As it's going back a few years now, you hum it and I'll pick it up as we go along.
The point is that literally everyone except (some) hardcore Yes fans slags it off like it's the worst thing ever. But actually some of it is OK. Hence underrated.
As it's going back a few years now, you hum it and I'll pick it up as we go along.
The point is that literally everyone except (some) hardcore Yes fans slags it off like it's the worst thing ever. But actually some of it is OK. Hence underrated.
Some of it was ok but a tad self indulgent I would say.
As it's going back a few years now, you hum it and I'll pick it up as we go along.
The point is that literally everyone except (some) hardcore Yes fans slags it off like it's the worst thing ever. But actually some of it is OK. Hence underrated.
Some of it was ok but a tad self indulgent I would say.
I'm going to listen to it all the way through now.
Umm, not sure. Agree 100% with regard to Badly Drawn Boy – The Hour of Bewilderbeast - what a pile of crap. But quite enjoyed both Antony and the Johnsons – I Am a Bird Now and Elbow – The Seldom Seen Kid.
Anyway, I'm going for Is This It by The Strokes. The album title could well describe my disappointment after a piffling 36 minutes of utter bland.
I love Elbow but I think Seldom Seen Kid is maybe their third or fourth best record. Grounds for Divorce and Bones of You and Day Like This and Dear Friends and Perfect Weather to Fly are all great tunes. The other half is thoroughly Meh. A good example how half of a good album can obfuscate a mediocre half.
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
I actually gave the record another go today, couldn't get past two minutes.
There's no melody or hooks to grasp on to. Jazz music doesn't feel like it has a structure, it's just like a jam session.
To point you in the direction of jazz with what you might consider more structure, and definitely has a melody, I'd like to recommend this version of Autumn Leaves, by Chet Baker, where you have a more traditional head-solos-head structure.
Thanks for posting that, just had a listen. Did you ever get into any of the heavier stuff like Ornette Coleman's Free Jazz for example? I find it enjoyable but really need to be in the right mood for it. I also understand that I'll never have the musical knowledge and understanding to fully appreciate it.
You're welcome.
Yes - The Shape of Jazz to Come was actually one of the four albums on which I focused my dissertation - the others being Kind of Blue; Coltrane's Giant Steps; and Time Out by Dave Brubeck. In their own ways, each album was a reaction to what the artists perceived as the increasing staleness of the jazz preceding it.
I find Coleman really, really hard to get into, but he's unquestionably a genius.
"By 1959, most took for granted that their work happened within a tradition that they had inherited and that would outlive them. Coleman's re-shaping of jazz 'to come' was uncomfortable in this context. Most disquietingly of all, his music could be quite beautiful."
- Darius Brubeck, '1959: the beginning of beyond", The Cambridge Companion to Jazz.
That's the thing - it got to many jazzers on a visceral level, I guess. I always feel *something* when I hear some Ornette, but... I don't think I'll ever get *into* it properly.
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
I actually gave the record another go today, couldn't get past two minutes.
There's no melody or hooks to grasp on to. Jazz music doesn't feel like it has a structure, it's just like a jam session.
Like your honesty, Jazz deserves no more respect than Milli Vanilli. So now give 'Transfigured Night' by Arnold Schoenberg a listen for unhooking therapy.
Now Schoenberg is a composer I'm very interested in. Heard a string quartet piece that really gripped me. If anyone can recommend anything I'd be much obliged.
Sgt Pepper by The Beatles. Very few good songs and a lot of boring ones. Nowhere near as good as Revolver or Abbey Road, for me.
OK Computer by Radiohead. I love Radiohead, but this album just doesn't do it for me. Subterranean Homesick Alien, Let Down, Lucky, The Tourist, No Surprises - all boring. Electioneering isn't great either. That's too many substandard tracks for a classic album. Airbag, Paranoid Android and Karma Police are great, but three songs is not enough to make up for the rest.
And that's why music is so wonderfully subjective! Let Down in my top 5 tracks of all time. Lyrics are brilliantly thought provoking. Feel it rather than hear it.
For me, that song is so 'meh'. Absolutely love Easy Star's cover of it though, if you've heard that...
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
I actually gave the record another go today, couldn't get past two minutes.
There's no melody or hooks to grasp on to. Jazz music doesn't feel like it has a structure, it's just like a jam session.
To point you in the direction of jazz with what you might consider more structure, and definitely has a melody, I'd like to recommend this version of Autumn Leaves, by Chet Baker, where you have a more traditional head-solos-head structure.
Thanks for posting that, just had a listen. Did you ever get into any of the heavier stuff like Ornette Coleman's Free Jazz for example? I find it enjoyable but really need to be in the right mood for it. I also understand that I'll never have the musical knowledge and understanding to fully appreciate it.
