As a classic listener I can't see the point of jazz or at least why its praised so much.It either sounds like a background music or ost for some cool noire movie.There is no beauty in it unlike classical music.And before you start accusing me of fedora jazz is the ultimate fedora music.
It's music written by musicians for musicians.
Also it's the pinnacle of musical improvisation
Shitpost music
>>64716702
>It's music written by musicians for musicians.
its seems not to be the case and I am musician myself
>Also it's the pinnacle of musical improvisation
once again you spout opinions as facts
>>64716545
What jazz are you even listening to?
Have you checked out pic related?
Weak b8 m8.
Apply yourself next time.
>>64716739
>it seems not to be the case
Try play it - it's fun.
>opinions as facts
Aleotoricism in classical music is rarely to the same degree as even the most tame of jazz improv at high levels.
>>64716740
>kind of blue
wew lad youre proving my point
>>64716769
t.jazz shiteater
>>64716774
>fun equals beautiful
what?
Is music with out form (even when it has form) is like singing with out words trying to say something but with instuments, why the hype? in one time was relevant and original and innovative and scape from the rigid rules of classical music and the chromatic scale, something like that
>>64716739
What do you play and at what level do you play it at?
Have you ever tried playing jazz? I wouldn't knock it until you've tried it.
You ever try fuckin your woman to some jazz? Try it then let me know what you think about jazz.
>>64716797
Oh he's shit posting.
Remember, 100% of surviving classical music from before the 20th century is literally the pop garbage top 40 of its day.
Look - I can shit post too.
Here's your (you)
>>64716797
Are you gonna bait or will you at least tell me what you thought about the album if you even gave it a respectable listen through?
>>64716545
/pol/ told me jazz is white people paying niggers to make fart sounds
>>64716702
>It's music written by musicians for musicians.
That doesn't mean it's any good.
>Also it's the pinnacle of musical improvisation
That doesn't mean it's any good either.
Jazz fans will never stop bringing nonmusical arguments into their apologies.
If like improvised shit, it's fine, just don't pretend that the former part cancels the latter.
>>64716823
Jazz is black people getting mad at white people for enjoying their music but not letting them play it in front of them.
>>64716797
>fun equals beautiful
Why can't it?
>>64716838
>If like
*if you like
Jazz made music before you were born
>>64716822
>if you even gave it a respectable listen
>respectable
And pray what are your undoubtedly-objective criteria separating a 'respectable' listen from a regular, carless one?
Of course, I know. If you didn't like the jazz record as a result, it was not a proper listen yet. 'No true listening to a jazz record would not result in you not liking it.'
>>64716869
Even before Mosart if you can believe it
>>64716838
>Mastering an instrument to play new music doesn't make the music good in some sense.
You don't play an instrument do you?
I think you'd have maybe a little more respect for jazz if you knew how far some of its most famous players went musically or technically to play what they wanted to play.
>>64716879
>would not result
*would result
>>64716843
It can and does, just not in case of jazz.
>>64716545
Obviously you haven't checked this out then
>>64716888
'It takes a lot of practice to play it, so it's good.'
You just can't give an argument that refers to quality of the music itself and not to the circumstances surrounding it, can you?
>>64716894
lel
As a jazz listener I can't see the point of classical or at least why its praised so much.It either sounds like a background music or ost for some blockbuster movie.There is no beauty in it unlike jazz music.And before you start accusing me of fedora classical is the ultimate fedora music.
>>64716894
I laffed
>>64716879
I meant just sit down and listen to the full length of the album with little to no distraction.
If you don't like it, fine, you don't have to listen to it again.
I just want to hear your thoughts on the album since I think there is some truly beautiful music on it and would like to know how your opinions would maybe disagree with mine.
>>64716545
>As a classic listener I can't see the point of jazz
Improvisation and interplay/communication between musicians.
>why its praised so much.
