Do you have to analyze jazz to appreciate it?

[william251082]

this is freakin' hot stuff!!! sorry i gotta post this! oh man!

feature=PlayList&p=102376F03478E4CD&index=34

[jazhombie]

Do you have to analyze sex to appreciate it?

Do you have to dissect Jody Santamaria's face to see its beauty?

Do you have to compute the diameter of a rainbow's arch to know its beauty?

Do you have to know the exact measurements of a woman's breast to appreciate it?

Analysis... blewhhh.

, nice one..hahaha analyzing breasts!

[dominant_chord2005]

I have watched countless number of musicians who strived to learn jazz by buying books and downloading scales, chords, and riffs and even songs on the net( myself included) just to fully understand jazz and its perspectives. I agree that playing this kind of musical language is no walk in the park for it takes a lot of listening, analyzing and in psychic_sushi's word's, choosing which notes to use and when does it become applicable. Sad to say, not all of us are born to play jazz.

Then there's this guy, who doesnt even know how to play a guitar or a harmonica at the least, but was weaned on jazz as if it were his vernacular.  Come a day when his knowledge on the subject matter was put to test, he would still come out as the winner even if a jazz prodigy was there to antagonize his credibility.  Now the question is , who understands it better?

I know I am no guru in terms of this subject. Just like everyone, I'm still learning the ropes of the trade.  Thanks to psychic sushi' guitar wizardry he's able to guide me towards the right path. He's like the Jesus of Jazz, guiding new blood to the light through his refreshing ideas on the musical lingo.  I just dont know if people in this forum would agree but I appreciated jazz because of how it felt and not on how it was played.  I agree to that saying that the execution of the notes in the song are rendered useless if it has no feel or doesnt leave that mark to the listener. Whatever Coltrane, Miles Davis, Carlton and the rest of those jazz greats have accomplished, though established through years of mastery of the instrument, was not possible without the vital element of their playing, w/c is its emotional value. Jazz solos /pieces no matter how fast or slow must be channelled properly as if firing an arrow to the heart of the enemy to convey a message and it doesnt entail that much mastery of the craft as long as the message is conveyed and interpreted by the senses. Experience wise I have jammed with a lot of guys and one thing I've asked myself is if I am conveying the right message since  I dont have much theoretical background on the subject matter. I have heard the best players in this city play and what i can conclude is it's all in the feeling.

I believe most of us fall on the 2nd example. Appreciating jazz is easier than actually analyzing it which makes it more complicated; though a thorough understanding it would be its end result.

Just my two cents.

[pcalmaden]

...it bugs me when people try to analyze jazz as an intellectual theorem. It's not. It's feeling.
~ Bill Evans

[Lahed92801]

we dance around the circle and suppose
the secret sits in the middle and knows

SIR ANG DEEP! 

Ano point ng ANY KIND OF MUSIC, not just jazz, if you don't feel it or enjoy it.

think about it

[jazhombie]

i still dig zappa's way of explaining things!!--just 'shut up and play yer guitar!!'

[william251082]

i still digs zappa's way of explaining things!!--just 'shut up and play yer guitar!!'

ky zappa ko natutunan kung gaano kahalaga ang GUTS s pagiging musician, hahahahhaah

[tronixx42]

Re: Do you have to analyze jazz to appreciate it?

I dont know why i like jazz and i dont have to appreciate it, plain and simple, but im a rocker.

[strummer]

yep. it's like sense of humor. you don't need to think to be able to laugh out loud and feel good.

besides thinking about it too much takes out most of the fun.  .

likewise, as free flowing as it sounds like; i suppose it needs to be listened to that way too. With the least distraction < i.e. analyzing it >, you'll have the best jazz experience.

[william251082]

i'll let miles say something about this or whatever, this is a good watch, totally worth your time.

feature=PlayList&p=9CC4A629CD5B3EFF&index=6

[jeff_proX40]

jazz is all about music and lifestyle. you dont need to analyze it. Live it! its the best way to understand it. hehehe thats it. Funky Karma here!!!

[Deacon Blues]

Why does it seem like a lot of people are so averse to the idea of 'analyzing' jazz - or any kind of music for that matter?

It doesn't have to be an intellectual theorem or scholarly discourse.

Analyzing music can be anything as simple as taking mental notes of the immediate impressions that you get when you listen to any piece of music. You don't even have to read music to do that.

Surely, there MUST be some qualities that make a jazz piece 'jazzier,' 'hipper,' 'more coherent,' 'more melodic', etc. than others. That being so, wouldn't we want to know what they are? Like, what makes Coltrane 'jazzier' than Kenny G? Or do you 'feel' their music with the same unclouded judgment.

That doesn't kill the music, does it?

Wouldn’t it be nifty if we can identify those same qualities, internalize them and imbibe them into our playing so that it can help steer us in the direction we want?

