What about Jazz?

[thierry13]

Nope.

HAHAHA ... yes.

[ctrastevere]

HAHAHA ... yes.

There's more to playing music than pure technique.

[thierry13]

There's more to playing music than pure technique.

OMG are you f*cking kidding me? Their technique had nothing THAT bad. The notes probably were all there with respectable accuracy. AS IF I was talking about technique. OMG the fact is that there's more to playing music than pure technique was my POINT. Their technique is far from great anyways so that removes pretty much all what that performance had : a bunch of notes. They simply do not have to musical intelligence to play classical professionally. They should stick to the cheap music called jazz.

[ctrastevere]

OMG are you f*cking kidding me? Their technique had nothing THAT bad. The notes probably were all there with respectable accuracy. AS IF I was talking about technique. OMG the fact is that there's more to playing music than pure technique was my POINT. Their technique is far from great anyways so that removes pretty much all what that performance had : a bunch of notes. They simply do not have to musical intelligence to play classical professionally. They should stick to the cheap music called jazz.

I see.

[frigo]

Lately I've been listening mostly Bill Evans, he is fantastic. I like specially of "My Foolish Heart", "Isn't It Romantic", the "Peace Piece", "Someday My Prince Will Come", "Come Rain or Come Shine"..... What do you think of him? What other pieces do you like?

[indutrial]

OMG are you f*cking kidding me? Their technique had nothing THAT bad. The notes probably were all there with respectable accuracy. AS IF I was talking about technique. OMG the fact is that there's more to playing music than pure technique was my POINT. Their technique is far from great anyways so that removes pretty much all what that performance had : a bunch of notes. They simply do not have to musical intelligence to play classical professionally. They should stick to the cheap music called jazz.

Why isn't it apparant by now that nobody here wants (or needs) to listen to your shitty vitriol and asstastic musical criticism. Listening to you rant on about technique and "musical intelligence" is downright hilarious to me since you are essentially a nothing in the music scene with less credibility than a high-school punk guitar player. Please just shut...the...f**k...up already!!

[thierry13]

Why isn't it apparant by now that nobody here wants (or needs) to listen to your shitty vitriol and asstastic musical criticism. Listening to you rant on about technique and "musical intelligence" is downright hilarious to me since you are essentially a nothing in the music scene with less credibility than a high-school punk guitar player. Please just shut...the...f**k...up already!!

Hahaha. As if you knew anything to my value in music. You sound like that high-school punk guitar player. I'm no music critic, my post was FACTUAL. The only thing you bring to this forum is bad music and ad hominem. Go sh*t your cr4p elsewhere.

[steve_m]

h

[ctrastevere]

Hahaha. As if you knew anything to my value in music. You sound like that high-school punk guitar player. I'm no music critic, my post was FACTUAL. The only thing you bring to this forum is bad music and ad hominem. Go sh*t your cr4p elsewhere.

You know, I think the point is, when one compares the majority of your posts to the posts of other members here, you are the one who comes across as an irate adolescent child. Frankly, even the points that I agree with you on are stated by you in such a way as to make me embarrassed to even admit I support them.

As to your post being "FACTUAL," you have yet to provide a single reasonable, objective explanation as to why you are right and the majority of other members here are wrong. When called on it, you just get defensive and say the equivalent of: "You are all so STUPID! How could you not SEE that I'm RIGHT?!" Here's a challenge -- prove your point with reason. Either that, or learn the difference between opinions and facts. Perhaps that will prove to people that you've matured past the mental age of 15, and they'll actually start taking seriously.

[popdog]

Excellent post steve_m.  I laughed a great deal.  Checkmate.

[thierry13]

Everything is defendable. Everybody has an opinion. Does that mean that everything is true and everything is good? No. Certainly not. It's simply not true that every music is equal because some people might like it and some others no. Pop will never equal classical music in any way ... but look at the number of people who like it. You're not going to tell me because the vast majority of people like pop that it's equally great music. Inferior/superior exists in music and it has nothing to do with opinion, subjectivity or how many people like it. Nothing comes close to the masters of the so-called "classical" music. Jazz is very far from it too, tough I have to admit it's better than pop. Rap and hip-hop is the ultimate inferiority.