You're welcome.
Yes - The Shape of Jazz to Come was actually one of the four albums on which I focused my dissertation - the others being Kind of Blue; Coltrane's Giant Steps; and Time Out by Dave Brubeck. In their own ways, each album was a reaction to what the artists perceived as the increasing staleness of the jazz preceding it.
I find Coleman really, really hard to get into, but he's unquestionably a genius.
"By 1959, most took for granted that their work happened within a tradition that they had inherited and that would outlive them. Coleman's re-shaping of jazz 'to come' was uncomfortable in this context. Most disquietingly of all, his music could be quite beautiful."
- Darius Brubeck, '1959: the beginning of beyond", The Cambridge Companion to Jazz.
That's the thing - it got to many jazzers on a visceral level, I guess. I always feel *something* when I hear some Ornette, but... I don't think I'll ever get *into* it properly.
As a song writer, in my opinion this is the bigest compliment you can give a composer. For what its worth I find 'Lonely woman' from Coleman a most romantic piece...
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
I actually gave the record another go today, couldn't get past two minutes.
There's no melody or hooks to grasp on to. Jazz music doesn't feel like it has a structure, it's just like a jam session.
Like your honesty, Jazz deserves no more respect than Milli Vanilli. So now give 'Transfigured Night' by Arnold Schoenberg a listen for unhooking therapy.
Now Schoenberg is a composer I'm very interested in. Heard a string quartet piece that really gripped me. If anyone can recommend anything I'd be much obliged.
I recomend My personal journey of discovery. It was in reverse, going from Paul Simon's to Bach via Jobim, Debussy, Chopin, Schubert, Beethoven, (a few others in between) getting stuck on Bach for many years now (intense unexplained love like for a certain football club...) That way music always made sense and my ears came along with me...
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
Because it's tuneless musical masterbation
No, it's just way over your head. Stick to the Stones and Red, Red Robin.
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
Depends what kind of jazz, what's the one called where it sounds like they're making it up as they go along, with some doris doing the "do bop" to?
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
Depends what kind of jazz, what's the one called where it sounds like they're making it up as they go along, with some doris doing the "do bop" to?
"You practice Bebop and it feels like riding a push bike on the freeway. You finally able to play it, and it feels like driving a Porsche round the car park..."
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
Must admit, I love a bit of Jazz, but there are so many genres. I just love the atmosphere in Ronnie's for example. There are Jazz clubs in every city in the World - must show that there are a heck of a lot of people who like it.
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
Because it's tuneless musical masterbation
Tuneless? Do you mean:
1) there is no tune;
2) are you disillusioned with, for instance:
- the modality of Kind of Blue - the free-form stylings of Ornette Coleman - through-composition/non head-solo-head stuff;
3) or, do you think that as a musical language, the jazz vocabulary is inaccessible to most (i.e. the diverse range of scales and modes used), and therefore sounds incomprehensible ergo "tuneless?"
If 1, then please refer to that version of Autumn Leaves I posted. It's literally tune-solos-tune.
If 2, then I'd place you in the John Mehegan bracket of (and I massively paraphrase): "jazz [according to certain criteria] can't progress and anything outside of head-solos-head can no longer be considered jazz", and that you think anything reactionary to the norm of 32-bar heads isn't worth listening to.
If 3, then fair play. It can take a bit of listening to unpick jazz vocabulary, and if you're not comfortable with that, then fair enough.
----------------------------------
At least you concede it's musical, though.
----------------------------------
In this context, what do you mean by masturbation? (I presume it's not literal, anyway.)
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
Because it's tuneless musical masterbation
Tuneless? Do you mean:
1) there is no tune;
2) are you disillusioned with, for instance:
- the modality of Kind of Blue - the free-form stylings of Ornette Coleman - through-composition/non head-solo-head stuff;
3) or, do you think that as a musical language, the jazz vocabulary is inaccessible to most (i.e. the diverse range of scales and modes used), and therefore sounds incomprehensible ergo "tuneless?"
If 1, then please refer to that version of Autumn Leaves I posted. It's literally tune-solos-tune.
If 2, then I'd place you in the John Mehegan bracket of (and I massively paraphrase): "jazz [according to certain criteria] can't progress and anything outside of head-solos-head can no longer be considered jazz", and that you think anything reactionary to the norm of 32-bar heads isn't worth listening to.
If 3, then fair play. It can take a bit of listening to unpick jazz vocabulary, and if you're not comfortable with that, then fair enough.
----------------------------------
At least you concede it's musical, though.
