Album Rating: 2.5

uh...but less so than classical music. which was my point. there's tons of shit you do in jazz that isn't considered kosher by traditional music theory because it draws a lot more on musical traditions not rooted in western classical music.

Album Rating: 4.0

To Pimp A Butterfly prepared me for this

Album Rating: 5.0

it's not that you can't enjoy jazz like a bloody drongo, you could be a peasant archer that has lived your whole life in a pastoral setting and can't tell shit from piss, but find a lot of enjoyment in jazz for not very educated reasons (uijt sound GUD!)

but you get a lot more depth for the music if you have a background in it. Classical is a great and extreme example



say you're listening to Beethoven's 5th symphony, you can recognize the emotive power in it, sure you can, you can recognize the metamorphic progress as the exposition develops and talk about darkness-to-light doodoo. But you don't know that the 8 note unit of the famous "fate" motif outlines the pitches of G, E flat, F and D and from there the whole of theme 1 and the modulating bridge is actually just beethoven exploring permutations of that motif. Guess what happens at the horn call? It's E flat, E flat F, B flat. It's the first motif being stretched out at either end. The E flat and the F are the same, but there is a wider space in pitch between the 1st and 4th notes. So the horn call is literally a 3rd generation of the first motif. Guess what happens at the 2nd theme? It's an inverted horn call, instead of going down in pitch it goes up. So you get this logic and sensibility from musical underpinnings, it's like a storyline, the whole piece is unified through this motific development.



This is concrete stuff that deepens your appreciation of the music or indeed criticism of it. It makes you more qualified to try to make objective claims about it. What's the problem here? No one's saying you can't enjoy a jolly chat with your black nana about jazz, go for it!

Album Rating: 5.0

Yeah of course, I agree, but I think you have to grant there are varying degrees here.



When you have a genre, which like Solbrave says, has pieces that are simply intended as technical exercises, you have to grant this is a very technical type of music and objectively more technical than ke$ha. Having the background in it or knowing more shit about it matters more than with Pop right? There are extremes in music.

Album Rating: 5.0

Yes, I agree jazz is not incapable of being viewed as a piece of art like any other, that has never been the issue. Not all jazz is purely technical exercises and the most important albums are surely not, but it is an instrumental genre at it's core and it is intimidating to analyze with any sort of authority without basic music theory and you can't say the same for a simple pop song.

" it is intimidating to analyze with any sort of authority without basic music theory"
you can discuss what you like about it and how it affects you

for example, piglet, what do you like about this album?

Album Rating: 5.0

yes everything hahahah

Album Rating: 5.0

Yeah fairo, it's proving that people can listen and enjoy jazz album immensely and then proceed to review it. could review this album as well and talk in a general air about how good the production sounds, how good the instrumentation sounds. Absolutely you can discuss what you like about it and how it affects you. I was saying that in the absolute beginning, but it's essentially more intimidating, there's so much more scope and detail. Being in a jazz band would help you really analyze it more than being in a pop band and analyzing a pop album would be.

yo piglet i dont want to get into it too much because u are tl'dr'ing so hard it hurts my scrotum but i just want to mention that you are dumb as all fuck that is all goodnight

Album Rating: 4.5

What Johnny said. [2]



Potsy raised what is probably the most important point in this discussion on the previous page. At the end of the day, everything in music theory has a purpose with regard the emotions it evokes / colours it portrays / atmosphere it creates etc. That means people educated and uneducated in the theory can have discussions because it's mostly about what the music evokes. I place a lot more value on a jazz/classical review or discussion that doesn't delve into the specifics of music theory because if you do delve into that, you're simply pigeon-holing your audience and discounting the opinions of the greater portion of the listening community.

Album Rating: 4.5

Just jamming now for the first time too, what a fantastic album.

Album Rating: 5.0

Okay so to boil it down, I say jazz and classical and the dimension of understanding the musicality of it, is a very essential part to it's enjoyment

The counter to that is that all genres are like that.

My counter to that is that there are varying degrees because some music is more "technical" than others.

The counter to that is that music is entirely subjective and there is no greater or lesser in artistic value.

I'm not sure what I think about that

and my counter to that is who gives a fuck. i don't need to know what species of bird is in the background of some ambient song to know what sorta mood it instills in me, and i don't need musical theory to kick back and enjoy a jazz album.

like, I'm sure working in a brewery might give me a deeper appreciation for different types of beer, but tell me i can't appreciate it in my own way by simply enjoying it in different circumstances

Album Rating: 5.0

I never really dug classical music, it's nice to listen to on the radio while driving but I just never cared enough to check out a whole "symphony" or whatever, it just bores me after a while



Jazz on the other hand is something I've always enjoyed listening to, I just wish I had more free time to check out more jazz albums

Album Rating: 5.0

Okay, so sure you grant that a deeper understanding yields a deeper appreciation, but at the same time you can simply enjoy it. That's all i'm saying.

Potsy raised what is probably the most important point in this discussion on the previous page. At the end of the day, everything in music theory has a purpose with regard the emotions it evokes / colours it portrays / atmosphere it creates etc. That means people educated and uneducated in the theory can have discussions because it's mostly about what the music evokes. I place a lot more value on a jazz/classical review or discussion that doesn't delve into the specifics of music theory because if you do delve into that, you're simply pigeon-holing your audience and discounting the opinions of the greater portion of the listening community.

Album Rating: 5.0

Okay but even if I wasn't being broad and were not misrepresenting a genre as a whole, you still are not opposed to the view that there are varying degrees of technicality?



And i only agree with what ComeToDaddy said, it what's I've been saying from the very beginning.

I have a hard time listening to music without analyzing the theory behind it after four years of having to do it on a daily basis. It's incredibly frustrating but I'm sure I'll kick the habit with some time away from college.

Album Rating: 5.0

Don't mix "technical" with sheer technicality though, that's not the thing. Depth is probably a better word.

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

But then again, the technicality of an album isn't the only factor that makes an album great. Look at DragonForce; while their technical prowess is hard to deny, their music doesn't have the personality or the personal touch to make it come alive. I feel a personality on this record, a soul, that keeps this from just being a technical showoff.