aight so i really liked this
where can i go from this to get more into avant garde jazz?
>avant garde jazz
This is called post-bop, you little poseur.
>>64347346
the pretentious zone
someone get the guy from this thread >>64341711
over here now
Wayne Shorter - The All Seeing Eye
>>64347378
i don't care
i saw it called avant garde jazz on wikipedia
but all this is semantics and slightly autistic
>>64347403
thank you
>>64347403
actually thank you a lot, i started listening to this and i fucking love it
>>64347627
>>64347463
No problem lads, my favourite shorter album
check out Grachan Moncur's Evolution. It's not a classic mellow bebop thing nor it is free. Also go for Komeda's Astigmatic. Two of my favorites from post-bop.
>>64347346
I want more jazz with this instrumentation/dynamics. it's a really colorful record, enjoyable even for us who don't know much about jazz
>>64347378
and post-bop isn't a form of avant-garde you dumb fuck? avant-garde isn't a musical genre, it's a characteristic.
>>64348022
will definitely check these out
>>64348085
it's all avant jazzcore ya dingus
>>64347403
Excellent rec.
Also Andrew Hill - Point of Departure
ALL jazz is terrible and NONE of it has even a single interplay and ALL jazz 'musicians' are just pretending that their music has any relation to anything else.
I can't play an instrument or read music but I'm an expert in the subject from having composed countless masterpieces by pressing buttons on the computer my mom bought me.
this isn't jazz but
>>64347378
All post-bop means is "straight ahead jazz after 1960". Everything from slightly experimental 60s modal jazz to Robert Glasper's albums pre-Black Radio has been called post-bop. It is useless as a genre label
>>64347346
Some must-listens:
Fire! Orchestra - Exit!
Miles Davis - Cookin'
Sun Ra - Space is the Place
Pharaoh Sanders - Elevation
John Coltrane - A Love Supreme
Kamasi Washington - The Epic
Ambrose Akinmusire - The Imagined Savior is Far Easier to Paint
All of these are fantastic.
I'd also recommend some fusion, if you're interested.
Return to Forever - Romantic Warrior
Irakere - Misa Negra
Weather Report - Heavy Weather
Santana - 3
I swear if you guys start arguing about The Epic
>>64349272
It's obligatory in jazz threads at this point, anon.
Just let the waves of jazz purism wash over you.
>>64349248
>Kamasi Washington - The Epic
>muh retro clavinet
>muh meandering
>essential
wew lad
>>64347346
check out A Genuine Tong Funeral
>>64349385
Oh, fuck off. Even if you don't like it, you can't deny it's an important album for the genre.
>>64349083
top kek
>>64349083
v good, anon
ty ty
>>64349423
>important
>>64349468
>bringing new interest to an entire genre
>not important
ok
>>64349513
>ok
glad it was that easy
>>64349083
It's funny because not only did you invent all those things about me from thin air, some of those things you intentionally posted despite me explicitly denying them.
>>64349597
bro, he wasn't even replying to you
project much?
>>64347346
I assume you have already listened to this OP but if not give it a listen
>>64347402
There isn't much left for me to say. Jazz is for people who are easily satisfied, not very open-minded, and avoid a challenge. There isn't much challenge in listening to a flurry (at best -- often a sludge) of notes following a couple of simplistic patterns, for an hour or so. If you're not very discriminating, it might be entertaining, make a decent enough show, capture for a moment a wandering attention. It's easily digestible. As I said, a couple of years ago I would listen to jazz myself; the 'it's new every time!!' trick doesn't get old for a couple of albums. But today I prefer to expose myself to new cultures, instruments, forms -- to any in fact at all.
>>64347402
Why did you do it dude look what you've done
>>64349796
The thread has been commandeered everyone abandon ship
>>64349796
I threw up
quality bait, anon
feeling a strong 9
>>64349889
Don't worry, criticizing an album such as [1] is beating a dead horse. It's like criticizing a Pollock's painting. I sympathize with how few ideas the players had, how they never grew from being a *player* to being a *musician* -- what else there is to do?
[1] >>64347403's https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pw_eWMOGJU
>>64349952
This guy was in a general awhile ago. He's really consistent, not just a baiting.
>>64349597
What are you talking about? I didn't say anything about you. I was talking about myself.
