A thread to politely discuss the merits of jazz

Originally Posted by Dan Gilbert

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

Simple. An awesome melody written over a chord progression can be pure genious. Look at, say, Schubert. Of coursethese guys spend days/weeks/months on end tweaking and poishing these melodies and harmonies to make it just right.

Now, good jazz musicians do just that, only in a matter of seconds.


Oh, and go listen to some Fusion.
Or lounge, lol.
or Acid Jazz.
Or *shudder* Smooth Jazz.
Or Steely Dan.

~Kal

Besides, jazz musicians get all the girls!

Yeah, just from Derek Bailey's writings, though, I assume that he's coing at it with instant intentions - that at that moment, he decides to play that odd-metrical part

::shudders at the Bailey-Jamaldeen Turner album:: Sorry, bad memories.

Originally Posted by Ferkungamabooboo

Yeah, just from Derek Bailey's writings, though, I assume that he's coing at it with instant intentions - that at that moment, he decides to play that odd-metrical part

Aha...I see what you're getting at, and fair enough - tools (such as uncommon-tuplet-groupings, or multi-metrical-musics [ha!]) are (in my opinion) a product of the interaction-stimulus/response of the moment, as opposed to true premeditation...I think... I could be, and likely am WAY wrong.




[it's great having someone else around with whom to actually discuss this shit!!]

Originally Posted by Keerakh Kal

Besides, jazz musicians get all the girls!

But sadly not all the girls get jazz musicians. :>

Originally Posted by SSC

But sadly not all the girls get jazz musicians. :>

Knowing the jazz musicians here in New Orleans? You can take em

Well, I can say I like jazz, but more on the written side of things. For an example, I totally dig Bill Evans' Very Early the first time I heard it. But as the piece goes on, here comes the improvisational part, which is just something I can't appreciate. Maybe the notes are too complex for me to hear any kind of feeling inside it.

Another example by the same composer:

YouTube Video

Waltz for Debby

(Original Source)

I felt that the piece started to lose its charm at around 2:05 or so. It's just too, erm, complex (can't find a better word right now). Sure the harmonies are great, it's great music, I understand that. But I just can't seem to get what's so great about it. Anyone care to shed some light? Another thing, IMO it gets its charm back at 3:33 or so, since I can hold back on to the main melody again.

That being said, I like improvising. I can't do it properly, just memorizing some scales and the such and playing it out. It's fun

EDIT: After having some thought about my problem, I think it may just be that during the improvised parts, I just don't know what to listen! Should I listen to the bass? The piano? The drums? Or all at once? All those don't make much sense to me when the musician is improvising. Anyone can recommend some pieces with improvised part that aren't so steep (for lack of a better word, again)?

I apologize if this has already been said....because I didn't really have time to read the entire 8 pages....but....

To an extent Jazz has become classical music in regards to the way it's been studied over the past 20 years. The essence of jazz is truly improvisation. Over analyzing what someone has to say on his/her instrument (for instance Eric Dolphy....who played some seriously "heady" stuff but it was all from his "gut") has lead to some of the worst "jazz" out there.

Don't get me wrong...understanding the language is BASIC to playing ANY style of music, but once you start getting too far into analysis and away from the "heart" of it you're playing classical music and not jazz.

This is the main and basic reason Mr. Dan is so lost in a sea of musical mis-information.

All I can say to Dan is get over yourself and listen to some of the greats without your misinformation (Monk an uneducated druggie???? really????? What about Coltrane's "A Love Supreme"?????? He wasn't on a single substance at that time and it's one of the most powerful pieces of all time!!!)

3.5 cents,
Kyle

See, but I think that all of the greats of Jazz KNEW and wholly understood the compositional/theoretical side of what they were doing.

Miles Davis, for example, was constantly criticized in his time for his soloing; the reason why he is so well known is because he understood composition (and he surrounded himself with the MOST KILLER musicians and composers: Bill Evans, Coltrane, Taceo Macero, Wayne Shorter, Tony Williams, Ron Carter... the list is too long)

And a lot of the Jazz vs. Classical "problem" come in to misunderstanding the role of a classical musician. It's easy to say that they're just reading what's on the page, but its a bit silly to assume they put nothing of themselves into the piece. There's even a concept of "groove" - ie rubato, or an intentional lack of it - in much of it.

I think this ties in with the discussion of "magic" in the craft of music...

Originally Posted by Ferkungamabooboo

See, but I think that all of the greats of Jazz KNEW and wholly understood the compositional/theoretical side of what they were doing.

Miles Davis, for example, was constantly criticized in his time for his soloing; the reason why he is so well known is because he understood composition (and he surrounded himself with the MOST KILLER musicians and composers: Bill Evans, Coltrane, Taceo Macero, Wayne Shorter, Tony Williams, Ron Carter... the list is too long)

And a lot of the Jazz vs. Classical "problem" come in to misunderstanding the role of a classical musician. It's easy to say that they're just reading what's on the page, but its a bit silly to assume they put nothing of themselves into the piece. There's even a concept of "groove" - ie rubato, or an intentional lack of it - in much of it.

I think this ties in with the discussion of "magic" in the craft of music...

Couldn't agree more

The intellectuals that get caught up in the over-analyzing of classical music don't understand that
in spite of all the knowledge and intellectual genius of someone like Bach or Mozart they were still playing/writing what they heard (ie..."the magic")

It is unfortunate that Jazz has ventured head first down this hallway......

-Kyle

Well, my point was that I don't think you CAN over-analyze it. The same tools are valid for both, since they're fundamentally the same - they're art music (for the most part), involving at least a modicum of interpretation, that were both at one time highly successful commercial music, but have lost favour and are now aficionado music. I mean, Stockhausen and Miles Davis did an album together - never got released - but the ties are the same. Compare the style of On The Corner with the concepts from Stockhausen, excepting the regular pulse and whatnot...