[rc]

I'm not going to say that all music is equal, or all opinions are equal...  There is definitely crap out there.  But you've got to be able to appreciate a style by the right criterion, for what it is.

I've heard some excellent hiphop from friends, but I'm definitely not judging it based on harmonic progressions or thematic development.  More like the eloquence of the rhymes, the intensity of the message.

Same deal with pop music, there's a lot of good, lasting pop music.  Some have interesting harmony, nearly all have a catchy melody, some are more about the lyrics.  Many of the great composers took inspiration from simple folk tunes of the time, can you see the value of simplicity and clarity of expression?

It's too narrow to listen to Radiohead the same way you listen to Duke Ellington, Beethoven, Beatles, or Tom Waits...  All great music in it's own way.  To apply the same criterion to such different aesthetic styles is to miss out.

[indutrial]

Inferior/superior exists in music and it has nothing to do with opinion, subjectivity or how many people like it. Nothing comes close to the masters of the so-called "classical" music. Jazz is very far from it too, tough I have to admit it's better than pop. Rap and hip-hop is the ultimate inferiority.

I think you take the cake for representing everything that could possibly SUCK about a classical musician. Did anyone ever let you in on the idea that variety is the spice of life. Your painfully stratified view of music genres bespeaks a smug and arrogant person who is so weak and pathetic that he has to envision himself as being on some kind of 'winning side' amongst the wider world of musicians. You must wake up everyday and remind yourself that you're not some Philistine listening to lesser musics like rap and electronica (or by your insane standards, jazz!). Give me a frigging break. I've actually hung with a number of people who work in those genres and most of them are far more open-minded about music than you're capable of being. Contrary to what a classical snob like you might realize, a lot of other avenues of artistry exist in those genres, mostly having to do with sound production and arrangement, not to mention that some rap is really pretty damned smart and (dare I say) in touch with the times. I suppose because you can easily decipher the theory behind a song like "Nuthin' But a G Thang", you could also produce and arrange a piece that is equally catchy with the same production quality. I'm certain this is not the best example, but I'm also certain that even the more pedestrian efforts in rap music bear more musical significance than whatever you've done with your musical life. All you seem to know how to do is talk trash and whine. I'd rather listen to a good album like Outkast's Aquemini than hear you pissing and moaning about, well, anything you piss and moan about.

[thierry13]

I'm not going to say that all music is equal, or all opinions are equal...  There is definitely crap out there.  But you've got to be able to appreciate a style by the right criterion, for what it is.

I've heard some excellent hiphop from friends, but I'm definitely not judging it based on harmonic progressions or thematic development.  More like the eloquence of the rhymes, the intensity of the message.

Same deal with pop music, there's a lot of good, lasting pop music.  Some have interesting harmony, nearly all have a catchy melody, some are more about the lyrics.  Many of the great composers took inspiration from simple folk tunes of the time, can you see the value of simplicity and clarity of expression?

It's too narrow to listen to Radiohead the same way you listen to Duke Ellington, Beethoven, Beatles, or Tom Waits...  All great music in it's own way.  To apply the same criterion to such different aesthetic styles is to miss out.

I can see that. BUT, if you're judging hip for it's rhyme and message, you're not judging the music. Same for pop with the words. It's like if I made the most crapiest movie ever, put beethoven op.109 as music on it and then call it an amazing movie, because I didn't judge it for the movie, the music was awesome so it was a good movie. It's just different criterion. Well no, the movie was crap no matter how good the music was. Now let's take your example of composeres being inspired with folk tunes. Yes of course they did. Why did they do so? Because the melody was catchy and it was a part of their folklore. Now, the actual musical side sucked, so they did some good with it. If it was good at the beginning they wouldn't have cared to make it better. If they did so, it's because they tought their folklore deserved better music. I agree for the appreciation of art that you can't listen to everything the same way. But just don't go telling me it is as good or as valid musically. That's just not true.