>>64350015
Consistently illogical and full of fallacies. Not to mention the fact that he can't back up any of what he says because he can't read music or even play an instrument.
>>64349685
i haven't listened to it yet, but i will now
my god i leave for dinner and the thread turned to memery
>>64349796
>a couple of years ago I would listen to jazz myself
In fact, I think this naturally coincided with more tolerance for teenager music. 'Noise', 'electronic', 'ambient', whatever -- I can't be bothered to know the 'proper' labels. When I haven't yet heard many structured pieces, I was more tolerant of lack of design (in case of jazz, of course, its existence is tenuously retrospectively posited by the 'artist'), less exacting, a sloppier consumer. Just indeed like a young kid would embrace his opportunity to push buttons on his computer to produce his first electronic piece, a jazz player is similarly 'unshackled from the composer's design', and similarly misuses that opportunity, because he hasn't yet heard (in case of children) or took care to memorize (in case of jazz players) the many musical forms which to evoke and reference through his compositions. His untrained mind is too limited to realize that artistic freedom is determined by awareness of artistic limitations, and too excited by the applause of the audience (not knowing any better itself), to learn that art is creatively molding a piece to fit a specific form, creatively managing to fit it within a limitation of e.g. a genre or a culture or a composing principle such as jazz actively avoids.
>>64350517
You type so much but say so little
>>64350589
>>64350517
I don't feel so, but I just sat to write the tl;dr anyway.
tl;dr jazz players are like children who don't know that art is creatively adapting an existing cultural/musical pattern of the past, and too arrogant to precognize their existence, so they're doomed to reiterate the couple of performance techniques they've managed to absorb in their early years.
>>64350517
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d98MndEbJoY
>>64350517
Lol are you trying to say that jazz has no form? Just like most genres, you can find jazz in many, many forms.
Many standards are written in a very strict 32 bar form. These can further be broken down and analyzed deeper in terms of form like AABA, ABCA, AABC, and many other variations.
Then there is jazz that has a chorus structure but doesn't stick to 32 bar forms. Some have 40 bar forms, some have 20. If this interests you you should look into Wayne Shorter as many of his compositions use different length forms.
Then there are jazz composers who utilized longer, over-arching forms. Mingus, Horace Silver, Paul Bley, and Dave Brubeck all wrote jazz that includes other sections like intros, interludes, endings, and codas.
Some composers even experimented with classical forms. Brubeck and the MJQ both wrote jazz music that uses classical forms like Fugue, Rondo, and Sonata.
Then there is jazz which has no set form at all.
This is why your generalizations are meaningless and flat out wrong. You are either a worryingly dedicated troll or just extremely uninformed.
>>64350705
Pretty nice.
So, let me guess, some jazz player has forty years ago become the saviour of all jazz by referencing that composition in some performance of his and thus eternally enabled jazz apologists to point to this fact as a proof of its historic open-mindedness and inclusiveness?...
>>64350312
will check this out too
>>64350764
*sigh*
'It's not just classical/ethnic/... done by a jazz player you jazz-hater, it's clearly JAZZ whose boundless inclusiveness and willingness to adapt has graciously reached towards those other sources of compositional structure, while still remaining unmistakably jazz!'
Again, somehow, magically, every time a jazz player looks favourably at genre x, it becomes 'jazz plus some of that puny x' rather than 'x plus some jazz'... How convenient for jazz!
Still, kudos for not simply insulting me like the rest of your pals.
>>64350765
No, I just like your posts in the thread so far and was interested in feeling out your thoughts on form.
>>64350894
tl;dr broadly calling genre-straddling artists 'jazz artists' just because listeners of those other non-jazz genres aren't as belligerently distributive of their labels.
Dude, Andrew hill is one of my favorite composers of all time. You might wanna check some of his works such as Judgment! (fucking Elvin Jones, man) and Black Fire. Also, Pete La Roca - Basra is neat. They're all post-bop but with great taste of avant-garde experimentation.
>>64350902
Hm. Well I GTG for 15 minutes, then maybe I'll reply.
Meanwhile you can read >>64341711 whose coherence as a thread is comparable to that of jazz pieces.
