-
Seagulls, unlikely (not counting Jonathan Livingston and friends) - but dolphins and whales, most definitely.
Originally Posted by pauln
Last edited by Mick-7; 03-02-2026 at 05:08 PM.
-
03-02-2026 03:52 PM
-
trad jazz improvisation is quite limited, it is melodic variations within given form, not much you can do with it and it comes quite close to spoken intonation expressiveness, very straightforward, imitative and emotional. Originally Posted by emanresu
actually when I play jazz improvisation I try to feel some kind of murmuring, some authentic deeper ‘speech’, I have certain irregulars meter feel usually (often confusing for others to be honest) and how it works
with intonation.., and I just try to express it, something very intuitive.
But it is very different from what I would doin classical composition
-
Music conveys information, same as any language. It's more tonal (like Mandarin) than analytic languages (like English), but it can and should be telling the listener something. If it's not, then I'd argue it's not very good music.
As far as this relates to jazz, I think we've taken it waaay too far in the analytic direction. Which seems to have mostly benefited university level music programs, not so much the music itself or its players. Because if I'm at a jam, I'm thinking of how to connect to the audience. And if some other guy shows up with the most brainy enclosures anyone has ever come up with, I'm still gonna be the crowd favorite. Not because I'm better. Because I'm meeting them and communicating with them. Telling them a story. Giving them a beginning, middle, and end. And trying to do it with a little style, all while honoring the changes and the other players I'm working with.
As with anything, it's really not what you say. It's how you say it.
-
Just because you have to change your mindset to comprehend it doesn't mean the connection isn't there. Does a computer programmer intuitively perceive the connection between the code and the medium? No. Is it still a language? Yes. Originally Posted by pamosmusic
And the bot: Exactly — the comprehensibility of the correlation to an untrained observer is irrelevant to whether it's a language. Nobody intuitively reads binary but it's still a precise systematic language. The definition stands on the structure of the correlation, not on whether it's immediately accessible.
It makes perfect sense if you don't disregard my other posts. A chief definition of a language is a system of communication. Music qualifies as that. It's just specialized. Not being able to communicate any type of information like alphabetical languages doesn't officially disqualify it. Originally Posted by James W
-
All speech is sound but not all sound is speech.
-
LOL, McLuhan was already mentioned so I'll add Wittgenstein and Barthes to the list of thinkers who would very much disagree with that statement; and so would any linguist, language teacher and similarly trained professionals Originally Posted by emanresu
Then going back to the original idea, music is language: Bernstein makes a very compelling case for music as language using generative linguistics as a basis for his framework. In more recent times, Barenboim in his memoirs often talks about music as a language and what he says aligns with what the thinkers above also considered about language: meaning emerges from relationships and patterns and shared engagement and not from a single fixed semantic point. And tbh, whenever I read up what musicians have to say abt music, more often than not, music is considered a language.
If you wish, I can recommend a few books on the topic I am reading as part of my prep for the MA degree I'm planning on doing in a couple of years once im done w the BA. The topic of language is mightily interesting and really worth exploring properly... the bot will only add more to your confusion.
Tom Wolfe's The Painted Word comes to mind here - meaning is in the discourse around it xD Originally Posted by emanresu
Bold words there... And while I see your point and agree with it to some extent, I also do think music can and is an intellectual pursuit, especially when you try to understand its context or historical framing; take for example 2 of my favourites, Shostakovich and Billy Holiday - the intellectual aspect aids and enhances interpretation. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Someone asked for an example to show what the hell I'm on about again.
joke.mp3
Doctor: Relax, David. It is just a surgery. Don't get nervous.
Me: My name isn't David!
Doctor: I know, I am David.
-
Engineering is intellectual, but the important part at the end of the day is that the engine works or whatever. Originally Posted by jazzloverfat
-
As an Engineer, I find that Engineering can be very creative, historically a lot of Engineering concepts/rules were found by trial and error. Some with disastrous consequences. Originally Posted by pamosmusic
Below: 1826 Suspension Bridge built by Thomas Telford. Maybe, over Engineered, but safe.