----------------------------------
In this context, what do you mean by masturbation? (I presume it's not literal, anyway.)
music isn't an intellectual process, not for me at least. It is emotional. If it doesn't "hit" me as Marley said then it's not working. If I need to "unpick" it then it's not doing it's job. Like any art, if it needs to be "explained" then it's failed.
I really want to like this record, but jazz music isn't good for my equilibrium.
Isn't good for your equilibrium? How do you mean? I'm genuinely intrigued - as a huge jazz fan and practitioner, I always wonder why people can't get into it.
Because it's tuneless musical masterbation
Tuneless? Do you mean:
1) there is no tune;
2) are you disillusioned with, for instance:
- the modality of Kind of Blue - the free-form stylings of Ornette Coleman - through-composition/non head-solo-head stuff;
3) or, do you think that as a musical language, the jazz vocabulary is inaccessible to most (i.e. the diverse range of scales and modes used), and therefore sounds incomprehensible ergo "tuneless?"
If 1, then please refer to that version of Autumn Leaves I posted. It's literally tune-solos-tune.
If 2, then I'd place you in the John Mehegan bracket of (and I massively paraphrase): "jazz [according to certain criteria] can't progress and anything outside of head-solos-head can no longer be considered jazz", and that you think anything reactionary to the norm of 32-bar heads isn't worth listening to.
If 3, then fair play. It can take a bit of listening to unpick jazz vocabulary, and if you're not comfortable with that, then fair enough.
----------------------------------
At least you concede it's musical, though.
----------------------------------
In this context, what do you mean by masturbation? (I presume it's not literal, anyway.)
music isn't an intellectual process, not for me at least. It is emotional. If it doesn't "hit" me as Marley said then it's not working. If I need to "unpick" it then it's not doing it's job. Like any art, if it needs to be "explained" then it's failed.
A totally fair enough opinion - I reckon jazz works viscerally (otherwise I wouldn't be so keen on it), but knowledge of the context gives it that much more import.
For a non-jazz example of what I'm getting at, I had that sort of experience when listening to God Only Knows. When I first listened to it, it gripped me emotionally - and when I listened to it after reading up on Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys, it hit me intellectually, too.
Then again, as it was my conscious choice to study music, I guess I can't get away from it!
Comments
Yes - The Shape of Jazz to Come was actually one of the four albums on which I focused my dissertation - the others being Kind of Blue; Coltrane's Giant Steps; and Time Out by Dave Brubeck. In their own ways, each album was a reaction to what the artists perceived as the increasing staleness of the jazz preceding it.
I find Coleman really, really hard to get into, but he's unquestionably a genius.
"By 1959, most took for granted that their work happened within a tradition that they had inherited and that would outlive them. Coleman's re-shaping of jazz 'to come' was uncomfortable in this context. Most disquietingly of all, his music could be quite beautiful."
- Darius Brubeck, '1959: the beginning of beyond", The Cambridge Companion to Jazz.
That's the thing - it got to many jazzers on a visceral level, I guess. I always feel *something* when I hear some Ornette, but... I don't think I'll ever get *into* it properly.
Absolutely love Easy Star's cover of it though, if you've heard that...
For what its worth I find 'Lonely woman' from Coleman a most romantic piece...
Pink Floyd - The Wall
James Blunt - Anything by him
Pink Floyd - Animals
spelling !!
Just about anything by Frank Zappa. Never really got him.
1) there is no tune;
2) are you disillusioned with, for instance:
- the modality of Kind of Blue
- the free-form stylings of Ornette Coleman
- through-composition/non head-solo-head stuff;
3) or, do you think that as a musical language, the jazz vocabulary is inaccessible to most (i.e. the diverse range of scales and modes used), and therefore sounds incomprehensible ergo "tuneless?"
If 1, then please refer to that version of Autumn Leaves I posted. It's literally tune-solos-tune.
If 2, then I'd place you in the John Mehegan bracket of (and I massively paraphrase): "jazz [according to certain criteria] can't progress and anything outside of head-solos-head can no longer be considered jazz", and that you think anything reactionary to the norm of 32-bar heads isn't worth listening to.
If 3, then fair play. It can take a bit of listening to unpick jazz vocabulary, and if you're not comfortable with that, then fair enough.
----------------------------------
At least you concede it's musical, though.
----------------------------------
In this context, what do you mean by masturbation? (I presume it's not literal, anyway.)
For a non-jazz example of what I'm getting at, I had that sort of experience when listening to God Only Knows. When I first listened to it, it gripped me emotionally - and when I listened to it after reading up on Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys, it hit me intellectually, too.
Then again, as it was my conscious choice to study music, I guess I can't get away from it!