[thierry13]

I think you take the cake for representing everything that could possibly SUCK about a classical musician. Did anyone ever let you in on the idea that variety is the spice of life. Your painfully stratified view of music genres bespeaks a smug and arrogant person who is so weak and pathetic that he has to envision himself as being on some kind of 'winning side' amongst the wider world of musicians. You must wake up everyday and remind yourself that you're not some Philistine listening to lesser musics like rap and electronica (or by your insane standards, jazz!). Give me a frigging break. I've actually hung with a number of people who work in those genres and most of them are far more open-minded about music than you're capable of being. Contrary to what a classical snob like you might realize, a lot of other avenues of artistry exist in those genres, mostly having to do with sound production and arrangement, not to mention that some rap is really pretty damned smart and (dare I say) in touch with the times. I suppose because you can easily decipher the theory behind a song like "Nuthin' But a G Thang", you could also produce and arrange a piece that is equally catchy with the same production quality. I'm certain this is not the best example, but I'm also certain that even the more pedestrian efforts in rap music bear more musical significance than whatever you've done with your musical life. All you seem to know how to do is talk trash and whine. I'd rather listen to a good album like Outkast's Aquemini than hear you pissing and moaning about, well, anything you piss and moan about.

Excuse me, did you make a point? The only things you are saying are : you are snob because you no like what I like and you can't play music. Indutrial it's fine I know you like jazz and  you do not want to admit it's not really great music. I know I hurted your feeling because you have wasted your time a number of times writing LONG LONG paragraphs like this one with NOOOOO point at all except : you're stupid you can't play you're dumb you suck etc. You know anybody can write 3 pages of insults to anybody. Go find a goal to your life and stop pretending you're a better judge than me simply because you like the actual subject.

[Petter]

Quick, hide your instruments! The music fascist is lose.

[thierry13]

Quick, hide your instruments! The music fascist is lose.

Why not 

[Petter]

 

[indutrial]

you're stupid you can't play you're dumb you suck etc.

Uhh....yeah, that IS the basic gist of my argument. Looking back on the thread's previous posts, I'd say those ideas are downright valid considering the nature of the arguments you've posed since the beginning. Let's go one by one:

1.) You're stupid - this is true because you're deluded enough to think that everything you say is factual and you think that most of the musical world is wrong while you are right. If you were an inexperienced child, that would be understandable, but you've led me to believe you've been to college, which to me just adds up to an idea that you're just stubborn and close-minded. If you're a musician who wants work or people to compose for you, that IS stupid.

2.) You can't play - this one, I'll admit, is mostly personal opinion and personal taste on my part. Considering your atrocious attitude and your mean-spiritedness on this forum, to me you are not much better than someone like Frank Kastle, who not only puts down other musicians for their own choices but seems to be happily sunk into a musical sandtrap. While that's an obviously extreme example, I'd say you're on well on the way to being the same sort of jerk as he is. I wouldn't want to go watch you play, especially since your close-minded attitude bespeaks a close-minded repertoire and an overall limited artistic approach.

3.) You're dumb - see #1

4.) You suck - This is certainly the most valid since you are downright guilty of trolling this thread with your dumbassed views when you could have been tolerant enough to shut the hell up and leave it alone. Teenagers do not need to come on this forum and listen to washed-up, petulant losers telling them that "jazz is a complete waste of time" and so forth. Likewise, college students and post-grad adults shouldn't need to read your garbage and tell you that you're full of s**t and that you're acting like a baby (you haven't gotten the hint yet). If you're not contributing anything to the forum but hotheaded opinions, then you are sucking the life out of it and sucking us into your pathetic melodrama.

5.) Etc... - This is true also, precisely because you just don't know when to quit.

[ctrastevere]

Everything is defendable. Everybody has an opinion. Does that mean that everything is true and everything is good? No. Certainly not. It's simply not true that every music is equal because some people might like it and some others no. Pop will never equal classical music in any way ... but look at the number of people who like it. You're not going to tell me because the vast majority of people like pop that it's equally great music. Inferior/superior exists in music and it has nothing to do with opinion, subjectivity or how many people like it. Nothing comes close to the masters of the so-called "classical" music. Jazz is very far from it too, tough I have to admit it's better than pop. Rap and hip-hop is the ultimate inferiority.