>>64350981
i'm actually listening to Point of Departure at this moment, and am thoroughly enjoying it
will definitely check out more stuff of his
>>64351017
>Hm. Well I GTG for 15 minutes, then maybe I'll reply.
nice cop out faget
>>64350902
>>64350705
Well, I haven't much experience with past music outside of obvious modern followers such as [1] or [2]. I suppose as long as it's fast enough ([3] or faster), I'll listen to it. And polyphony is always nice.
I have never been attracted to 'classical', but I once read about 'Transcendental Etudes'. I looked them up, liked [4] and [5] alike, and since then am sure there is 'classical' on par with best rock in terms of variety.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqx_egzW6js
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIx8bo8ga0w
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pckqNtsAOXY
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD4C1voDDfU
[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoNkUfxgMj8
>>64350015
holy shit
>>64350894
None of that addresses my main point that you are flat out wrong because of your generalizations.
Really no matter what you say, if you try to summarize ALL of jazz within it, you will be wrong.
People have posted many examples that have proven you dead wrong and you dismiss them as being "the exception" or just change the subject (as is the case now). Really only one example is needed to prove you completely wrong when you generalize like this.
If you want anybody to take you seriously then start talking about specifics.
>>64351438
By the way. I realized that jazz can't be considered polyphonic because it doesn't even have a single melody. I Googled >does jazz have melody. And I found this (how typical, how typical) gem.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/all-about-jazz-a-unique-form-of-american-music/2012/05/24/gJQA4bswnU_story.html
>In jazz, [a jazz player] says, “it’s easy to express your emotions. In classical, ... you get the sheet music and you read it top to bottom. You’re more focused on technically making it perfect. ... In jazz, your main focus is ... being creative and using your imagination.”
Here. You have a jazz player that literally denied classical composers creativity and imagination.
Remember people, I have been met with indignant incredulity many times from jazzfags when I pointed out jazz players' superiority complexes.
>>64351751
>generalizations
>>64351751
>ALL
>>64351751
>generalize
What kind of jazz do people listen to when they're 15?
>>64351762
>Here. You have a jazz player that literally denied classical composers creativity and imagination.
Where does he deny the composer's creativity or imagination? He is talking about the performer.
>>64351762
If you think jazz can't be polyphonic, you're a retard.
Also, that quote wasn't saying classical composers can't be creative. It says that the focus of classical music is not on the creativity of the player, whereas in jazz it is.
God, you're a faggot.
>>64351802
...What?
He literally says, in classical, the focus is on technicality, in jazz, the focus is creativity and imagination. This is a polarity. Stop playing stupid. (...Oh wait, you can't, you're a jazz player.)
>>64351788
Every single one of your posts you refer to all of "jazz" as a single entity. This is the definition of generalizing.
Are you trying to deny this with your sarcastic green texts or what?
>>64351844
Yes, he's talking about the performer, not the composer.
>>64351876
Oh, well, that doesn't make it any less of an insult. 'Oy you down there, enjoy your uncreativity much?'.
can you faggots please take your argument to another thread?
>>64351814
>If you think jazz can't be polyphonic, you're a retard.
No it can't. It doesn't lack the 'poly', but it lacks the 'phonic'. It does many things at once sure; none of them is melodic.
kamesai washington, the list goes on...
>>64352002
Guys, can we just ignore this dumbfuck?
>>64347346
100% listen to this OP
Some more if you're diving deep
Andrew Hill - Compulsion
Cecil Taylor - Unit Structures
Ornette Coleman - Shape of Jazz to Come
John Coltrane - Impressions
Charles Mingus - Oh Yeah
Sam Rivers - Contours
yeah guys I think it's time to stop responding to this person. I don't think he can really be serious and if he is serious then God help him.
Reminder that if you see "Generalizations Guy" (GG for short) to either just ignore him or respond with
>generalizations
to remind him that nobody here is going to take him seriously when all his arguments are based on generalizations.
>>64347378
not predominantly
>>64352128
Listening to the things jazzfags post, hoping to hear something unconventional, makes me really realize the neurological danger of listening to shit. One does forget rapidly the variety of one's past listening. The brain rapidly zooms in and begins to take the part for the whole again. Minor changes become profound and creative, you convince yourself that routine is being interesting. Snap out of it.