There are several main influential things jazz did to music and to american culture as a whole. Most notably it gave America an identity during the world war. This continues to this day, it's instantly recognizable as american. There are books about it, read if you're interested.
>It either sounds like a background music or ost for some cool noire movie.
Most noire films used classical music as background music. The French used jazz in their new wave films. Anything sounds like background music if you don't care for it.
>There is no beauty in it unlike classical music.
That's your opinion and you're free to have it. Not sure why you feel like you need to compare it with classical music aside from trying to show off.
I won't pretend to know much about it but the jazz I've found myself liking is full of beautiful melodies. Stuff like Herbie Hancock and Ahmad Jamal is hard not to like. I also like fusion, which I'm not sure counts, but that stuff's fun as fuck and has killer grooves. It's not all just noodling.
Jazz to me portrays a lot of emotions much better than classical music is able to, and of course vice versa.
Listening to music simply for something as abstract as "beauty" is utterly misguided.
>>64716906
>'It takes a lot of practice to play it, so it's good.'
the funny thing is classical fans say this to defend classical music all the fucking time.
however, I like jazz and classical.
>>64716545
OP, what jazz albums have you listened to exactly? If you really don't think there is beauty in jazz, I would strongly recommend A Love Supreme by John Coltrane, Karma by Pharoah Sanders, and The Black Saint And The Sinner Lady by Charles Mingus, for starters.
There is an enormous amount of diversity in jazz and the majority of popular music from the 50s onwards was born out of styles or innovations that began in jazz.
>>64716805
Whats the point of me playing it when I dont like it in the first place?!?
>>64716808
So its just novelty music.Thanks for proving my point.
>>64716821
Y-y-youre s-shitposting I dont have to p-prove anything!
>>64716822
I told you at my first post what I think of jazz and kind of blue is the cheesiest jazz I ever heard(without kenny g
>>64716965
>Improvisation and interplay/communication
>>64716965
>identity
The quest for nonmusical arguments continues.
>fusion
Fusion is hilarious because more than once I looked up a virtuosic jazz performer only to find them classified as fusion. Clearly real musicians (or just people with a modicum of intelligence) realize the folly of pretending anything worthwhile could come out of improvisation and are drawn to writing.
>people still fall for this ancient bait
>>64716906
I'm saying that being a musician adds another level of appreciation, understanding, and enjoyment to the music.
There is no such thing as objectively good music, but there is, in some sense, levels of musicality and technical capability that musicians need to play jazz that adds some merit to the music.
That doesn't mean the music is "better" than other forms of music.
I'm just trying to hint at another way of hearing the music that may be lost to people who don't play an instrument.
>>64717029
>The quest for nonmusical arguments continues.
What the hell are you even trying to say?
As someone who liked jazz first and then learned to enjoy classical I can say you that the "point" of those styles of music is very different. The key to liking jazz is to like the intensity, groove and tightness in the music, just listen to the drums on a good jazz song and you will very likely notice it fast. The "feel" of the sounds is at least as important and sometimes even more important than a melody and harmony. The band builds up this intensity and energy through the jam and when it finally releases, it feels awesome (not so different from building tension in classical music actually). The improvisatory nature of jazz makes the communication between band members very important and makes all kinds of twists and turns possible. Jazz doesn't have the same kind of feeling of narrative as classical but it doesn't really even try to be.
But ofc this is just how I see it, if you don't like it you don't like it. I personally don't even look for beauty in jazz.
>>64717029
Meant to quote >>64716966.
>>64717006
>I would strongly recommend A Love Supreme by John Coltrane, Karma by Pharoah Sanders, and The Black Saint And The Sinner Lady by Charles Mingus
I second this recommendation. They are pretty sure to disillusion a person about the quality of jazz.
>>64717029
There is such a thing as a musical identity.
Famous jazz artists have signature timbres or play styles that are evident in their music and changes in their playing and personality can be heard thought their varied works over time.
This concept also extends to all other music as well.