I think you're missing the point. I'll use a quote that you made regarding Derek's dislike of Xenakis' music, and how you considered his view to be "irrational."

The FACT is that he doesn't like Xenakis but for the wrong reasons. I'll make again a good analogy to illustrate that : you go to Cuba looking for a good ski ride, but you can't find a snowy mountain there so you say you don't like Cuba, and then you go to alaska to get a nice sunny day at the beach, but you can't do that because there's snow everywhere, and because of that you don't like Alaska. THIS is irrational, and this is EXACTLY what Derek does with Xenakis.

So... let me get this straight. It's irrational for him to compare Xenakis to Chopin but not for you to compare jazz to classical music? It's irrational for him to make sweeping generalizations about a 20th century composer's music but not for you to make sweeping generalizations about an entire genre? So basically, if somebody else has an opinion that disagrees with yours, they're ignorant and irrational, but if it's your opinion it's "factual?" You honestly can't see the glaring contradictions in your argument?

You're still not producing a compelling fact-based argument for why your views are based on objectivity and aren't just a load of trash spewed out by some angsty, inexperienced college student who thinks he understands everything. I think indutrial hit the nail on the head in his... er... analysis of you. You'll probably come to your senses eventually and look back on these posts of yours in utter embarrassment.

[indutrial]

just a load of trash spewed out by some angsty, inexperienced college student who thinks he understands everything. You'll probably come to your senses eventually and look back on these posts of yours in utter embarrassment.

I'd say that this description sums up the thread perfectly, with the slight exception that I personally wouldn't spare any hope that he'll stop being intolerant. First he needs to learn how to be humble, and that's often a bridge left uncrossed by people who become set in their ways after high school. A college environment like his sounds like a nightmare. I frankly can't understand why someone would come to hate jazz musicians so badly. Thank god I didn't go to a shitty school. Maybe when he realizes that a s**t attitude like that won't get him far in the music work world, he'll come around a bit, but I'm sure I won't be concerned enough to find out.

[rc]

Now let's take your example of composeres being inspired with folk tunes. Yes of course they did. Why did they do so? Because the melody was catchy and it was a part of their folklore. Now, the actual musical side sucked, so they did some good with it.

Is a melody not music?  I don't see how a melody can be catchy but suck?

Indutrial mentioned sound production and arrangement which I also believe is a valid facet of music.  After going hearing an experienced producer talk about mic placement in a clinic I had a whole new appreciation for production and engineering on a recording, because when I think of it the final result is about what we hear, whether we're talking about mic placement for a record or a pianists 'touch' and 'tone'.  The principle is the same.

On the topic of arrangement, what do you think of Ravels Bolero?

[andyd]

I feel rather sorry for you thiery13,  in that you cannot appreciate jazz in any way. 

After being brought up only with classical music, I was in my mid teens when Joplin, Waller, Tatum, Peterson, Shearing etc. became part of my piano life and opened up a new vista.  I can still love to listen to a violin concerto or an opera singer, but also love bossa nova, sea shanties, fado, etc.

Jazz has brought me so much pleasure over the last four decades with it's interesting rhythms and improvisations, I can only express my sympathy to you that you don't 'get it'.

 

[thierry13]

I feel rather sorry for you thiery13,  in that you cannot appreciate jazz in any way. 

After being brought up only with classical music, I was in my mid teens when Joplin, Waller, Tatum, Peterson, Shearing etc. became part of my piano life and opened up a new vista.  I can still love to listen to a violin concerto or an opera singer, but also love bossa nova, sea shanties, fado, etc.

Jazz has brought me so much pleasure over the last four decades with it's interesting rhythms and improvisations, I can only express my sympathy to you that you don't 'get it'.

 

I appreciate what's good ( few pieces here and there ). Even what I like i'm not going to say that it's as good music as say a Beethoven or Chopin or whatever piece. To retake my Mcdonald analogy : I love mcdonald, once in a while (never too often hehe), but because I love it am I going to say you don't get it if you say it's crap and it's equal in value to the great culinary art? No. It's simply not. Same with jazz. It can taste very good but it still isn't equal in any way to the greats.

PS. : I love System of a down... not going to argue it's not inferior because I like it tough (at the opposite of some other people who do...)

[ctrastevere]

I appreciate what's good ( few pieces here and there ). Even what I like i'm not going to say that it's as good music as say a Beethoven or Chopin or whatever piece. To retake my Mcdonald analogy : I love mcdonald, once in a while (never too often hehe), but because I love it am I going to say you don't get it if you say it's crap and it's equal in value to the great culinary art? No. It's simply not. Same with jazz. It can taste very good but it still isn't equal in any way to the greats.

What about the albums that are generally considered masterpieces, such as Coltrane's A Love Supreme? Just like the fast food vs. fine dining analogy, there's catchy, "McDonald's" jazz, and then there is serious jazz, music which is to be listened to similarly to the way you'd listen to a great work by Beethoven or Chopin.

PS. : I love System of a down... not going to argue it's not inferior because I like it tough (at the opposite of some other people who do...)

I like System of a Down too, but they're music is not a good example here because it's not meant to be serious or sophisticated. On the other hand, bands such as Pink Floyd or Opeth create music that is most certainly up there with the great works of classical composers in my book. But the idioms in which they are written are so different that it's impossible to compare them fairly.

Comparing genres is like comparing apples and oranges. I'm not saying there aren't objective standards. But it's pointless to compare things that are so completely different on so many levels.

[Petter]

You´re wrong. Bananas are superior in so many ways.

[Petter]

Lately I've been listening mostly Bill Evans, he is fantastic. I like specially of "My Foolish Heart", "Isn't It Romantic", the "Peace Piece", "Someday My Prince Will Come", "Come Rain or Come Shine"..... What do you think of him? What other pieces do you like?

I like Bill Evans alot and I have alot of records. Maybe too many. Besides the classics I enjoy the record he did for Verve with Jim Hall which I think is really great. And the one with Monica Zetterlund, Waltz for Debby. (which is a classic here in Sweden) I also like the recorded interview by Marian McPartland. There´s a track on that album called "Reflections in D" that I think is my favorite Bill Evans piece. Sounds abit like Debussy to my hoplessly inferior ears.
 Another favorite record is Bill Evans at the Montreux Jazz Festival when he plays with Jack DeJohnette. Even though they´re not that synchronized it´s still fun to hear them togheter.

[andyd]

thierry13, the Mcdonalds analogy is puerile.


Petter:

&feature=related

[richard black]

I thought steve_m's post above was really funny - made me laugh out loud. So this thread can't be all bad.....

[indutrial]

What about the albums that are generally considered masterpieces, such as Coltrane's A Love Supreme? Just like the fast food vs. fine dining analogy, there's catchy, "McDonald's" jazz, and then there is serious jazz, music which is to be listened to similarly to the way you'd listen to a great work by Beethoven or Chopin.

If you read his other posts carefully, you would know that all of the best and worst jazz in the world is produced on his college campus and nowhere else!!! Musicians like Coltrane, Miles Davis, and Bill Evans are all mythical since they didn't go to his college. There's little point in trying to reason with him with real world examples since his world is really no larger than that of the Little Prince's.

[thierry13]

If you read his other posts carefully, you would know that all of the best and worst jazz in the world is produced on his college campus and nowhere else!!! Musicians like Coltrane, Miles Davis, and Bill Evans are all mythical since they didn't go to his college. There's little point in trying to reason with him with real world examples since his world is really no larger than that of the Little Prince's.

Wow you really based my whole being and knowledge on one simple and poor example, don't you? I clicked the links others gave me to Coltrane and Evans. Had to listen to Davis in a musical litterature class. Watched Oliver Jones on TV. Listened to many Tatum. My college does have a good jazz program tough. So I am often exposed to it. But I didn't limit my opinion to that. Far from it.

[frigo]

What do you think about this:

&feature=related

i think it's great! 

[frigo]

I think no one saw this last post.... or no one wanted to add a coment about it... understandable

[slobone]

I think no one saw this last post.... or no one wanted to add a coment about it... understandable

OK, I'll comment: meh.