>>64352377
It's small wonder that you have been reduced to such a post, but if I had any interest in generalizations, I wouldn't open an album after an album of jazz in hopes of being proven wrong. I must stop though; it's really not sane to listen to increasingly similar stuff.
check out mingus like black saint and let my children hear music
>>64352128
i've heard dave holland play free improv before, so i'll def check that out
and i'll write down those others for later, this thread got a lot more responses than i expected, even though a lot of them were memes
>>64352481
wow there's a lot of salty vaginas on /mu/ these days
>>64352810
In other words, as I said in the other thread, jazz 'musicians' take a narrow aspect of music, arbitrarily define it as the TRUE/ESSENCE OF/SOUL OF music, and neglect all other aspects -- or, worse, imply meaninglessly that jazz in reality 'still is about all aspects of music', except 'abstract' or 'purified'. Such heavy-handed, unfalsifiable linguistic manipulation is then allowed to fly.
>>64353153
...Just take the most common case of linguistic blackmail by jazz players: 'jazz is all about being in the moment'. Meaning: if you don't like jazz, you don't like being in the moment', meaning, you don't like having fun and just enjoying yourself. It's the purest of ad hominems, tried when there are no strictly musical merits to talk of.
>>64349423
"no"
>>64353149
if i knew a better place to learn about music god knows i'd never set foot in this shithole again
>>64353275
/mu/ is godawful for casual browsing, but the archive is pretty good for looking up the bands you already like and seeing what else is recommended together with them.
>>64353321
i think it's really just especially shit since lemonade dropped, it was like this when TLOP came out too.
>>64353250
Check out this: [1]. A lot of meaningless pseudodefinitions that are just cocky nigger-tier bragging, while simultaneously denying jazz detractors every single virtue imaginable, from creativity to spontaneity to soul to humanity to God knows what.
[1] https://spinditty.com/genres/What-is-Jazz-Aint-no-other-music-like-it
>>64353433
People having a superiority complex over the music they like isn't a jazz problem, it's a people problem. You clearly consider yourself superior to those jazz niggers or whatever.
>>64353491
reminder
>>64352377
Don't bother responding to Generalizations Guy
>>64353491
>You clearly consider yourself superior to those jazz niggers or whatever.
No actually, my intelligence is literally that of a nigger.
>People having a superiority complex over the music they like isn't a jazz problem, it's a people problem.
This makes no sense outside an apparent odd 'no true' ('I will let no true definition of jazz be tainted by its players' rhetoric').
But yes, jazz is harmful, except it's won a special status in the cultural lottery.
>'Violent hood rap is the true only music, that's about being and performing in the moment, it's the only music that has soul and is not just artificial recreation of a written piece.'
>'What a moronic justification.'
>'Jazz is the true only music, that's about being and performing in the moment, it's the only music that has soul and is not just artificial recreation of a written piece.'
>'A true patrician! True discrimination right there! What incisive insight!'
>>64353822
In other words, jazz is only impressive when you blind yourself to its context. To enjoy it, you must first allow yourself to artificially patch up its musical shortcomings with the purported merits of the improvisation and all (all those insubstantial 'it's so natural!' and 'it's so expressive!'). This is the real meaning of the cliche that 'jazz is about the union between the performer and the audience'. The audience must first arbitrarily convince itself that non-musical merits, such as 'look ma improvisation!', are as important as musical ones. This in turn is the age-old abuse/overextension of definitions, here of music.
>>64353822
>No actually, my intelligence is literally that of a nigger.
UNTY IS THIS YOU??
IT ALL MAKES SENSE NOW
>>64354116
N-no. I've been called names on 4chan but not that one. Sorry.
OP here, thanks for all the suggestions
frick
>>64349423
lel lol kek jej lel
>>64349796
is it opposite day?
is prince alive again?
with bowie?
>>64351959
its not an insult. but it is a goad to finding one's creativity. and its not about the composer, but about the limits placed on the player's creativity and freedom. there's a nice interview with milford graves where he sums up the position re: playing with charles gayle and william parker. john cage said pretty much the same thing when watching branca conduct peak of the sacred.
you dont know very much guy
>>64352810
>>64353153
this is idiotic.
>>64359069
Reminder
>>64352377
Just look how frustrated he gets when nobody responds to him.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4510912
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSMnFhYwwGA
