Make a Jazz Noise Here

[escher]

The harmonies used in "jazz" don't compare at all .. and are far far behind .. (as are all parameters)

don't compare with what? You clearly don't know what you are saying.
You can find everything, atonal, bitonal, twelve tone stuff, modality, quartal harmony, microtonality, even spectralism. And there are even original things that you can't find in classical music. The limit of jazz is structure, because it's very difficult to improvise in complex compositions.

[escher]

vs. art music .. harmonies in jazz are child's play and far far far behind, musical backwater ..  and it's virtually all homophonic too. with the great knowledge and theory the composers have, noodling through chord changes is a piece of cake .. nothing particularly interesting or challenging about that!

you're clearly a troll

[Grazioso]

vs. art music .. harmonies in jazz are child's play and far far far behind, musical backwater ..  and it's virtually all homophonic too. with the great knowledge and theory the composers have, noodling through chord changes is a piece of cake .. nothing particularly interesting or challenging about that!

Further proof--as if any were needed--that you have no idea what you're talking about and are more interested in trolling than actually learning about music.

[escher]

You have a very limited understanding of music.

the funny thing is the he's not capable at all to make any example of what he's talking about, there would be some esoteric harmonic system that only James knows about 

[escher]

Well, I don't think James is a troll.  And I do think he offers some good information about music, but my comment was meant to say that he consistently offers information about one aspect of music, namely the cerebral, technical aspect. 

I don't agree: actually James has two refrains: classical is always better and more sophisticated than jazz or any other musical form, ALWAYS (as it was possible to compare thousand and thousand of persons only because they made a genre of music, but hey! No tags!), and "i'm smarter than all of you" (said withouth any sense of the ridiculous). Actually he doesn't say anything about technical aspects. But i agree with you that to compare music thinking only of techinical aspects is totally meaningless. Even more because in jazz improvisation and swing are central aspects (and very sophisticated things to do).

[Grazioso]

Speaking of jazz and theory, some folks may find these workbooks useful:

http://davidvaldez.blogspot.com/2006/04/berklee-jazz-harmony-1-4.html  (the four links in first post)

[jowcol]

I don't agree: actually James has two refrains: classical is always better and more sophisticated than jazz or any other musical form, ALWAYS (as it was possible to compare thousand and thousand of persons only because they made a genre of music, but hey! No tags!), and "i'm smarter than all of you" (said withouth any sense of the ridiculous). Actually he doesn't say anything about technical aspects. But i agree with you that to compare music thinking only of techinical aspects is totally meaningless. Even more because in jazz improvisation and swing are central aspects (and very sophisticated things to do).

I don't think he qualifies as a troll, and he isn't always limited to the two refrains.   

As some who has not been shy about poking fun at his more "automatic" responses, I'll have to acknowledge that there are times he provides some thoughtful responses that  advance the conversation.  During some of the whole Miles Vs Zawinul Improv vs Composition discussion on this thread many moons ago, there where some very thoughtful replies that were more than just a knee-jerk reply drawn from a set of themes that I've catalogued to death.  (Or at least the text-tagging software I was using to analyze it) I agree with his assessment of Miles on this recent part of the thread.

But , although this last spate of responses doesn't seem to advance the discussion beyond that idea that he may have a notion of art music or higher consciousness that we do not,  I fully support his right to post them.   One can choose to get offended, to ignore them, or , in some cases, find them both funny and utterly fascinating.  (I confess to the latter--  I sometimes wonder if this is  Turing test).

As far as the "Classical is always harder than Jazz" -- Miles's description of trying to get classical musicians to play on the Sketches of Spain sections may offer some counterpoint to the discussion.

[escher]

I don't think he qualifies as a troll, and he isn't always limited to the two refrains.   

As some who has not been shy about poking fun at his more "automatic" responses, I'll have to acknowledge that there are times he provides some thoughtful responses that  advance the conversation.  During some of the whole Miles Vs Zawinul Improv vs Composition discussion on this thread many moons ago, there where some very thoughtful replies that were more than just a knee-jerk reply drawn from a set of themes that I've catalogued to death.  (Or at least the text-tagging software I was using to analyze it) I agree with his assessment of Miles on this recent part of the thread.

But , although this last spate of responses doesn't seem to advance the discussion beyond that idea that he may have a notion of art music or higher consciousness that we do not,  I fully support his right to post them.   One can choose to get offended, to ignore them, or , in some cases, find them both funny and utterly fascinating.  (I confess to the latter--  I sometimes wonder if this is  Turing test).

As far as the "Classical is always harder than Jazz" -- Miles's description of trying to get classical musicians to play on the Sketches of Spain sections may offer some counterpoint to the discussion.

ok, i have read the first pages of this thread and i've seen that even James can be human (and he listed little Monk in his favorites  ).
I've seen that everybody was making list of his favorite albums, so here's mine:

Sun ra - Atlantis
Sun ra - It is forbidden
Albert Ayler - Witches and devils
Andrew Hill - Andrew
Andrew Hill - Judgement!
Booker Little - Out front
Abbey Lincoln - Straight ahead
Miles Davis - Miles smiles
Miles Davis - Bitches brew
Charles Mingus - Black saint
Wayne Shorter - High life
Paul Desmond - Pure Desmond
Michael Mantler - Hapless child
Lee Morgan - The procrastinator

and obviously many others.

As far as the "Classical is always harder than Jazz" -- Miles's description of trying to get classical musicians to play on the Sketches of Spain sections may offer some counterpoint to the discussion.

There is also Stravinsky for example composing the ebony concerto for Woody Hermann (actually a good piece but certainly not on the same level with other classical pieces with jazz influences or other third stream works by other composers). And there are many other classical musicians influenced by jazz, Debussy, Antheil, Schulhoff, Milhaud, Xenakis, Shostakovich and many others (or with great respect for it like Ligeti).
And regarding the harmonic aspect, there were a lot of jazz composers/arrangers doing atonal or twelve tone stuff, like Graettinger, George Handy, Gunther Schuller, Duane Tatro, Giorgio Gaslini, Boyd Raeburn and many others. But as said, it's not a good way to evaluate music (or Ferneyhough could be considered a greater composer than Beethoven).

[escher]

Musicians who play "jazz" are more influenced by art music and stand in awe of it. They draw from that huge legacy, there is no denying or escaping it. It has been around much longer, remember - and it's practice is much more rigorous, advanced and evolved. Not to mention, focused. Everything truly new in music is to occur there. If you listen to pop musicians like Ellington, Mingus etc. you can clearly here an influence, a desire to reach higher levels .. they dabbled in serious composition & technique but none of their efforts compare and the application is unskilled, derivative & simplistic.

you can't compare only in terms of structure jazz and classical, because of the improvisation. A classical composer has no problems with it, because it's written music and there are not problems of this kind. And beside that, music is not measurable only in terms of harmonic complexity or other technical aspects. As said if this would be true, Ferneyhough is better than Stravinsky. I don't think so.
And by the way, a lot of jazz musicians are as originals as the best classical composers.
For example i dislike most the music of Boulez (though i quite like few of his works), that i find often  pretentious, a man who said that is not important as the music really sounds. Compositions as Structures are total garbage to me. He can do a lot of sophisticated things (sophisticated only in the more superficial way), but his approach and his ideas on music are often incredibly naif to me (though he probably consider himself the most advanced musician).
As Calatrava or Gehry are not  greater architects than Frank LLoyd Wright because they can use computers.

[Grazioso]

Musicians who play "jazz" are more influenced by art music and stand in awe of it. 

Verifying that would require a huge amount of biographical research on both side of the supposed divide.

no denying or escaping it. It has been around much longer, remember - and it's practice is much more rigorous, advanced and evolved. Not to mention, focused.