[piano_ant]

I think the biggest issue is with image. In all genres of music, NO MATTER WHICH it may be, there is an image that tries to tag along with it, which in turn, kills a part of it's value and leads many to believe that the image taps into the true spirit of the work.

Classical holds the image of the raised chin and crackling knuckles and the genius pining away at his masterpiece. Old people, rich people, and nerds insulting and flinging ridicule as if trying to compensate for a fight they know there is no way to win. This KILLS so many potential listeners, because they are intimidated by an image which holds very little water. Genuine classical musicians are humble and open minded. How many classical pianists play a Chopin ballade and deem themselves musicians. How many FAMOUS classical musicians command extensive repertoire and still sound like brain dead idiots. Many.

Same with Jazz, and pop and rock and rap, etc. These genres, except for jazz, are more affected. They are subject to media, and image used as  A SELLING POINT. Jazz is an exceptional medium for creation and self expression, and as always, communicating through music that which is otherwise noncommunicable. I've seen many Jazz pianists sit down play RANDOM jazz chords, improvise poorly and sway their bodies so fiercely that they think they're the sh*t.  This is all they know, they think the image is everything It's not an insult to the genre, it shows the immaturity of those attempting to tap into the real meaning of music.
But to hear the good stuff...Truly amazing!

Classical snobbery helps nobody. Jazz snobbery (likely more rampant than classical snobbery) helps nobody. It restricts the language. The language is music. Music is not jazz chord theory, not correct voice leading in a symphony, not how many G's you got ***, not if you did it again Britney. This is all an image. We need MUSIC.

[nyonyo]

I don't like jazz either, and I REALLY don't like Kapustin or Gershwin.

Why? I like both. Jazz can be very very satisfying. It is just totally different kind of music. The beauty is different. Let's use dog for an analogy. If you compare a Golden Retriever and a Pug, a Pug definitely does not meet what we consider pretty dog, but a Pug has its own beauty. If you understand the beauty, you will be able to appreciate.

However, I can also understand why Thierry does not like Jazz. When a person has not been exposed enough to certain thing, for example food, he or she will have hard time to appreciate. If you give a person who came from a little town in Iowa a plate of escargo, he will throw up, but someday he can appreciate it. If one does not know enough, one will not appreciate. We hope someday Thierry will like Jazz too.

[oscarr111111]

Why? I like both. Jazz can be very very satisfying. It is just totally different kind of music. The beauty is different. Let's use dog for an analogy. If you compare a Golden Retriever and a Pug, a Pug definitely does not meet what we consider pretty dog, but a Pug has its own beauty. If you understand the beauty, you will be able to appreciate.

However, I can also understand why Thierry does not like Jazz. When a person has not been exposed enough to certain thing, for example food, he or she will have hard time to appreciate. If you give a person who came from a little town in Iowa a plate of escargo, he will throw up, but someday he can appreciate it. If one does not know enough, one will not appreciate. We hope someday Thierry will like Jazz too.

Good post.

I'm currently studying 'Popular music' at uni (which is not just a 'pop music' course but a course focusing on the performance and writing/producing/playing of all modern genres and working in the modern music industry in general), classical music is covered in history, composition, theory etc. context but not in playing or performance (the piano players and vocalists cover it a bit in their tuition but it doesn't really come into any group performance), I think this serves as a decent example of the place of classical music in the modern industry; 'moving forward while looking back', I don't mean from 'worse' to 'better' either, I mean from 'one thing' to 'another thing'.. change is inevitable. 

I'm a big fan of classical music along with all other styles and I've studied it quite a lot in my own time, I personally think that there are good and bad examples of every genre, perhaps you see less of the bad bits in classical nowadays because they've been left behind and forgotten over time.  I think that the songwriting/composing/arranging/producing etc. of every genre rivals that of any other genre, classical composers are given a mythical status over the years and classical musicians refuse to believe that anyone will ever rival them, but in *MY* opinion, the abilities of Charles Mingus (as a composer and player) or Radiohead or the Beatles or Sikth, or the people who write songs for Kylie Minogue etc., the people at the top of their fields, are on a level and comparable with the best of the classical genre.  There is a lot more to EVERY genre than is apparently from the odd listen with a negative predisposition.

