Improvisational Groups

Started by Ugh!, November 24, 2008, 03:07:32 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ugh!

#20
Quote from: James on December 23, 2008, 09:09:07 AM
No, I'm saying it's transient.

In the long run it is all transient. Therefor I respect the moment.

jowcol

Quote from: James on December 23, 2008, 08:17:32 AM
Are you kidding? All Coltrane did was practice!!! And they all played a lot...

To be honest, I've never been very taken by jazz with lots of soloing, even with great soloists. The form is so limited it doesn't sustain my interest for very long. So much of it is ego over changes, with a head at either end. It takes a sort of breadth & variety of composition & invention to get me to listen.

Alice Coltrane, John's latter wife, claimed never have to known of the band practicing, but she may have been exagerating.

As far as the assessment on the limitations of Jazz-- I would call that a subjective assessment, but my response would also be subjective.  I would hazard that many music scholars (as well as current "serious" composers) would disagree, but when it comes to deciding what to listen to, life is short.  Listen to what helps you reach where you want to go.

wjp
"If it sounds good, it is good."
Duke Ellington

jowcol

Quote from: James on December 23, 2008, 09:26:16 AM
Coltrane was always in the woodshed, as were the others, but esp. Coltrane....you don't become a great player like that without practice. It's impossible. And the assessment of jazz isn't subjective, nor mine, but it is very real. Listen more, and over time you may see & understand what I'm saying....

I'm reluctant to engage in any further sado-necro-beastiliality. (Beating a dead horse)

I never said Coltrane didn't practice-- just that the classic quartet rarely practiced TOGETHER.  Coltrane was legendary for practicing solo for hours.  Yes, they played together  a lot, and live they used a pretty limited setlist to frame their explorations.  Have you read Porter's and Cole's biographies, or some source that contradicts what they say? 

For what it's worth-- I've been listening to "classical" about 20 years longer than I've been listening to jazz.   It's opened up new musical worlds for me-- but since music is subjective-- your mileage may vary. 

If the assessment of Jazz you present isn't subjective and is not yours, where is it documented?  What measureable  criteria is used?   In, if it is so limited, why were several  20th century composers influenced by Jazz?  And vice versa? 
How does a minimalist composition more broad and inventive than the complex harmonic progressions in bop or the polyrhythmic attack of an Elvin Jones?


You may have the last word on any of these questions-- I sense the converstational equivalent of a Chinese finger trap developing here...
"If it sounds good, it is good."
Duke Ellington

Ugh!

Quote from: James on December 23, 2008, 04:17:54 PM
They all practiced i'm tellin' ya...and this is self evident through listening to them together play on recordings, not reading about them.

Oh and music ain't subjective, it's a very real thing...all I can say is keep listening and judge by comparison. Plenty of ephemeral music has excellent qualities, but stand the test of time? which is the ONLY 'test' we have of a certain type of greatness...(that combination of longevity & universality) I'm sure quite a bit of classic recorded jazz will be around for some time, and classic rock & pop etc ... what future as performance music it could have is dubious. We'll see.

You keep repeating this argument about the test of time as the universal criteria for judging musical quality. By your own argument then, none of us are able to judge whether contemporary music is any good until later generations vouch for it. Any enjoyment you get from listening to it is consequently spurious, since it may not after all be good music. And even your precious Bach may in the long run be expelled from the company of good composers by later generations, hence we should reserve ourselves against enjoying his music at this point, since the test of time is really a never ending story. Ridiculous. If you like it you like it, no claim towards universal truth is going to change that. You completely disregard the impact of the commercial industry, identity processes, nation-building, etc. on musical taste.

As for your second argument about the future of rock and pop as performance music - I sincerely hope you are right - I would hate to come back to the earth anno 3014 to find that Hotel California is still being performed by Night Club singers ;)

Ugh

"I no longer believe in concerts, the sweat of conductors, and the flying storms of virtuoso's dandruff, and am only interested in recorded music." Edgard Varese