How so? You referred earlier to jazz musicians "noodling," and while some bad ones probably do, if you feel that's what most jazz musicians are doing, you don't understand jazz and therefore can't judge it. People who hear jazz and complain about noodling or lack of a melody are a) approaching it with the wrong expectations and b) musically unaware.

In traditional changes-based jazz, the musicians need to have an extensive grasp of harmony since it's more elaborate than just about any pop, and a good amount of classical music, for that matter. Jazz is built almost exclusively on 7th chords with extensions/tensions and alterations, the harmonic rhythm can be very fast, and key changes are par for the course. To understand how those progressions and chords are built, how to reharmonize them (tritone subs, etc.), and knowing what can be played over each one requires a heck of a lot of theoretical and practical knowledge. Quick--what scale would mesh with a Maj7#5 chord? You have .1 seconds to remember and then play something interesting that will work over an improvised bass line

And folks just expecting to hear a lyrical melody over and over with slight variations will be just as disappointed as someone looking for that in Bach's keyboard works. That's now how they work.

Now, if you're just talking composition, sure, classical music often uses larger, more elaborate forms, and when polyphony appears, its usually denser and has its own traditional "rules" that need to be understood, like the avoidance of parallel fifths.

Everything truly new in music is to occur there.

Except new things like jazz  And as escher already noted, plenty of classical composers were interested in or influenced by that crazy new jazz music. Again, it's not a contest.

most virtuosic of jazz players don't have what it takes on a musical or technical level, to come up with (write) .. let alone
play music on that level.

The first is an untestable assumption. The second is patently false. Ever heard of, for example, Wynton Marsalis or Benny Goodman, who recorded a number of major classical works? There's no reason at all that a skilled jazz musician couldn't learn to play classical music, but the reverse isn't always true. To play jazz, you need not only the technical mastery, but a huge amount of theoretical knowledge, the ability to improvise intelligently, and the ability to swing, and swing isn't teachable--you either have it or you don't.

[escher]

Improvising has existed since the earliest music was made .. it's nothing new, all the great masters were improvisers. Jazz's usage of it is nothing new either. And you can compare music that is made that way with music that is carefully thought out and written. Obviously improvising will fall short .. and will have to work within much simpler & narrower parameters.

None of the composers we have mentioned are known as merely 'technicians'. Nope. And yes, many jazz (& pop) musicians have achieved their own little voice. Matching the best composers in musical profundity? Nah ..

Nah for you.
And if you consider Believe it or albums of Return to forever and tribal tech as some of your favorite albums is perfectly understandable.

[escher]

Verifying that would require a huge amount of biographical research on both side of the supposed divide.

How so? You referred earlier to jazz musicians "noodling," and while some bad ones probably do, if you feel that's what most jazz musicians are doing, you don't understand jazz and therefore can't judge it. People who hear jazz and complain about noodling or lack of a melody are a) approaching it with the wrong expectations and b) musically unaware.

In traditional changes-based jazz, the musicians need to have an extensive grasp of harmony since it's more elaborate than just about any pop, and a good amount of classical music, for that matter. Jazz is built almost exclusively on 7th chords with extensions/tensions and alterations, the harmonic rhythm can be very fast, and key changes are par for the course. To understand how those progressions and chords are built, how to reharmonize them (tritone subs, etc.), and knowing what can be played over each one requires a heck of a lot of theoretical and practical knowledge. Quick--what scale would mesh with a Maj7#5 chord? You have .1 seconds to remember and then play something interesting that will work over an improvised bass line

true, and there's another important aspect of jazz, the spontaneous feeling.

[escher]

it's all derivative & simplistic by comparison, and is in no way as evolved at all. S

Ornette Coleman is derivative of what or who?
Louis Armstrong is derivative of what?
Charlie Parker is derivative of what?
Thelonious Monk is derivative of what?
Sun ra is derivative of what?

It's too simple to make always the same reply, tell me who are the classical composers that those musicians are copying (or their classical "inspiration").

[Grazioso]

There is no divide, it's all music in the end .. western art music is like a giant musical ocean that has existed for centuries tho ..

If there's no divide, no difference, then how can one be superior to or more complex than the other? You seem to want it both ways: all music is equal, but some is better than others.

I'm not sure how classical music's longevity grants it some higher status. If anything, you could take that sort of thinking and note how jazz has evolved exponentially faster, moving from something like the Hot Fives to bebop to Trane to free and avant-garde jazz in just a few decades. Impressive, but that doesn't make it better.

read my reply to escher above. Everything you hear in jazz wasn't created in a vacuum .. it's all derivative & simplistic by comparison, and is in no way as evolved at all. Sorry .. but nothing you say here will ever change those realities.

It's a shame you willfully confuse fact and opinion, but as you say, no amount of facts or logic will sway you.

And why not contribute something positive here? Why not engage in a fact-based discussion instead of harping about how "art music" (jazz isn't art?) is more "evolved" than jazz (or film music or John Cage)? Instead of spamming the thread with album art and opinions, which are a dime a dozen, why not offer some original reviews, analysis, compositions, transcriptions, etc.?

[escher]

They are .. the serious ones have a deep reverence for it and realize it's the best. The best of it is ultimate testament to what the art-form is capable of achieving .. and it's the ultimate source of musical riches. Jazz is so primitive & terribly old fashioned in comparison.

refrain number 1.
Now, i'm still curious to know (if you have real arguments) the name of the classical composers that influenced Monk, Ornette, Armstrong, Sun ra, Albert Ayler or Charlie Parker. Just because you said they are derivative and old fashioned.

[escher]

Art music isn't "my phrase" .. it's been used for awhile now. Google it. You're totally lost on all of this I'm afraid.

it's a way to say made by those who think that only classical music can achieve artistic results. Pure and obtuse fanatism, art music basically stands for arian music. It's like to think that no one person in the world outside the european classical culture can make something artistically relevant, because all the other cultures are inferior.

[escher]

i'm still waiting:

Ornette Coleman is derivative of what or who?
Louis Armstrong is derivative of what?
Charlie Parker is derivative of what?
Thelonious Monk is derivative of what?
Sun ra is derivative of what?

It's too simple to make always the same reply, tell me who are the classical composers that those musicians are copying (or their classical "inspiration").

and another thing: you consider Allan Holdsworth a GENIUS (your words) of guitar. Do you think that those musicians above are inferior to him?

[Grazioso]

1st, no one stands "in awe" of any music - great musicians know good music from bad, but they are masters at what they do and are not awed by other kinds of music. 

That's how you can tell the difference between musicians and a lot of so-called music fans: the musicians are the ones with the open minds 

[jowcol]

"Art music" is a phrase (not universally used), but I am not lost on any of this I'm afraid.

Leon-  I'd have to agree with James that you are totally lost on this one. 

Art Music = Music James Likes
Derivative or Pop = Music James doesn't like.

and I for one do stand "in awe" of sweeping generalizations...

[jowcol]

This may be a bit rad, but I'll try to return to the original theme here.  A fave jazz "composer" of mine is Duke Pearson-- I'm not sure if one could claim he set the world on fire, but I've gotten a lot of enjoyment out of some of his works, including:

Christo Redemptor (on the Donald Byrd Album where Pearson wrote choral parts for all of the tracks)

http://www.youtube.com/v/Y5ujEFsaInk&feature=player_detailpage


Bedouin (which is on the most Excellent Grant Green Album Matador, which has McCoy Tyner, Elvin Jones, and a nice version of My Favorite Things)
http://www.youtube.com/v/l8aswr8LLt0


And also Idle Moments (also played by Grant Green) which is a classic late night piece:
http://www.youtube.com/v/mbEwVrDmlxk