Why do you think people who like jazz hate Kenny G?

Because kamasi is a hack. I could probably play what he does and I haven't touched my sax in over a year

>>65328124
cuz its not really jazz?

Because its not a technical album, its not impressive for anyone with an understanding of jazz, it rarely breaks away from convention and tries to do something interesting (other than DUDE 3 HOUR ALBUMS LMAO). It's a decent album, there's nothing particularly wrong with it, but it didn't deserve to be named the jazz album of the year by so many music publications. Joey Alexanders My Favorite Things was way better and more impressive, both Ibrahim Maalouf albums were more interesting and concise (IMO Black Light, Red Light was more interesting) and Vijay Iyers Break Stuff was more fun.

>>65328157
I don't think it's supposed to be technically amazing

>>65328204
I agree on the fact that it's definitely not the best, but again, i don't think it's objective was to be really technical

>>65328211
And that's okay, but I don't want to listen to le meme jazz man noodle around for 3 hours

>>65328251
yeah I guess that's fair, it would have been nicer to get a shorter album

>>65328113
>So, why does mu hate this?
Some like it some don't. It was actually pretty popular on /mu/, which of course will make its critics more vocal.

>Is it just because fantango liked it?
I wouldn't think so.

>Is it because it's really catchy and way simplier than other jazz albums?
Probably not.

>Is that even such a bad thing?
It is if it sacrifices musicality.

>>65328470
>It is if it sacrifices musicality.
yeah, that's pretty obvious tho

1. it's about as "mainstream" as a jazz album gets and /mu/ hates anything that "normies" might like

2. it's not a "technical" album and /mu/'s autism can only appriciate albums on a technical level.

>>65328712
>/mu/ doesn't like my meme music? better call them autistic until they agree with me

>>65328745
>taking the bait

I don't like it because it sounds too artificial. I like my jazz music to be recorded as a live performance in the studio.

>>65328745
>meme music

idk what that even means but I'm pretty sure you're proving my point

>>65328157
>>65328204
This is why i haven't dived deep into jazz. You fans actually care so much about technicality. Like, how autistic do you have to become that technicality has breached your art appreciation. Question, why, as apposed to every form of art, does jazz get valued on its technicality?

>>65329081
desu you cant call others autistic for liking something you dont even understand

>>65329098
What do you think of the epic? What is bad about it, besides the fact that kamasi isnt technical enough?

>>65329081
modern jazz fans tend to be "musically inclined"/high school band nerds/art majors/autists etc etc, that is to say, its a niche genre enjoyed mostly by music nerds.

so kinda like math rock, technicality is a huge part of the appeal.

>>65329221
Respectable answer

at the same time, there are plenty of jazz fans who don't sperg out over technicality and give a shit about jazz as a historical and cultural phenomenon as well as music in a wider sense instead of the myopia engendered by poring over transcriptions for hours on end and turning the greatest American art form into another route of competition between white suburban teenagers to get them into college.

to answer the OP's question, the backlash against Kamasi has mainly been based on the music's own failings as detailed in this thread but compounded because, like with Sunbather or Aesthetica or Since I Left You, it tends to be liked most by people who have it as a token example of the genre it's in and claim to love it without understanding its context very well at all, and then they have the gall to just parrot equally misinformed critics who call it groundbreaking or unique. it turns into this like huge lie that everyone's repeating and never questioning, where anyone with a baseline knowledge of jazz knows that Kamasi did very little for the genre besides making it popular with the Pitchfork crowd. (seriously, first new jazz album review for Pitchfork in like a decade or something and since then, there's been two or three jazz BNMs.)

>>65329196
its not bad, its not good

I ain't impressed, and I own a vinyl of Kind of Blue

>>65329001
This. The majority of "modern jazz" is WAY too overproduced and sterile sounding to me. There's no excitement or spontaneity to it anymore.

because it's fucking three hours long

it just absolutely does not need to be so lengthy

>>65328113
It evokes no emotion, it's a boring drag for the most part. Some parts shine, but it's like 3 hours long. No experimentation and little soul. T Monk, Davis, and Mingus have already pushed the boundaries further than this 50 years ago.

>>65329676
this is basically the correct answer

listening to the opening song of the record, Change of the Guard, I really enjoy the piano flourishes, the production is clean and pretty (some may say it is sterile but sonically I enjoy it) and the vocals in the background are ghostly and evoke a sense of spirituality really well, but in comparison to some of, let's say, the best Coltrane material it doesn't really push new boundaries and instead explores ideas and sounds that have been pioneered already. of course music does not always need to be innovative to be enjoyable or great art, but given that this record has been called the best jazz album of 2015 by so many publications, and given that the album is almost three hours long, its own ideas don't justify the length despite the music actually being very good and enjoyable.

that's my opinion on it anyway.

>>65329594
>>65329001
check out recent releases from the criss cross label. They're always recorded live in the studio in a one day session with minimal rehearsal and minimal overdubbing or studio effects. It's very similar to the way classic Blue Note albums were recorded.

>>65329586
Kek

>>65328204
>It's a decent album, there's nothing particularly wrong with it,

/thread