Wouldn't you agree that a lot of 'bad jazz' was made under the pretext of 'feeling?'

Otherwise, someone might as well take a 2x2 wooden plank and ram it up and down on all 88 keys of a grand piano for five minutes and call it jazz - just because he 'feels' it .. 

[jazhombie]

Otherwise, someone might as well take a 2x2 wooden plank and ram it up and down on all 88 keys of a grand piano for five minutes and call it jazz - just because he 'feels' it .. 

... that'll be cecil taylor with peter brotzmann..

[william251082]

Why does it seem like a lot of people are so averse to the idea of 'analyzing' jazz - or any kind of music for that matter?

It doesn't have to be an intellectual theorem or scholarly discourse.

Analyzing music can be anything as simple as taking mental notes of the immediate impressions that you get when you listen to any piece of music. You don't even have to read music to do that.

Surely, there MUST be some qualities that make a jazz piece 'jazzier,' 'hipper,' 'more coherent,' 'more melodic', etc. than others. That being so, wouldn't we want to know what they are? Like, what makes Coltrane 'jazzier' than Kenny G? Or do you 'feel' their music with the same unclouded judgment.

That doesn't kill the music, does it?

Wouldn’t it be nifty if we can identify those same qualities, internalize them and imbibe them into our playing so that it can help steer us in the direction we want?

Wouldn't you agree that a lot of 'bad jazz' was made under the pretext of 'feeling?'

Otherwise, someone might as well take a 2x2 wooden plank and ram it up and down on all 88 keys of a grand piano for five minutes and call it jazz - just because he 'feels' it .. 



dos por dos hahahahaaaha

[aya_yuson]

Speaking only for myself, friend Tinnie...

... to quote/paraphrase D.T. Suzuki --- thought overheated loses its oomph.

[william251082]

describe colors to a blind person...

[jazhombie]

describe colors to a blind person...

yeah... i'll describe black to them, it's easy.. hehe

[william251082]

yeah... i'll describe black to them, it's easy.. hehe

black and white were not considered as colors...

[jazzhole04]

i think music in general shouldn't be just for the musician...nuff said.

taena...I LOVE JAZZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[rjtorres]

i know i'm going to pay for this, pero this thought made me wonder.. the question is if we need to understand to appreciate it better? Well, my answer is yes. I'm not saying that it's the only way to appreciate it better, but it could be a way.

but if the question is do we need it to appreciate it? No. I appreciated jazz way before i even knew them.

let's take a joke for example. If you don't really understand the joke, how can you laugh at it? or how about a solution for a programming problem, how can you see the beauty in how he used different mathematical elements in order to know which is the shortest path of getting from point A to point Z if you don't really understand the shortest path algorithim? I think music is the same in this case.

i'll base some of my personal experiences here.

I watched a diana krall concert live before when i was a kid. I fell in love with the music and i tried to learn it. After a few years, i (kind of) get how the music is created - well of course i listened to it most of the time and tried to learn through ear. And i think the listening in this case is also a part of gaining knowledge on music, much like listening to computer geeks talk about computer stuff all the time, after a long time you get to understand what they are talking about. Anyway, so here i am now, wishing i learned and became more knowledgable about jazz. i couldn't understand a thing before, i just knew it was beautiful, and now i know that if i get to watch that again, it'll be definitely better.

So here i think listener B understands the music better.

but then again, there is a flaw to the question - i don't think someone who is a devout jazz lover can be someone who is not knowledgable in music at the same time. if you listen to jazz long enough, you learn the different progressions, sequences, turnarounds, the diminished, the augmented, the 7th, if it's in the right pitch, if he hears the right notes - it's just that you don't know how the rest of the world calls them. well, i think i learned this way, before i gained knowledge from the internet and other people.

Anyway, just a thought - i just want to be heard. 

[jazzhole04]

if your a listener you dont have to understand any history of whatevur genre music you listen too.

but if you're the musician who plays it.....now there's the difference.

[butoyonly]

well in my opinion..being a good player means your a good listener, it's like comparing coaches in basketball teams..like one who technically knew basketball but haven't played at all and one who relied on pure experience..same with listeners and players 

[jazzhole04]

well in my opinion..being a good player means your a good listener, it's like comparing coaches in basketball teams..like one who technically knew basketball but haven't played at all and one who relied on pure experience..same with listeners and players 

re: Do you have to analyze jazz to appreciate it? NOT NECESARILLY

re:Do you have to analyze jazz to PLAY it? YES

you cant play jazz without learning it.

pwede cgro...coverband ng jazz songs. pero thats not gonna work uless ypu hit the books and learn learn learn

[jazhombie]

for me, jams pwede na at application ng onting theory, overanalyzing-nalo kang mababano..just play , hayaan mo yung iba ang mag analyze ng ginagawa mo..

[william251082]

analysis is in your practice room, playing from the heart when performing...
LISTEN, COMMUNICATE AND PLAY!