Respect: lost
Respect: lost
Sebastian Rodriguez
Bentley Brooks
He’s not wrong. Standards and live albums are mostly bad.
Gabriel Wood
Straight covers are usually uninteresting. But making it your own is just as good as original compositions though
Daniel Myers
Is this Mr Scruffy?
Joseph James
If you ever had respect for Scaruffi’s opinions on jazz at all then I’ve lost any respect for you user.
Jaxon Peterson
yes
since when? many great albums by great musicians are live, it's a generalisation that's, at best, bold and, at worst, ignorant
point taken, to some degree
never really cared about Scaruffi in general desu
Jayden Ortiz
Since always. Even great musicians are less than precise in many performances. The studio gives them the opportunity to choose only the best performances.
David Nguyen
I agree that studio polishes and gives them many takes, but there’s a certain spontaneity to live performances. I don’t think Keith Jarrett has ever taken his solo improvisations to the studio, The Grateful Dead are praised for their long winded jams on stage, even with mistakes.
Carter Parker
>he doesn't know that "standards" are divided into three distinct categories (Great American Songbook, Showtunes, and Jazz Compositions)
>he can't appreciate (or recognize) a brilliant re-arrangement of a standard
>he doesn't know that many "Live" jazz albums are actually selected from the best takes at a live performance
>he doesn't know that many "studio" recorded jazz albums are in fact recorded live in studio
>he doesn't know that many jazz albums consist almost entirely of first-take studio cuts
There are people on this board that actually worship this man as the final arbiter of taste.
Hudson Rogers
>I don’t think Keith Jarrett has ever taken his solo improvisations to the studio
Makes sense, since his music isn't meant to be experienced with a recording, its meant to be experienced live. The recording takes away what makes his performance great.
>The Grateful Dead are praised for their long winded jams on stage, even with mistakes.
But not because the jams themselves are great. They have value because their concerts were always different, not because they were always great.
>he doesn't know that "standards" are divided into three distinct categories (Great American Songbook, Showtunes, and Jazz Compositions)
He does know, as I'm pretty sure I have seen him write about showtunes, but given how that paragraph is written in a page dedicated to jazz, trying to imply he could talk about any other kind of standard is retarded.
David Powell
100% right as always
David Sullivan
>but given how that paragraph is written in a page dedicated to jazz, trying to imply he could talk about any other kind of standard is retarded.
I'm not trying to imply that dumb dumb. I'm saying JAZZ STANDARDS are divided into those three categories. But Scaruffi obviously thinks that all jazz standards are showtunes.
Liam Bailey
>people are actually fucking defending this
music critics were a mistake
Logan Rivera
I’d be surprised if Scruffi could even recognize and name more than 3 or 4 jazz standards just by hearing them
Jack Bennett
>thinking all that autism means anything whatsoever
Ayden Bell
it literally does
Bentley Parker
>I'm saying JAZZ STANDARDS are divided into those three categories.
They are not. Jazz standards can't be showtunes.
>Scaruffi obviously thinks that all jazz standards are showtunes
Source?
Anthony Martinez
Showtunes often become jazz standards. Porgy and Bess, for example, is full of them
Eli Lopez
Most of the most common jazz standards that come to mind first are showtunes from musicals. All The Things You Are is from Very Warm for May. My Funny Valentine is from Babes in Arms.
Scaruffi says that most jazz standards are pop songs or little better than pop songs so clearly he’s talking about showtunes or great American songbook tunes rather than jazz standards composed by jazz musicians.
Anthony Torres
>Jazz standards can't be showtunes.
Tyler Davis
Fair enough.