reflecting on the alabama church bombings (as was apparently the inspiration). The second half just seemed so limited by the fact that it still had to be jazz... What's so honest about it? The emotions you feel when reflecting on these things are bound up into a 7-note scale? The only thing that made sense really was that it LINGERED, but with jazz, what else can you do?

Ummmm....

*shrug* I think you're trying to be too cerebral about it...but, whatever...that's your prerogative. It's hard to explain what you're missing in it - you heard a scale, yes. You also heard a man pouring his life's experiences and a world of emotion through that horn, using that scale.

I say, give it some time - perhaps return to straight-ahead jazz in a few years. Your ears and tastes will develop and change...you might still come around.

------------------------

Originally Posted by Euler

"an Ellington score" implies there is jazz which has a score, ...is there some jazz that is not improvised making the defining characteristics of the genre the rhythm and harmony?

Short answer: yes. Most of it.

Originally Posted by Dan Gilbert

I'm not sure I can pinpoint what turns me off of jazz. It's just not pleasing to my ears, and I feel like I am hearing exactly the same wall of sound no matter what track off which album is playing. I know from playing in a jazz band that "wall of sound" is something which is avoided, but I don't feel like there is any variety, despite the fact that if I listened closely, I could pinpoint the elements that are different. I feel like I am hearing the same sounds over and over and over again. I get it, a whole tone scale sounds such and such a way over this particular chord, but so what? I feel like there are no climaxes, no points of interest, it's just a smoothly flowing wall of sound.

based on what you've had to say, I'd gather that you haven't listened to Wayne Shorter, Herbie Hancock (played with ChicagoSO at 11), Mingus (Black Saint anyone?), Eric Dolphy (advocator and performer of Varese, among other contempary composers), Andrew Hill (studied with Hindemith), Cecil Taylor (atonality!), Bill Evans (studied composition at Mannes College of Music), Keith Jarrett (was offered to study with Nadia Boulanger as a teen) or even Zappa (extremely advanced classical composer as we all know) for that matter...you act like these guys are mindless screwballs, they know their shit and yes their stuff is complex, not like it matters in the first place

One more thing and then I quit for tonight (but I will come back),

I never said that music has to be complex to in order to be good, although I personally prefer more complex music.

This argument started over the statement "Jazz artists pretend that playing jazz is much more complex than it really is." If we want to drop the complexity part of this argument, that's ok with me. We've basically just started to argue about whether or not Jazz is GOOD, which is not really something you can argue - it's all about how much you like listening to it. Robin's basically just being altruistic and not argumentative. So, I suppose the discussion has shifted.

By the way, is there anyone out there who, like me, doesn't like Jazz? I'm a bit outnumbered here.

Originally Posted by Dan Gilbert

I tried, I really tried, but four the first four and a half minutes, I heard a scale. THEN it changed, but it just in texture and mood, not harmonically, except for a couple changes later on. And the texture and mood change didn't really do it for me - they certainly didn't cause me to feel the emotions they felt apparently reflecting on the alabama church bombings (as was apparently the inspiration). The second half just seemed so limited by the fact that it still had to be jazz... What's so honest about it? The emotions you feel when reflecting on these things are bound up into a 7-note scale? The only thing that made sense really was that it LINGERED, but with jazz, what else can you do?

...sorry for that one.

EVERYONE:

Artists on whom I'm basing my opinions, those artists who are apparently the lame-os of jazz who are shielding me from the worthy jazz:

Miles Davis,
Parker,
Coltrane,
Rheinhardt
Monk
Evans
Marsalis

Among others.

Have you considered that if you can't even recognize the talent and skill to play jazz at the level of those listed above- perhaps it is a clear indication of your lack of musical understanding or talent?

No I'm not trying to bash you. Actually consider what I'm saying.

You listed off some of the A-list of jazz musicians and claim you cannot identify or understand the emotions and complexity behind it. Because of this you don't enjoy it and don't like jazz. That is fine- it is your opinion. Hell, I don't like most of Wynton Marsalis' stuff but I respect the crap outta him because he can really play and has had a great career.

I think you're mixing too much of your opinions in with value of a style of music. I'm not one for country music- never have been. However, I can respect what professional county bands can do. Sometimes I even tap my foot a bit!

If you cannot find any value of jazz- that is fine! It is your opinion... however your sheer lack of any understanding, respect or ability to identify emotion in some of the greatest jazz around makes me question your musical talent, understanding and ability itself.

I don't mean that as an insult.... but I would argue that someone that is musically talented and at least somewhat educated can (at the very least) appreciate any musical style performed well.

Originally Posted by Dan Gilbert

"Jazz artists pretend that playing jazz is much more complex than it really is."

This statement is biased on so many levels. I can argue that classical musicians pretend that classical music is more complicated that it really is. I can even argue that polka musicians pretend that polka music is cooler or more complex than other forms of music. It doesn't prove much- it is an opinion. Also, I know many musicians that are equally talented at classical music and jazz music. My old professor during grad school was one of them. He could rock out in one of the best jazz bands in the world- then play internationally with some of the best symphonies around the world. He has high regards for both classical and jazz styles of music. In fact, he holds all good music in high regard.

What you've done is just make asinine arguments and biased statements. If jazz music is so simple- then why are you not a FANTASTIC jazz pianist? Have you thought maybe you wouldn't consider yourself "to be a good jazz pianist" because you don't have enough understanding or experience playing jazz? Why not master something (or at least get close) then throw your strong opinions around the web. Until then.... you're just wasting people's time and blowing smoke.