-
Yeah that’s kind of what I’m saying. If you’re approaching something creatively, then lots of pursuits can be creative. But creativity at the expense of the parts all fitting together is pretty useless. Originally Posted by GuyBoden
As an Engineer, I find that Engineering can be very creative, historically a lot of Engineering concepts/rules were found by trial and error. Some with disastrous consequences.
Below: 1826 Suspension Bridge built by Thomas Telford. Maybe, over Engineered, but safe.
With music and other arts, maybe jazz in particular, people tend to bristle at the idea that pure creative expression might not be the end all be all. Or that the nuts and bolts are super important for facilitating the creativity
-
Here's a Telford bridge I'm fond of. He did like his circles :-)
-
Very nice. Originally Posted by ragman1
Here's a Telford bridge I'm fond of. He did like his circles :-)
Telford Bridge, 1819, Bannockburn.
-
This Tacoma bridge. Yes, negative Nancys see it as a failure.
But when you look how damn much of punishment the bridge took before failing. That's quite amazing.
When I saw that, I gained new confidence walking over any bridge. On a calm day.
-
The Humber Bridge is designed to accommodate movement caused by traffic weight, thermal expansion, and wind changes, allowing for a maximum deflection of two meters. Originally Posted by emanresu
Two meters is 6 1/2 feet in old money.
Humber Bridge below:
-
Eh? Originally Posted by emanresu
There are 5 short "sentences" in the solo, mimicing the text of the convo. How they would sound (the mood) and how it "goes".
Nothing to do with the normal way of composing - the structure borrowed from the text and not what the "music itself demands".
It works as well as any other, kinda makes sense already. No literal "meaning", of course. As always
-
Yup. I remember something like that, he mimiced Zappa's talking somehow?. But it was not exactly what I meant. Originally Posted by brent.h
The exercise in OP was for creating a short simple "plan" first, then try to execute it. Helps to train to think ahead a bit more, I hope.
Get those smaller phrases interconnected, giving them a place to "go", things to "do" in advance.
Maybe.
About the "musical meanin" business - I've completely solved this for myself. Not trying to debate or argue about it anymore cuz, for me, it is done.
See, when comparing music to cooking/eating instead to language, it becomes so basic and simple. There are no "meanings" in cooking,
the tastebuds send the signals directly to your senses, get good experiences. Musical notes do the same to the hearing senses.
"Make sense", "musical sense" works just fine as opposed to maybe: "what do you MEAN with this chord here?
Because music works your senses
Well, not trying to be philosophical here, just trying to relax and forget about forcing myself to think in ways that don't agree with what really happens.
-
I’m one of those who like thinking of music in terms of language, not in grammar or syntax, but in fluency.
Playing from a memorised repertoire is a bit like using set phrases in conversation. You can sound fluent and expressive, and it allows you to perform in projects you enjoy. For me, this kind of fluency is performative fluency, built from learning complete songs in detail from João Gilberto, particularly his comping and vocal phrasing, and from Nat King Cole.
On the other hand, studying individual phrases that really speak to you in your listening contributes to a different kind of fluency, one that is spontaneous. I often borrow lines from horn players such as Chet Baker and Dexter Gordon, using them if the moment calls for it or ignoring them if not. This is the thrilling moment-to-moment interaction with other musicians, where you respond and shape the music in real time. Achieving it requires preparation, study, and familiarity with a range of approaches so you can make choices freely.
In my experience, there is even a subtle connection between João Gilberto’s vocal style and the cool aesthetic of Chet Baker, though others might hear it differently.
Both types of fluency have value, but the spontaneous kind feels much closer to actual conversation than any performative fluency ever could. That is where ‘music as language’ truly comes alive, and it is also where it lands with the listener, carrying a sense of immediacy and presence that memorised fluency alone cannot achieve.
Music can also play a part in shaping the listener’s emotional experience. As Roger Ebert reportedly described cinema, it can help elicit empathy, and in that context, the music supports the effect produced by the images and story, enhancing the audience’s response rather than creating it on its own. In performance, music can similarly contribute to the listener’s engagement and emotional impact, adding depth to the experience without being the sole driver.
Reply With Quote
Calling you Framus folk
Yesterday, 09:38 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos