more like this? just got into jazz and have been listening to the classics; this is by far the best jazz record i've heard so far
Don Cherry - Eternal Rhythm
Ascension by Coltrane
I do recommend starting from the beginning of jazz and working your way to the free stuff because it gives context to what they are actually doing and how the music progressed that point of deconstruction
>>65817933
Can you tl;dr what the beginning jazz stuff I should listen to is for me?
I don't want to listen to a ton of Glenn Miller and Benny Goodman just to get to the good stuff like Mingus, Rollins, Coleman etc..
>>65817986
What I did was at first listen to a lot of modern jazz and then the old one, you just should probably do so on the order you prefer. I understand it can seem like a bother at first, but it really enchances your view of it.
Though, you should probably do so when you feel authentic curiosity for it after having listened to more and reassuring you like the genre enough to do it.
>>65817986
Then don't listen to a ton of what you don't like, but it's a big mistake to skip it all together.
How can you understand Mingus' genius if you've never listened to Ellington?
How can you appreciate Rollins' playing if you've never heard Lester Young or Coleman Hawkins?
How can you know what made Coleman's playing so revolutionary if you haven't first listened to Johnny Hodges and Charlie Parker?
>>65818369
By reading a chart, apparently.
>>65818468
It's a decent chart but it's no substitute for listening to the music and forming your own conclusions.
>>65818492
It's at least a good place to start. Thanks.
>>65818369
I don't know man, some people like to listen to music and pay attention the history and the significance, and some people just want to hear sounds that are enjoyable.
You don't "have to" listen in a certain order. If that's what you're looking for, then great, but it's perfectly legitimate to just listen to what sounds good to you.
>>65818369
That's stupid, you don't need a history lesson in a genre just to listen to an album. You don't need to hear every person who's ever played a trumpet in order to enjoy A Love Supreme, it's fine on it's own. Early Jazz really isn't as enjoyable as the 50's and 60's stuff.
>>65818612
This is true. But I really think that to enjoy the music to the fullest, especially this music, it really is pretty important to understand the history and context.
The Shape of Jazz to Come was one of the first jazz albums I listened to and I enjoyed it immensely. But eventually after I went back and listened to Charlie Parker and Lee Konitz and Lou Donaldson and then came back to Shape of Jazz to Come I enjoyed it on a completely different level. I think a lot of people have similar experiences with a lot of the essential jazz that is recommended for starting out.
>>65818721
see
>>65818818
Nobody's saying you can't enjoy the music without the historical context. But shit, if you really do enjoy the music why wouldn't you want to learn all you can about it?
>>65817933
>>65817986
I did a project on Ornette Coleman in high school. Made me realize his evolution as an artist and how he kept pushing boundaries that he had set. This helps a lot in understanding what he did
http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/11849/1/Frink_Thesis_ETD_(5).pdf