>>64717029
Fusion has improvised solos as well, though, so I don't really get what you're saying
>>64717056
That's like saying that being able to accurately visualize sentences' syntax trees as I read a novel can increase my enjoyment of literature. Maybe; but it's not a musical merit.
>inb4 I can't use a linguistic analogy to describe jazz; >"jazz is a language" returns a ton of results
When a jazz musician chooses in his individual isolated, insular solo to traverse a scale this or that way, he sure has some conception of what he does, but this neither corresponds to the other players nor sounds any good. It is perfectly possible to improvise good music, it's just never happened so far.
>>64717109
>'it's either 100% improvisation or 100% comopsition' strawman
JAZZ IS A SPECTRUM.
>>64717102
No, I didn't mean fusion as referencing the original fusion stylistics, I meant fusion as limiting the amount of improvisation.
>>64717125
>That's like saying that being able to accurately visualize sentences' syntax trees as I read a novel can increase my enjoyment of literature
*or actually makes the literature I'm reading any better
>>64717148
I thought that was what you were saying. I certainly wasn't implying that. But if you are of the opinion that all improvisation is shit then I'd imagine there's plenty you don't like outside of jazz.
>>64716545
What's with all the Jazz hate threads cropping up so much lately? Is it just the same guy over and over or what
>You can't like what I don't like
>>64717200
It's an ancient bait thread that always manages to get replies.
Some people never learn I guess
You're asking dumb broad questions and continually undermine any legit responses. If you had any sincere intention about learning what makes jazz great you'd be reading dozens of books about it, talking to musicians or try it yourself and not shitpost about it on fucking 4chan. You're pathetic.
>>64717200
>>You can't like what I don't like
>implying
Liking jazz is like eating raw sugar. It's biologically impossible not to like the unstructured, never-repeating string of tones that a jazz performance is; it's too entertaining on the basic cerebral level. Some people just realize that pitfall and move on and look for something with more variety.
>>64717125
I'm saying exactly what you're saying in argument to me.
Understanding what it takes to play an instrument absolutely can increase your enjoyment of music. Similar to how understanding how to film a movie can increase your enjoyment of watching movies or the example you just gave in regards to literature.
Jazz is a language, and hearing what other people want to saying by speaking through their instrument and in music is what is enjoyable about jazz to some people.
Also thinking that good music has't been improvised before is just your opinion and not a fact.
>>64717043
You're my current fav trip. Just dropping by to tell you that
>>64717244
Jazz is one of the most expansive and varied genres of music though.
>>64717043
>>64717230
>Its a bait!Its my safespace after all nobody can question me!
>>64717060
Well jazz is the affirmative action of music
>>64717235
Yeah because all the people who make jazz music can't write their names to save their lives
>>64717235
>jazz books
>wanting to spend time reading niggers prattle about 'soul', 'essence', 'communication', 'spirit', 'the moment', 'getting lost', 'the self', and the rest of the prehistoric concepts they evoke to arbitrarily appear superior
Reminder Classical > Jazz
>>64717312
Pretty much every bait thread ever has at least one instance of a variation of that sentence.
You basically ask a question then proceed to shoot down any answer given, no matter how logical or emotional, objective or subjective, long or short or meaningful or meaningless it is. That screams bait
>>64717304
This myth REALLY needs to die.
The fact that every genre is infinitely divisible and every performance is infinitely discussible != there are no quantitative differences between genres' and performances' complexity. tl;dr jazz is unique and simplistic.
>>64717162
Fusion doesn't mean limiting improvisation though. Some songs that would be considered jazz fusion are sometimes almost entirely improvised.
It means taking influences from other genres and music and mixing it together to create music.
>>64717343
did you even read the thread you moron.nobody ever disproved me.
>also
>logical
>emotional
tYpIcAl
>>64717365
There's nothing to disprove, you didn't post any constructive arguments.
>>64717312
Good thing they aren't writers huh?
>>64717312
>jazz is the affirmative action of music
Well put.
People blame people who dislike jazz as pleb, but in reality those people just haven't learned that you're socially expected to like it. 'You are to find improvisation etc. the true spirit/pinnacle/essence/whatever of music because I say so.'
>>64717312
Why are you replying? He's just shitposting. It's not even subtle. Every fucking day these shit genre argument threads happen and they get hundreds of replies, and they're always the same.
>if it's slow
Go for a walk, you'll understand.
>if it's quick
Start writing, you'll understand.
>>64717359
Well the players I had in mind were presumably so good that they would not be attracted to fusion as a certain stylistic or just genre/culture blending. They're rather considered that because of the 'limited improvisation' definition.
>>64716545
ITT: It's 1926
>>64717312
>>64717394
Please elaborate on "affirmative action."
>>64717388
>>64717409
of course
>>64717389
yeah like all the trap beatmakers and edm artist who are"sound engineers".Also if you think they wrote the books then youre beyond saving.
>>64717426
whatever helps you sleep
>>64717336
>Ars subtilior > Popular music
These comparisons are ridiculous, when are you plebs going to realize that classical is not a genre?
>>64717433
And these players are?
>>64717502
They're just trying to say people pretend to like it to not look racist or something. Nevermind that big-band music existed and whatnot.
>>64717312
>jazz is the affirmative action of music
lmao jazz was a thing way before affirmative action was a thing
if anything post-2000s hip-hop is the affirmative action of music
>>64717502
Blacks being too stupid to master a musical principle more specific than 'hold this and solo on it' being at least given compensatory titles of 'the biggest innovator in the history of modern music' and such.
>>64716545
If you can't see the "point" or value in any type of music, you just aren't open minded, period. You are free to not like any kind of music, but to state "there is no beauty in it" and lump OSTs or background music into a separate category of enjoyability demonstrates your ignorance. Why is it so hard to understand that people like sounds?
>>64717524
>And these players are?
Never really listened to his music, but Chick Corea was one name. Shawn Lane was the other.
Look, do you like tensions, 7th chords and trumpets?
If you don't, then it's okay.
>>64717538
>'hold this and solo on it
if that's really what you believe jazz is then I don't know if there's any helping you, especially since you've completely ignored the suggestions me and other people are giving you such as right here >>64717006
seems like you're just willfully ignorant and/or baiting
and what's with the race shit, there were important white jazz musicians too, but you can't deny that the majority of the best ones were black. why would you think people only like jazz to seem not racist? and what the fuck kind of social environment do you go to where it's even considered social to like jazz? I know very few other people IRL who like jazz, where I am the "cool" stuff to like is hip-hop and EDM.
>>64717553
I'm as open minded as it gets because I challenge myself with completely different music and actually take time to understand it but Jazz is probably one of the blandest genres pretending to be the best thing on the earth.
>Muh soul even though I'm angry as fuck and usually die from heroine overdose
>>64717559
Chick Corea's most well known compositions and albums are filled with improvisation though.
I've haven't listened to Shane Lawn.
>>64717625
>I'm as open minded as it gets
then how come all you do is cherrypick and beat up strawmen and ignore actual answers ITT?
>>64717613
>I know very few other people IRL who like jazz
Ah yes, the old 'help! help! we're being culturally minimized!' disingenuous self-aggrandization. Face it, everyone claims to enjoy jazz. Hip-hop, comparable to it complexity-wise, is getting much more flak.
Also, if your musical perceptiveness is comparable to your literary one, then it is no wonder that you enjoy jazz if you thought that I write anything like OP.
>>64717625
Then there's no reason for you to not understand that people like different genres and styles. This is especially evident in your categorization of OST and background music as somehow something that is othered from "normal" or "real" music. You really don't have an actual appreciation of music.
>>64717647
>yfw when you talk about strawmens yet reply only to the first few words in the sentence
did your brain fry?
>>64717613
because people still think of jazz as a mature music even though its not
>>64717625
You're not very open minded if you're so quick to dismiss the music just because a famous musician took drugs.
>people still responding to GG
embarrassing
>>64717692
Saving for future threads, thanks.
>>64717692
I don't think I ever used the word 'hegemony' during my years on 4chan. Good job.
>>64717710
Remember, if you feel the need to post in a GG thread, always remember to sage
>>64717692
Also, love the sense of humour in your intentionally misspelling 'inconsistency'.
>>64717692
/Thread
>>64717675
I see the appeal of different genres but you seems to have missed the point I made in the OP.
>>64717684
When you hear some boasting about how soulful they are but are actually like obsessed by the devil you cant really take them seriously.
>>64717692
Jazz elitists are the most pathetic human beings in the world.
>Muh safespace
>we are not cool like before so lets pretend that its really complex and soulful
At least anime and vocaloid listeners don't think like they are the shit.
>>64717756
>missed the point I made in the OP
You're not making any point. You're assuming a status of "maturity" and objectively criticizing Jazz for something subjective in a select number of its fans, and are using your musical ignorance as an argument.
>>64717692
>giving him attention
>>64717783
>still responding to it
for what purpose
>>64717756
The elitism of jazz performers comes from race, and actually IQ.
Ever heard a Japanese musician brag how their music is the highest expression of human ... and integrates ... transcends ... ... ? I doubt it?
>>64717830
>I doubt it?
*I doubt it.
>>64717807
>>64717810
You guys seriously don't see that I am not OP?
>>64716545
Hi circlejerking mozart scatologist
>>64717783
>everything is subjective
>i can shit on the piano and its just the same as long as its great in my mind
Its called a mental illness.
>>64717810
dd-d-ont respond to him you will make our shittier music look even shittier
So, whenever OP is asked what jazz albums he's listened to he can't name any and whenever he's recced jazz albums he immediately writes them off.
Jazz fans are easy to troll apparently.
>>64717875
>Jazz fans are easy to troll apparently.
and yet you're the only one still responding...
>>64717871
That's what I thought, no argument or actual understanding of reality
>>64717871
>Its called a mental illness.
Again, well put. You hardly bother to argue ITT really, but you're again correct. Psychiatric delusions are essentially unshakable conviction in a causal relationship that isn't there, such as that a certain tone was 'in response' to a previous one by another musician. Mental illnesses can come with mania, too, which sounds akin to finding a musical concurrence pleasing no matter what.
>>64717921
yep you argument that everything is subjective is totally legit!
>>64717830
well no surprise after all the average jazz listener have 90iq
>inb4 iq doesn't matter
yes but if you have under 100 you're not going to be a smart man.
>>64717868
>mozart
jump under a train please
>>64717875
I tried every non made up genre and artists from thelonious monk to sun ra.
>>64717921
>understanding of reality
Tell me more about your understand of reality
>>64717941
>>64717941
>>64717941
>>64717941
>>64717941
>>64718018
understanding of reality*
hello is this the jazz thread
what have you been listening to?
>>64718055
no. this thread is an abortion. let it die and start a new one if you want to actually talk about jazz
>>64717692
>>64718055
>jazzidf tries to change the topic
>>64718077
>>64718077
>>64718077
>>64718077
You aren't even going to acknowledge that I'm not OP, are you? Better to lump all dissenting posters into one supernatural, vilifiable bogeyman, I suppose.
You have to get out of that rock mindset. Just only listen to jazz for a while. You'll soon find stuff you like, and stuff you don't.
>>64718115
>>64718077
In fact, I only now realized that 'all voices critical of jazz on /mu/ are one person, the Generalization Guy!!!' is a [spoiler]generalization[/spoiler].
>>64718154
>J-just listen to jazz i'm s-sure if you brainwash yourself enough you will start to like it!!!
>>64718154
>You'll soon find stuff you like, and stuff you don't.
>you'll find stuff you don't like
I highly doubt it. Cf. >>64717244. Jazz is pop; the key is not to begin to like it, but to stop liking it, so to move on to music that took premeditation whose structure to study and to modify in your own compositions.
Is that all jazzfags?I thought you will at least try to make some sense
>>64718486
>I thought you will at least try to make some sense
Yes well, the problem with jazz music is everyone can claim that a lot of forethought went into every note--
Oh wait, you were talking about the posts in this thread.
>There is no beauty in it unlike classical music
You've been arguing from a subjective standpoint the entire time. There's nothing to argue against.
>>64717506
I realize you're not b8ing. You're just a really empty, insipid, bland, white person. Even if you're not Caucasian, you're just a boring, tasteless whitey.
>>64718879
*does a improvisation of random animal sounds*
*chimpouts and burns the building*
ITS SOUL I TELL YOU!
>>64719030
a'ight
>>64717830
>The elitism of jazz performers comes from race
yeah, white classical composers are/were NEVER elitist, oh no...
>>64719218
>classical titles: literally the most self-effacing titling scheme ever, 'concerto/symphony/sonata/... #'
>boastful jazz titles that caught my eye TODAY ALONE, without me even trying: 'Giant Steps', 'Looking Ahead'
hmm
>>64717663
>Ah yes, the old 'help! help! we're being culturally minimized!' disingenuous self-aggrandization.
what the actual fuck are you talking about
all I'm saying is I live in a town where you can count the number of black families on one hand and the vast majority of white people I personally know don't like jazz, yet many of them love hip-hop.
most "normies" as many would call them like hip-hop because it is essentially easy-listening--you can "bump" it in your car, or at parties, or drink and get high to it.
jazz on the other hand is far more, as you yourself admitted, complex, and experimental, and challenging, and intellectually stimulating. you don't just hang out and listen to jazz with your friends for fun, you sit and listen with good headphones or speakers and listen intently, absorbing the details and letting the music fill you and make you feel weightless and transcendent to the point where it is almost like you are in a peaceful sleep yet you are still conscious enough to hear the music...
it works the same way as classical honestly. I would argue that jazz (or at least the BEST of jazz) is art music; it is certainly closer to art music than all other popular or traditional music. every innovation in popular music can be traced back to jazz and also classical.
why is it so difficult to enjoy both? why are so many classical fans elitist assholes who think to be "patrician" you can only enjoy one form of music, despite others having so much unique experiences to offer?
>people still responding to Generalizations Guy
honestly you're as bad as he is
>>64719353
seriously? you're even going to bother responding to this person's level of posting.
read this
>>64717692
>>64719354
>honestly you're as bad as he is
Don't generalize.
>>64716880
>mosart
>>64719353
>jazz on the other hand is far more, as you yourself admitted, complex, and experimental, and challenging, and intellectually stimulating
I said jazz *is* comparable to hip-hop in terms of complexity. You saw an 'im-' that wasn't there.
Listening to a jazz record intently would be like watching a video on YouTube of mentally challenged children who nonetheless try to play a card game. I don't really want to. I acknowledge it exists, but it gives me no pleasure to remember it. I don't mean in a hateful way -- I just would rather forget that some people are incapable of variety in their music beyond managing not to get into each other's way over the period of ten minutes. It is a bit egoistical -- I don't want to accustom myself to such impoverished efforts. But for the biggest part, it really is empathy.
>>64719549
Perhaps the sanest way to deal with this is just stop treating jazz as music and think of it as a sort of body modification festival, where performers cripple themselves (there: with pain/damage, here: with improvisation radically narrowing the amount of diversity at their disposal). That would be... acceptable if perplexing.
>>64717538
>black people invented new musical genres and I'm jealous
>>64719549
haha dios mio
you're having fun
>>64719749
Saying that blacks invented a genre by inventing jazz is like saying that a toddler invented a writing system by tripping over the inkwell and spilling the ink over the notebook.
