-
yyeaahhh...I'd prefer to stay out of it...but...the worst thing said to you was "this is terrible" lol
Originally Posted by ragman1
and again about that guy being so called "tarred and feathered" for saying fuck wayne shorter...What's clinging to views more: that, or "he is stupid for saying that for no reason?"
-
05-07-2026 10:34 AM
-
Jazz is an art form born in the African American community and a not very well known white artist was critiquing one of the innovators of the music.
Wynton Marsalis has a lot more leeway to critique as a member of that community and we have Iverson who has critiqued white musicians for deviating from what he believes is the essence of Jazz among other things.
What am I trying to say? I don't know, but that we should be cognizant of the history of the music and the social and cultural contexts associated with it.
-
Can we stay on planet Earth, please? I didn't say that, did I? Read it again. Originally Posted by James W
Why assume they need defending? And especially need defending by those who do? The defenders want to feel important, that's why they do it. And defending against what? Some people who prefer other kinds of music? When was the last time a well-known jazz musician had a breakdown because a few people said they didn't really go for their playing?What you mean is that people are passionate about music and these musicians, and feel inclined to defend them. That is not very insane at all.
At last, absolutely. I'm glad that's sorted. If it simply stayed at the level of idol-worship that wouldn't be so bad but it doesn't, it erupts to the level of fundamentalism. That's what's wrong with that, outright hatred and the baying mob. You don't like Miles Davis? Heresy!I agree jazz can be like a religion
I don't really want to get into that area. I know it's traditional but I really question whether any of that has anything to do with spirituality, especially when it turns to hate. How can something that is supposed to be about love, goodness and truth (if that's what spirituality is) evoke such violent reactions when questioned? Music is important but it can also become a drug, a refuge, a soporific, and that's not spirituality. Mess with my soporific and I turn nasty.I do like the mysticism and spirituality of particular sorts of jazz. This is a good thing. It just goes to show the depth of feeling and importance of this music. Listening to John Coltrane or certain records of Miles Davis can be like a religious experience. It is really that great.
But is what you're describing love? It's the same conversation. Love that turns to hate and violence is not love. Violence is not necessarily physical, it can manifest as anger, vengeance, spite, all kinds of stuff. And they say 'It's because I love the music'.There is this thing where people love music and the musicians who make it, and feel inclined to defend it against people who do not understand it
I doubt if they love anything at all, let alone music. What they love is the pleasure it gives them. They love the feeling, the sensation it gives them and when it's disturbed they go potty!
Then why identify so closely with these players, who are only human like you, and with probably more faults, so that a criticism of them is an insult to you?The idea that I enter the same league of a great musician simply by loving their work and defending them is twee and risible. I think it's more a sickness what you are saying, which evinces total lack of understanding of what motivates music lovers.
What you identify with becomes part of you. A person, for example, identifies with their country and says 'I love my country'. But when it's criticised or threatened they get extremely angry and are happy to go to war and kill for it.
Look at what you wrote:
Loving their work is one thing and defending them is another. They're two separate things. What makes you think they can't defend themselves if they need to? Why do you assume they need YOU to defend them against something? Because then you become important, it's very simple.great musician simply by loving their work and defending them
Actually, you're not defending them, you don't even know them. What you're defending is the thing you've identified with. You're defending yourself because you are the sum of your various identifications.
-
Coming back to this young saxophonist who doesn't like WS.
He is not an amateur.He was rambling as if he didn't know the work of WS.
It's depressing.
To tell the truth, this young man plays nicely in his own style.
Best
Kris
-
I went to music school for a year, just to get a grounding in harmony and theory and whatnot.
Not one teacher there ever said that contemporary jazz harmony is a set of ‘rules’! It was taught as something you need to know, and we did exercises to demonstrate our knowledge of it… but it was never said that these were rules you’re not allowed to break. Rather, it was always conveyed that these ‘rules’ exist because they SOUND GOOD.
We were taken through it step by step. Memorize a particular half-dozen chord patterns because these work with, and exist in, lots of the music we will be studying along with lots of what you already know. Then learn why those patterns function as they do. Now learn how to write a simple melody, and use these patterns to harmonize it.
Now expand into chord substitutions, then into secondary dominants, etc… once you have demonstrated understanding of these things, now let’s move into the “new theory” of Barry Harris and begin to understand that.
Now listen to Ron Carter and Sun Ra, and understand why - once you know these things - you can break these ‘rules’ any time you and the other musicians and the audience agree that it’s OK to do so.
-
Sounds like a pretty good school to me. Very clear curriculum.
-
I don't think theory helps the teacher so much as it helps the student. It is a stepping stone to explain how things work to the outsider. A decent teacher can play jazz already most of the time. Jazz, and in particular bebop harmony, has become so popular and influential world wide that it attracts students and musicians from all over the world now days, many with minimal friction to actual jazz music. They need some way to start the journey and understand how things work in this music. Hence, the set of rules. I mean, Bach and classical theory are a big part of jazz, and it helps knowing them, at least the jazz versions. Then you can add everything else on top, from basic to advanced. Even playing a b9 over a maj7 chord is a jazz rule, as is breaking any rule if you can make it sound good and justified.
The whole point of theory is to help you understand the real music and how musicians approach it. Then you forget it, and only remember it if you 're actually teaching it to someone. Unless it's your main thing of course, which for some players it is.
-
You did say that. Originally Posted by ragman1
Believe me, defending great musicians against people such as yourself on an internet forum does not make me feel important lol. I'm not defending the music because the person who made it might have a breakdown, I'm defending it because I love it. Probably a futile endeavour, not likely to make me feel particularly important. Originally Posted by ragman1
I'm not sure there has ever been a baying mob of Miles Davis fans out to attack anyone who doesn't share their love of his music lol. Are you deliberately being funny and daft? Originally Posted by ragman1
Well, speak for yourself. Again you appear to be a invoking a totally fictional scenario of violent jazz fans who turn nasty if anyone criticises their idols. Do you have any proof that this hilarious scenario has some sort of grounding in reality? Last time I checked there was not one facet of my love for Coltrane that manifests in any kind of hateful activity. Originally Posted by ragman1
See above. When has a jazz fan's love of the music turned violent etc.? I want some evidence for these outlandish claims! Originally Posted by ragman1
Well, I think they can't defend themselves because they're mostly dead. And, once again, wasting my time with people who spout twaddle on an internet forum does not make me feel important. It is sort of funny engaging with someone such as yourself who is so delusional but the feeling it elicits from me is not one of importance. I guess it just passes the time while I take a break from practising. Originally Posted by ragman1
-
He will always be the guy who said “F Wayne Shorter”.
And defended it by claiming to be standing for the mythical real jazz.
Gatekeepers should open gates.
-
In general, jazz musicians should be open to the achievements and playing of their other colleagues.
I mean professional musicians.
After all, the whole jazz and its development was based on that.
Someone was young and a beginner copied or imitated his idol.
He learned from his idol because he appreciated him.
Jazz theory is a kind of continuation of the phenomenon called jazz.
You can often hear musicians complain about the fact that they played with someone outstanding, saying: 'I learned a lot from him'...
-
I've had a lot of these kinds of conversations on the internet with people over the years and one thing I can tell you. When they start in with the personal stuff instead of the subject in hand it's time to go. Have fun :-) Originally Posted by James W
-
You? Originally Posted by ragman1
*gasp*
Perish the thought.
-
-
Oh, I missed this one. Originally Posted by joe2758
Said, maybe, but no. I won't make a list because it might start looking like I really care, that I'm moaning, or complaining, or feeling put upon, or victimised, etc. Which I don't at all. On the contrary, I've heard it all before so --!
And I still don't care for cacophonous music. It isn't music anyway, it's just noise, although it can be quite artistically put together. But each to their own.
I read somewhere that some free jazz was playing at some club and the people tumbled out afterwards 'drunk, high, and they loved it'. That's fairly accurate. Which just goes to show that everything's okay if you're in the right mood, I guess. But you could say the same thing about punk or other extreme types of music. Etc, etc.
I also read somewhere that Ornette Coleman (I think it was) was playing his stuff somewhere and was physically assaulted by some jazz community people. And also completely eviscerated by the critics later.
So, yes, it did, and does, go on. One might ask why music, or jazz in particular, evokes such strong reactions in people. I mean, it's hardly a very important part of life, is it? But they've made it enormously important.
To me that says there's something missing somewhere, wouldn't you?
-
You? Originally Posted by ragman1
*gasp*
Perish the thought.
-
This is hilarious. You think people who love jazz have something missing somewhere... Why do you even post on this forum? Originally Posted by ragman1
-
[QUOTE=ragman1;1462869]Oh, I missed this one.
Said, maybe, but no. I won't make a list because it might start looking like I really care, that I'm moaning, or complaining, or feeling put upon, or victimised, etc. Which I don't at all. On the contrary, I've heard it all before so --!
/QUOTE]
That doesn't really jive with this:
I think it's incredible that jazz, simply a particular kind of music, has become like politics and religion, religion especially. Say anything against their blessed leader or their blasted prophet and they will, literally, burn, torture and kill you. It's insane, but then the world's like that.
it's all about wanting to be a big shot. By defending actual big shots by inference you enter the same league. It's a sickness.
The context of that was you feeling ganged up on for expressing your opinion. The worst that can be claimed is a few implied you opinion is "wrong." of course it's not wrong, but it doesn't warrant a comparison to the Crusades or major ego maniac character flaws
-
Possibly before the internet? Before the internet, information wasn't homogenized, so musicians learned differently and their approaches would be more discrete. There was still knowledge back then tho. Originally Posted by kris
-
That is for sure. But knowledge can be constantly developed and improved. Originally Posted by Strat-itis
New systems are created or old ones are improved.
-
I listened to The Beatles when I was 12 years old and I even liked it. My parents bought me fashionable shoes and first guitar ala "Gibson". Originally Posted by Shamrock
But then jazz appeared in my interests.I found that this is the music I love to play.
-
No, I said the opposite (which you quoted yourself in your post): Originally Posted by joe2758
'...or victimised, etc. Which I don't at all. On the contrary, I've heard it all before so --!'
I don't think 'I'm being ganged up on', I think 'What we have here is a dangerous group mindset'.
-
I call it the "farrier effect". A farrier shoes horses. Every farrier I've ever met says every other farrier in their A.O is doing it wrong unless the farrier being discussed is someone the farrier you're speaking with apprenticed under. There is some level of competition involved. Originally Posted by kris
In general, jazz musicians should be open to the achievements and playing of their other colleagues.
I mean professional musicians.
After all, the whole jazz and its development was based on that.
Someone was young and a beginner copied or imitated his idol.
He learned from his idol because he appreciated him.
Jazz theory is a kind of continuation of the phenomenon called jazz.
You can often hear musicians complain about the fact that they played with someone outstanding, saying: 'I learned a lot from him'...
I think anyone heavily invested into jazz, blues, or shoeing horses is going to have strong preferences and may react poorly to new, different, or alternative methods. Now that jazz is basically "university music" there is an established form with "rules" and norms, and anyone pushing that envelope can expect pushback though it may be in a veiled form, rather than outright hostility. A gig lost, musicians who won't take a gig, clubs who won't book, etc. It's something that I think can be expected, though it may or may not be the right thing to do to someone.
-
I'm very surprised by the fact that young musicians at concerts or jam sessions use mobile phones these days.
They don't know the tunes or just look at themselves in their phones like in mirrors.
-
Yes … the young musicians do this. It’s the young ones. Originally Posted by kris
I'm very surprised by the fact that young musicians at concerts or jam sessions use mobile phones these days.
They don't know the tunes or just look at themselves in their phones like in mirrors.
-
Ethan Iverson: Originally Posted by James W
Conventional wisdom suggests that Tyner was Coltrane’s disciple. This is true, but it also true that Coltrane got a lot from Tyner. In one interview with Bob Dawbarn, Coltrane said, “Tyner plays some things on the piano, but I don’t know what they are.” For the big band album Africa/Brass, Coltrane told his arranger Eric Dolphy to get the voicings from Tyner.
Coltrane also said of Tyner: “He’s sort of the one who gives me wings and lets me take off from the ground from time to time”.
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions