Does jazz music's spontaneity and improvisation make it a viable competitor to art music? While it's more difficult to write a masterpiece than to create a masterful solo, jazz has a completely uncontrollable and almost tribal feel to it a lot of the time- especially when the performer keeps on daring and daring and daring to go further than anyone thinks they can, but they keep reaching a new peak. Now, as I said, art music seems to be far more complex, far more difficult, and far more artistic a lot of the time. But it seems hard to compare art music and jazz as though the latter is easy popular music. It seems like there really was something unique about it, and a certain kind of raw power that comes from listening to a person solo over strange changes at breakneck speeds or resolve a particularly challenging solo beautifully. It can also be fascinating to see how the musicians interact without the interaction being dictated by one person. Everybody tends to be their own master. I suppose art music tends to be like a well written poem or novel and jazz is like an intense argument or conversation.
there is no competition to art music
jazz, pop, and art music should be treated differently and analyzed with different mindsets. they're ultimately trying to achieve the same end (to be art, whatever that entails), but you're narrow minded if you think every genre of music demands the same type of interpretation.
>guitarist rips the unholy fuck out of his solo at 26:00
>hear violin, excited for some mahavishnu type shreddding
>wait, there wasn't a violinist up there
>its the fucking sax fucker with his nerdy ass wind keytar
Why does everything have to fit into your neat, pre-defined categories?
The term "art music" has always been vague and people seldom agree on an exact definition.
Comparing jazz improvisation to a through-composed piece of music in these terms is pointless as well. They are two very different aesthetics that require different skills and ultimately different goals.
Frankly, I feel bad for anyone who can't appreciate both and feels the need to compare them in such a shallow manner.
I see what you're saying OP. I agree that (in strictly musical terms) jazz is definitely on a higher intellectual plane than 'pop' music. And although classical purists will say that improvisation is childish or barbaric or whatever, it is noteworthy to point out that luminaries like Bach and Mozart originally included improvisation in their scores, for instance sometimes the slow middle movement of a work would simply direct the performer to improvise the entire movement on the spot.
Pardon me for being grossly superficial but I'll be damned if the guitarist and pianist aren't the dorkiest looking people I've seen all day. Though I guess I shouldn't judge since they could obviously play circles around me at my current skill level.
Almost all noteworthy composers up to the 20th century valued improvisation as an important skill and studied, taught, and performed improvisation.
Sadly this tradition has mostly died out in the classical world.
Yeah electronic wind instruments should be banned. Not a fan of Metheny's guitar synth either.
>They are two very different aesthetics
>that require different skills
Both generally require music theory and a lot of playing & listening experience
>and ultimately different goals
Both I would hope aim to create a worthwhile piece of music
ya, masturbation is a problem. i do believe though that its interesting to hear what melodies someone will put over top a chord progression, that's where new ideas happen. not so much into the whole a million notes per second thing or crazy scales, but the point is that they are trying to extend the limit of what's possible tonally, rhythmically, etc. its like any good improviser is trying to "jump out" of his instrument. fast is not necessarily impressive. its the creativity and originality in "phrasing" something as only you can, and has never been heard before
>Actually being so much of an egomaniac as to consider improvisation solely an act of masturbation and not a contribution to the musical whole
>mfw fourth rate band geeks are too white to improvise and lack the discipline to learn and instead resort to bashing an entire established and legitimate art form in order to compensate for their own creative and technical inadequacies
Unfortunately you guys are a little late for the negro music segregationist bandwagon. At this point there is literally no difference between you fucks and holocaust deniers.
then I'm sure you'd have no problem doing a Roman numeral analysis of this simple chord progression right?
or are you going to make some idiotic excuse like always?
"Art music" is overblown pop music for people who want to feel sophisticated/superior while still listening to the same bullshit everyone else does. It's the urban outfitters of music. Anyone who thinks that bullshit is better than jazz just doesn't know enough about music to understand it.
this any day...
but most jazz artists are guilty of more masturbation than actually improvising great melodies or having great phrasing. like John Coltrane's improvisations are monotonous wank a lot of the time. Jarrett, Herbie, Miles, Shorter, Pastorius, Zawinul, Adderley, Getz, Desmond and Parker are my faves.
>Providing credibility is a waste of time
You're already on /mu/, you can't spend a minute of time that was already going to be wasted?
>Roman numeral analysis addressed in the first year of theory at any school
Obvious pseudo musician is obvious
What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in musical study academy, and I’ve studied numerous music theories, and I have analyzed over 300 Bach operas. I am trained in musical note reading and I’m the top composer of real music in my county. You are nothing to me but just another masturbator. I will compose you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with listening to improvised music? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my league of extraordinary art music connesouers and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for some musical genius, maggot. The music that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your jazz. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can read music notes anywhere, anytime, and I can write music in two staves, and that’s just with staff paper. Not only am I extensively trained in music theories, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the Western Canon and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will compose fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.
You are clearly underage and too young to understand human nature.
When I waste my time, it is MY decision. When you waste my time, it is partly YOUR decision.
One is dictated by myself, the other is not.
For a liberal, you sure are ignorant of your own ideology.
I start doing basic crap for you brats, and next you'll be ordering vocaroos, video recordings, and a private show.
I'm not your bitch, I have nothing to prove.
My sight reading isn't fantastic due to my own poor sight.
I don't state opinions, I state facts.
No art is masturbatory, hence why jazz isn't art.