>>64719818
go on
>>64719842
That's it. The analogy is about forgoing the formal, modal, whatever, limitations. When you forgo limitations, nothing remains, and you're just playing a continuous string of music that can only be judged by -- guess what -- nonmusical criteria such as 'interaction' or 'feel', which is exactly what jazz listeners and performers alike arise.
>>64719883
please expand on
>formal, modal, whatever, limitations
it seems like you know what you're talking about and I'd like to learn
for instance please provide an example of a piece of music that respects the limitations you deem necessary.
>people trying to make this look like a feud between classicalfags and jazzfags when there is none, and even some composers like Ravel have introduced jazz elements into their works
>>64720229
And, in turn, Miles Davis loved Ravel's Concerto for the Left Hand, and proceeded to integrate concepts from it in his 60s work.
>>64719958
Whatever I could cite, you'd reply 'jazz does it too', for sure enough, SOME jazz performer had let their repressed inner composer out one time and subjected his work to a progression of some kind over its course.
>>64720333
This made me madder than rap creators 'sampling' (that's the word, right?) others' compositions. At least rap performers, whatever to say about them, don't insist their music is literally the best there is.
>>64720397
Trying way too hard here friend.
>people still taking this unbelievably obvious b8
>>64720397
>>64720333
In other words, a jazz 'musician' 'integrating' a composer's concepts is like a pseudoscience and alternative medicine peddler taking a scientist and saying that he deeply respects his work. Someone who has his whole lifetime been spitting on the values and efforts of honest, dedicated composers then solely for publicity declaring he's been their admirer. Reprehensible.
>>64720358
sure. but why should that stop you from demonizing an entire genre? what fun would that be?
>>64720430
How long has this person been around for?
>>64720430
>resizing the image because you realized that the unresized person you posted before allowed people to read my actual points (at least some of them -- that post actually said the're just the 'gist')
I laughed out loud. Nice, anon.
>>64720430
I hate this kind of people.
This is literally the only reason why it would be useful to everyone to become a tripfag, yet they don't.
>>64720522
>unresized person
*unresized version
>>64720358
You actually have no idea what you're talking about. Most jazz is quite formal. Jazz improvisation up until 1959 was based around connecting chord tones with scale and chromatic tones. Thus, the solo would imply the changes, which means that tunes with dense chord changes are restrictive, in a way. Then in 1959 both Miles Davis and Ornette Coleman tried to move away from that.
Pretty serious b8 in here
disappointed you're giving this blowhard the time of day, /mu/
>>64720532
>to become a tripfag, yet they don't
I'm not a jazz performer whose idea of a good album cover is a closeup of their face, I don't like to draw attention to myself.
>>64720601
why bother typing out a response to someone who cannot respond in a rational way?
>>64720430
>>64720601
>literally says that jazz's idea of progress throughout the century was to move away from a class of limitations
>still says it's formal
Everybody just stop replying to Generalizations Guy, there is literally no point, you're just falling deeper into his pool of insane shit vomit. Just ignore him.
>154 replies
>42 posters
>not one realizing this was copy pasta
hello, newfags
What's the point in any music?
>>64720694
>unironically saying "newfags"
>not pasta
bruh
>>64720712
deep...
>>64720712
(1) being pleasant in the neuroaesthetic sense
(2) containing patterns governing its variables (one aspect of the piece being dependent on another according to a rule) discovering which is pleasant
Jazz fails on both counts.
>>64720791
lol good try man. That's just too opinionated to stand as an objective reason. Music has a point outside of your own perception. I enjoy jazz, so that's one point of jazz.
>>64720935
As I said, if a genre's worth is defined by its popularity, jazz'll be fine.
>>64720935
why even bother responding to point out how irrational his argument is? everybody can see that. it's time to stop responding.
>>64721011
Why even bother? It's entertaining for me. I guess we're both obtaining some sort of entertainment value from it. Chill dude. It's just some shitty thread, it doesn't matter either way.
>>64720430
People need to pay more attention to this
