Its something I don't understand. Music snobs lump Jazz and Classical together as the "superior" music as opposed to Popular music. Classical I understand- it has lasted all these years for a reason. But Jazz, I don't get it. Jazz has a lot more in common with Popular music- it just sounds like a bunch of musicians got together and can't decide on which song to play. Also, little emotion in Jazz.
I have nothing against Jazz musicians- I do agree it takes skill and all of that. But why is it considered an "elevated" form of music? This is true in most colleges and universities even- they have a Jazz Department. They do not have a Country and Western department. Its complete opposite of Classical music to my ears. I don't hate Jazz, to me its nice for background music at a coffee shop or bookstore, but to sit down and listen to it , no thanks!
In Classical there is more emotion usually, although I don't understand I-talian Operas very well. But I see why people respect Classical music as a higher level of music- and I don't take offense at that. But why Jazz?
they lump those together because muh complexity. i suggest you to ignore snobs and focus on whatever interests you for whatever reason
Jaxson Kelly
I don't know why you classicalfags keep rambling on about MUH COMPLEX MUSIC!11 Everyone listens to classical. Even normies. It's one of the most accessible genres. You people are delusional
Grayson Bennett
...
Juan Edwards
>complexity not mentioned once in op
Luke Adams
all their posts kind of blend in together, sorry
Lucas Cox
>focus on whatever interests you for whatever reason gay
Ryder Rodriguez
Well maybe learn some music theory and you'll understand m8
Bentley Lee
Jazz is mechanical and corporeal. Even the improvisation is mechanical. It is corporeal in that it is an expression of the libido. Any conceptual additions mad to become purely libidinal.
John Thompson
...
Dylan James
...
Hunter Morris
this "jazz lacks emotion" meme needs to stop sure, there is jazz that's just wank, but there is absolutely no small amount of deeply emotional jazz just look at Grant Green, Chet Baker, Sonny Rollins, Bill Evans, Paul Desmond, Thelonious Monk, Miles Davis...all of whom are entry-level musicians, and you have to be out of your fucking mind to say their music lacks emotion
Ryan Scott
Jazz is all about music theory, time signatures, logic. It's the mathematical mind's genre you wingnut.
Jose Morales
Yeah, don't pretend you've listened to more than two jazz albums
Andrew Cox
I've probably listened to well over a hundred, and I've listened to those at least more than once. I've probably listed to A Love supreme (which I really do despise) well over twenty times.
>names one of the most popular albums in an attempt to prove they know what they're talking about
Liam Allen
found the autist
Jeremiah Powell
It's just the one I've spent the most time thinking about. Drug-addled theology trying to pass itself off as art. It's despicable.
Jonathan Morales
It is full of emotion. as classical music, it is calculated and have a strict structure (try looking for chords of any jazz standard), but the beauty is that they have an enormous amount of technic, so they improvise on that structure. it makes it smart and full of personality.
I recommend the last segmant of pic related, or "kind of blue" by Miles Davis.
jazz is a very broad category of music, just as classical. the mistake people make is assuming that just because the musicians are black, the band is good. there's lots of lousy, aimless, uninspired jazz out there. there's also lots of great stuff. and many would argue that, despite its limitations, jazz does a more honest job of continuing the classical tradition than the modern academic scene.
Liam Bennett
Shostakovich's music was considered tacky and derivative by a lot of critics while he was alive.
Joshua Kelly
I'm not even a jazzfag but this is so clearly untrue, emotions is one of the things jazz has going for it
John Watson
You cannot listen to Blue Train or Goodbye Pork Pie Hat and tell me jazz is completely void of emotion. Sure there are things like Time Out where the intent was to create songs in odd time signatures, but the vast majority of jazz is based in emotion over mechanism.
Jose Gonzalez
I wasn't saying it's devoid of emotion. It has incredible emotion when it wants to, but the main benefit of jazz is its intellectualized construction.
Evan Rivera
there are two things: 1) swing 2) improvisation everything else is optional and depends on artist - complex rhythms, harmony etc
Levi Jenkins
>Yea Forums "experts" trying to talk about classical and jazz again
Yeah and there's the shaggs which are technically math rock, but almost anyone who's making math rock will want to be more complex than that. Same applies to jazz. Just because there's only a few requirements for the genre of "Jazz", most people making jazz go the same, more conceptualized route.
Xavier Perez
perhaps not do that
Hunter Peterson
This is absolute bullshit. Yes, there's a lot of technical, theory-worshipping jazz out there, but the genre's origin is in party music. The idea that jazz is some kind of hyperintellectual thing is still fairly new, relative to its long history. You can't make honestly make a statement like your about a rich tradition that's over a century old; it encompasses way too much for that. There's technical wank jazz, and there's simple, soulful jazz, and there's everything between.
yes, but my point is, it's unfair to say jazz isn't skilled, when in fact its one of if not the best genre at using theory and more objective things to push skill and intellectualization.
