capnreverb wrote:Your dismissal of jazz Steve is quite lazy. Its obvious you dont like it, but that does not make you above it.

Well, the "jazz is dull" thread is one for another time, perhaps. I was being concise as part of a larger discussion.

What isn't "lazy" is the time I've spent having to listen to jazz, usually at the urgings of a graduate, in an attempt to grasp why anyone would give a shit about such passionless, formally narrow noodling. Honestly, the batting average must be well below the Mendoza line, and that gives me license to ignore it.

Having already conceeded that there must be interesting jazz music out there somewhere, I think I should get points for generosity of spirit.

I don't believe that all jazz music fans are fools. These people like something that speaks to them in a genuine way. I get it. I am just not one of them. I have been exposed to enough jazz to draw the conclusion that its charms are too subtle for me. Its flaws, or rather the flaws of its practice, are evident though, and they are a hurdle.

I can say the same about hip hop, without discounting the possibility that there will someday be some of it that I like. There is no shortage of music that has developed a passionate following that I am immune to: Heavy Metal as an idiom, for example, contemporary Nashville country music, new age music, hippie music of most varieties, Rush, the Smiths, the no wave revival, ska, and astonishingly (because the food is amazing), Hawaiian traditional music.

I'm comfortable with the notion that some music isn't for me. I'm also comfortable with the notion that any kind of music can speak to its natural audience in a way unique to it. Jazz included.

-best

Not a dry eye in the house...

The music that presently falls under this rubric of "free" or "improvised" is frequently the most stylized, ruly music around and it's certainly never free. This wouldn't matter so much except that this very concept--whether within music, Christiana or whatever--of being FREE is the conceit that draws so many followers to it. The only arguably free music is a 2 year old banging on a piano. When these "improvisers" get their free thing going and appear to be playing these fascinatingly counterintuitive notes, you know, bucking the whole western music theory paradigm, what they're not admitting is that without the whole western music paradigm their music would have no meaning. If we didn't expect some chord to resolve in a certain traditional way then the fact that the chord resolves to something seemingly counterintuitive would have no meaning.

Whether it abides by the traditional structures of music or reacts against them "free" music still depends on those structures for its meaning. At its best it thwarts our expectations in an exciting or "surprising" way, but it ain't free. Its significance still hinges on our expectations. If we didn't have any expectations to be thwarted the music would be insignificant noise. So many improvisors would give it up if they had to concede that they haven't transcended traditional musical paradigms but are at best posing an interesting reaction to them. It's already been pointed out that whatever freedom the jazz form allows is only within a strict definition of correct chords and progressions. And just as abstract art is often best done by 2 year olds I'd just as soon take my abstract music from them too. Or from those in the "improvisation" community who aren't afraid of the opprobrium that would be heaped on them by the elitists if they claimed that to some extent their desire was, like Picasso, to channel the 2 year old's mindset.

As for the base, carnal motivations that are supposedly specific to rock musicians I wonder what you think motivated these classical "high" artists? Exactly how many eunuchs do you number among the "great" composers? Can you honestly say anyone has written anything without being motivated by a desire to connect with someone? It is the basic human motivation for even the most seemingly abstract or metaphysical creations. Take Nietzsche for example, a guy whose abilities to get laid were notoriously lacking if not altogether non-existent. Do you think it's a mere coincidence that he's responsible for some of the angriest most vitriolic copy in existence?


Have you ever heard "Makeshift Swahili" by This Heat? It is a song from the disco genre. You can do that pointed finger John Travolta dance to it. But I would be happy to argue that it's the most complicated, subtle, sophisticated combination of intuition, training and just the finely tuned ears of its creators than any other song on the planet. AND it does all of this not by upending any traditions so much as drawing on them in a way that taps their most essential fruits and combines them in unique ways. Unfortunately while you might agree with me you'd probably just chalk any value it has up to the "eastern" influence.

First of all, this thread kicks ass.


Now I'm in a jazz band at college, and i must say that I have several qualms with the artform and those that perform it.

First of all, there is absolutely NO original music. We do little reditions of these terrible things called "standards" and play them over and over. Same techniques, same chords over and over, same snobby drum fills, over and over.

I attempted to make an actual band with the bass player (former best friend) and drummer from that ensamble, but all they wanted to do was cover Incubus and Rage (WHY!?!?!). They couldnt get their head around the concept of writing an original peice of music. In many ways, i feel like jazz, at least the way it s practice today, puts the collective, would-be talent, into a little box, and forces them to believe there is only one right way to do something.

There not even a single black person in our ensamble, wtf??


Now most of the people in that group are trying to because (or already are) professional musicians, but what they fail to realize is; if money is what you want, you've gotta learn how to create. Now all of this might be isolated to my little, soap-opera like, college. But there are several points i've noticed happening everywhere i look. No one is going to reinvent jazz, there circumstances that came about to create the entire artform will never take place again.

I'm a rock guitarist in a jazz band, its a hard life. At least i get paid

(...sarcasm?)

Alex, Steve, Danm, etc...

Are you people seriously talking about GENRES here!!!
For god's sake!!!!
That's just fucking stupid!!!

Jazz includes what then ?
Ellington: sure
King Oliver: sure
Sun Ra: sure
Sun Ra + MC 5: ...?
Willliam Parker: sure
William Parker + Yo La Tengo: ...?

+

Read John Fahey's 'How Bluegrass Music Destroyed My Life' and weep!
...

greetings,

cstof

I think he was just responding to capnreverb's posts. And I was just venting my frustration with close-minded music majors.

Danm,

here you go:
http://neumu.net/drama/2003/2003-00017/ ... rama.shtml

unleash genre-bendin' (again) !!!

cheers,

cstof

Capnverb is indeed full of it!!!!
+
what's his point?

A preference towards a certain type of music can be stated, of course!
But using the genre idiom is kinda silly, i believe.
Besides...aren't genres another way to ease the marketing of music?
(their just little signs sitting on top of the cd racks at your local store)

I too have my opinion about certain types of music, yet i always soon realise that it's mostly based on prejudice or ignorance.


cheers,

cstof

on an "aside" note:

i worked at a small record store for a while and i think the level of "music snob" is directly related to the height of the little platform behind the register.

one is certainly imbued with an alarming amount of pomp whilst looking down one's nose as someone tries to sell you their alice in chains collection or asks if you have a bjork import section.

darktowel wrote:Capnverb is indeed full of it!!!!
+
what's his point?

A preference towards a certain type of music can be stated, of course!
But using the genre idiom is kinda silly, i believe.
Besides...aren't genres another way to ease the marketing of music?
(their just little signs sitting on top of the cd racks at your local store)

I too have my opinion about certain types of music, yet i always soon realise that it's mostly based on prejudice or ignorance.


cheers,

cstof

I'm sorry, but i missed the part where i said one genre of music is better than the other. Please enlighten me to where this has happened.

I'm sorry, but i missed the part where i said one genre of music is better than the other. Please enlighten me to where this has happened.

My comment about genres was aimed at Danm and others, who made blunt statements regarding music styles.
If people choose to express a liking for a certain type of music (see Steve's extensive post) than this is their good right.
Thus it is not offensive or foolish.

However, my statement about you refers to the first post you made:

i don't understand what you mean:

Do you mean to say that music is only considered in it's historical context? That NOT knowing everything about music makes one an ignorant fool?
...