[thierry13]

However, I can also understand why Thierry does not like Jazz. When a person has not been exposed enough to certain thing, for example food, he or she will have hard time to appreciate. If you give a person who came from a little town in Iowa a plate of escargo, he will throw up, but someday he can appreciate it. If one does not know enough, one will not appreciate. We hope someday Thierry will like Jazz too.

You are judging my exposure to a genre and you do not even know me. I KNOW jazz. I WAS exposed to it. I DID listen to a LOT of it. No, I won't change my mind, and no that is not closing my mind, it's allways open, only not changing (on that subject).

[thierry13]

When a person has not been exposed enough to certain thing, for example food, he or she will have hard time to appreciate. If you give a person who came from a little town in Iowa a plate of escargo, he will throw up, but someday he can appreciate it.

The escargo analogy is simply wrong here, since escargo is fine food. Jazz is most likely to be compared to mcdonald's. You give mcdonald to somebody who doesn't know anything about food, and he will love it UNTIL he knows and crap it is. Same goes for jazz. Jazz is easy to like at first listen, or for someone who doesn't know anything about music. But once you know and study music, you realise how crappy and cheap music it is.

[oscarr111111]

The escargo analogy is simply wrong here, since escargo is fine food. Jazz is most likely to be compared to mcdonald's. You give mcdonald to somebody who doesn't know anything about food, and he will love it UNTIL he knows and crap it is. Same goes for jazz. Jazz is easy to like at first listen, or for someone who doesn't know anything about music. But once you know and study music, you realise how crappy and cheap music it is.

Possibly the worst post I've ever read, terrible examples, extreme bias and completely fabricated totally false statements.  Oh, and could you give a few examples of Jazz songs you used to like or listen to a lot and later came to despise, and reasons relating to those tracks as to why?  Thanks.

[nyonyo]

The escargo analogy is simply wrong here, since escargo is fine food. Jazz is most likely to be compared to mcdonald's. You give mcdonald to somebody who doesn't know anything about food, and he will love it UNTIL he knows and crap it is. Same goes for jazz. Jazz is easy to like at first listen, or for someone who doesn't know anything about music. But once you know and study music, you realise how crappy and cheap music it is.

What makes you think that Escargo is a fine food. Food and Music are the same. You think everybody in the world like McDonald. The answer is NO...People who are not used to eating beef will throw up by the smell of beef. But once people get used to the smell of beef, they will be able to appreciate. By the way, there are many parts of the world that do not eat beef enough, so they are not exposed to beef.

In addition, how could you say Jazz is simple? It shows you know nothing about Jazz.

[oscarr111111]

I'll share the piece that got me into Jazz, Moanin' by Charles Mingus.

https://media.putfile.com/Mingus---Moanin

I reviewed the album it comes from (Blues & Roots) for an assignment in my first year of uni, I'll post the paragraph on that song:

The blues influenced third track, ‘Moanin’’ is one of the most intense and highly regarded tracks on the album.  Mingus utilises Pepper Adams excellent baritone saxophone playing as an anchor for this elaborate composition, repeating the opening line with little variation other than to simplify it slightly as the other voices enter until Mingus brings in the B section with a cry of “Yes I Know!”, the piece develops into collective improvisation and fiery soloing.  Compositionally the piece is easily identifiable by Mingus’ trademark strong independent lines, harmonically it is similar to other Mingus compositions such as ‘Jump Monk’, ‘Eulogy For Rudy Williams’, ‘Reincarnation of a Lovebird’ and ‘Pithecanthropus Erectus’ (Charles Mingus, More Than A Fake Book).  The song ends in the B section on a dramatic eighth note run down to the final chord.

[indutrial]

Possibly the worst post I've ever read, terrible examples, extreme bias and completely fabricated totally false statements.  Oh, and could you give a few examples of Jazz songs you used to like or listen to a lot and later came to despise, and reasons relating to those tracks as to why?  Thanks.

Don't waste your time pulling teeth here. Talking about jazz with this user results in an endless stream of puling and pointless venom about jazz being fast food and popular forms being horribly inferior, etc.. etc.. etc.. so on and so forth. Having interacted with plenty of jazz and classical musicians who are very successful players and creative artists, it is completely obvious that Thierry's sentiments are smugly childish beyond a shadow of a doubt and the product of bad holier-than-thou classical attitudes reaching back well over 70 years. Sad thing is that, even in the 1920s-30s, most good composers (Gershwin, Tansman, Milhaud, Stravinsky, etc...) were much more open-minded towards jazz and popular music.

Maybe he needs to take this into mind.

Classical snobbery helps nobody.

[thierry13]

In addition, how could you say Jazz is simple? It shows you know nothing about Jazz.

We might not have the same conception of "simple". 

[frigo]

We might not have the same conception of "simple". 

We might not have the same conception of "conception"  Use a dictionary

[slobone]

Don't waste your time pulling teeth here. Talking about jazz with this user results in an endless stream of puling and pointless venom about jazz being fast food and popular forms being horribly inferior, etc.. etc.. etc.. so on and so forth. Having interacted with plenty of jazz and classical musicians who are very successful players and creative artists, it is completely obvious that Thierry's sentiments are smugly childish beyond a shadow of a doubt and the product of bad holier-than-thou classical attitudes reaching back well over 70 years. Sad thing is that, even in the 1920s-30s, most good composers (Gershwin, Tansman, Milhaud, Stravinsky, etc...) were much more open-minded towards jazz and popular music.

Maybe he needs to take this into mind.

I think it's kind of funny, it reminds me of those old movies where Bing Crosby wanted to be a jazz musician, and Lionel Barrymore or somebody would say "If you're going to play that trash, you're no longer my son!".

That was a hot issue back in the 30's, I guess he's showing his age. Hey, if you're going to hate popular music, bring it up to date. Fulminate against hip hop, or country grunge, or something.

[a-sharp]

Hey - I actually like some hip hop! 50 cent rules!   

*ducks under the flames*

but I am laughing at the term country grunge - what the heck is country grunge (I'm not sure I really want to know!!!)? *Eeek* 

[indutrial]

I think it's kind of funny, it reminds me of those old movies where Bing Crosby wanted to be a jazz musician, and Lionel Barrymore or somebody would say "If you're going to play that trash, you're no longer my son!".

That was a hot issue back in the 30's, I guess he's showing his age. Hey, if you're going to hate popular music, bring it up to date. Fulminate against hip hop, or country grunge, or something.

I'm generally a pretty judgmental musician/listener when I'm listening to this or that specific act. If anything requires criticism, why not simply lambast any of the "genres" that have been packaged and sold to us by MTV and Sony/BMG these past couple of decades. Spitting reactionary word-vomit at jazz, country, even hiphop, musical phenomena that far exceed any simple genre definitions, is mind-numbingly shortsighted and as someone else stated it, PUERILE. It would be more convincing to simply point out why certain musicians associated with jazz or other genres give you problems. I, for one, have a distinct distaste for the dentist-office-friendly offshoot marketed as "smooth jazz", which seems to put very talented musicians in the lamest musical situations possible. The jazz loses its...well, jazziness and becomes the soundtrack for the Weather Channel.

Lest anyone forget, however, the classical world has just as many bad seeds and lame-os floating around. Whenever I shop for used classical discs, I have to deal with flipping through about 5,000 used discs with titles like "The world's most relaxing classical music", "Mozart for Infants", and "In a Romantic Mood" until I actually find something legit. In a sense, no part of music is immune to the call of becoming some kind of aural McDonalds snack (to use Thierry's brilliant witticism) but that can't become a blanket description to be thrown over an entire genre...especially when those spouting off clearly have no f**king clue what they're ragging on.

[term]

Rap and hip-hop is the ultimate inferiority.

So according to you, i probably went from rags to riches. But i still love it 

Anyways, do you really think you'll succeed in convincing people their preferred music is crap? What's driving you? I just wonder, i mean if i would do that i'd probably run around with this: 


or maybe this

[iheartpiano]

Well, I like Jazz.  My favorite would have to be Teddy Wilson.  Has anyone listened to his rendition of "You Go To My Head" and "Shiny Stockings"?  It's really great, and I think he's an amazing pianist.