Owen Hill
>theory-worshipping What did he mean by this? Theory is a descriptive tool; how do you worship musical descriptors?
>the genre's origin is in party music And classical music has its roots in traditional/folk and/or sacred/meditative music. What's your point? Types of music/genres evolve all the time; there is no definitive source or any musical genre, it's constantly changing and functions on multiple levels.
>The idea that jazz is some kind of hyperintellectual thing is still fairly new, relative to its long history Eh, I doubt it. Jazz developed in the early 20th century and there was plenty of "intellectual" jazz albums getting released 40, 50 years into its conceivement.
Zachary Stewart
Why do normies love Tchaikovsky and Shostakovich so much?
I think this is a bad example, variety of jazz music is wider than you think. If we take a look at 50s-70s jazz - there always were cool, smooth, ballad pieces, which a techically less complex too.
Justin Butler
low brow usually means it's uncomplicated and unoriginal as to never really generate any enthusiasm or esteem among people who actually care and know about music. these genres completely ignore technology manipulation of timbres though.
Nicholas Taylor
I love Tchikovsky's Queen of Spades because of it's incredible ending and lyrics, any problems with that?
Nathan Price
*Tchaikovsky's
Logan Russell
>What did he mean by this? Theory is a descriptive tool; how do you worship musical descriptors? By making music that's about flaunting your theoretical education rather than expressing something.
>What's your point? My point is that jazz is too diverse to say something like "the main benefit of jazz is its intellectualized construction". What's wrong with the fucktons of great, historically significant jazz that isn't all that intellectual?
>40, 50 years into its conceivement that's exactly what I'm talking about
Bentley Rivera
Whose Tchaikovsky?
Elijah Peterson
what's wrong with drug addled theology
Matthew Price
>By making music that's about flaunting your theoretical education rather than expressing something. And an example of these two would be what exactly? And how would you measure this to be sure?
>My point is that jazz is too diverse to say something like "the main benefit of jazz is its intellectualized construction" Alright, that I agree with.
Asher Torres
is there are many of them?
Julian Brown
Alright, literally everything ever done is done to express something. By what criteria could you judge something NOT to be?
David Evans
its only certain parts of shosty dont see many normies repping lady mcbeth of mtsensk or symphony 13
Elijah Kelly
jazz requires way more skill than popular shit at least on a musical level, their musicianship is off the charts take any jazz pro and id wager hed shit all over a classical pro (not conductor) on modulations off the top of the head
>Wrong Planet is the web community designed for individuals (and parents / professionals of those) with Autism, Asperger’s Syndrome, ADHD, PDDs, and other neurological differences. We provide a discussion forum, where members communicate with each other, an article section, with exclusive articles and how-to guides, a blogging feature, and more.
Juan Reed
Theory obsessed formalists who mistake the forest for the trees have no place discussing music. Just stick to playing it's all you're good for.
Jeremiah Walker
It uses theory and complex improvisation to make more intense forms of sexualized dance music. Even the most abstract jazz is only good for this.
Jonathan Morgan
Quite an assumption and leap there, little buddy.
Ryder Garcia
ohhh look at this tough guy, he knows his stuff and only he can discuss music, watch out guys
I've never seen anyone invoke theory or claim knowledge from musicianship to hold any other perspective. You've lost your critical sensibilities and need to shut up.
Julian Moore
>nobody mentioned theory Quite an assumption and leap there, little buddy.
Cameron Martinez
Give this a listen and tell me if you’d put it in a book store
Yes keep telling yourself that, it's everyone else who is wrong, not knowing basic shit makes you better, sure.
Cooper Long
It's because both genres focus on live performance, which is the most expensive way to produce and experience music, which helps keep it out of reach of the plebs.
Teo Macero was the best jazz musician, for popularizing studio focused albums.
David Clark
No, I just think that theory is the least valuable approach to criticizing music, and the formalism advocated by its champions is perhaps the most limited approach one can take. Music should be treated as more than empty technical spectacle.
Jackson Thomas
Good thing the majority of people who do music for a living have a holistic approach, retard. If you don't know the basics; be it theoretical, historical, interpretative - you name it - you can keep quiet like a good boy.
Noah Young
>least valuable approach to criticizing music Depends on what kind of music. It's senseless trying to analyse popular music for example.
Dominic Myers
If they did, they would realize that jazz is reprehensible. Instead they're hypnotized by its complex musicianship. There's no other approach to jazz that could yield a slightly favorable evaluation.
Julian Flores
No, because it isn’t a book
Angel Young
>There's no other approach to jazz that could yield a slightly favorable evaluation. [citation needed]
Jayden Rogers
Yeah because "wow dude this sounds so GOOD like wow man the bassss, dude" is truly the absolute peak of human artistic achievement
Joseph Jackson
That's still better than theory-based formalism. At least it acknowledges music as a listening experience.
