2. misc-audio
  3. 169601-165740

Is improvisational jazz to impressionism art as smooth jazz is to realism art?

So, I’ll acknowledge up front, I’m an engineer. Civilian and Warfighter lives can be in the balance depending on whether our company products perform as required or not. As a result, I try very hard to drive the entropic world we live in towards black and white as much as possible. I need to put order to chaos. When i look at art, impressionistic art requires a lot of mental work to make sense of. I just don't see it or get it, appreciate it or like it. I also find, as hard as i may try to enjoy improvisational jazz, that i don't get it, appreciate it, or like it. Instead, I love Realism art and instrumental smooth jazz!!
Reading from Audiogon forum pages for a couple of years now, i feel like i should feel inferior because 1. I don’t appreciate the free flow of expression that is improvisational jazz and 2. I love that there is a tune and thread in smooth jazz. I love the guitar artistry of Chuck Loeb, Chris Standring, and Acoustic Alchemy; the trumpet expressions of Rick Braun, Cindy Bradley, and Chris Botti; and the bass works of Brian Bromberg. 
I’m curious if there are many others out there that equate order (or lack there-of) in their music tastes to that of their taste in the visual arts?
Also, are there many other music lovers who would rather enjoy a good smooth jazz listening session than improvisational jazz?  If so, who do you listen to?
128x128estreams
stuartk
2,872 posts
 
Sorry for the typo... the second Paul Klee quote should read: "Art should be like a holiday-- something to give a man the opportunity to see things differently and to change his point of view". 
stuartk
2,872 posts
 
One more thing... I didn't actually attempt to answer the question you posed: "Is improvisational jazz to impressionism art as smooth jazz is to realism art?"

Realism is not monolithic. Nor is abstraction.

Compare a newspaper photo to a photo by Edward Weston. 

They are arguably equally "realistic" yet what they convey varies enormously. 

I'd suggest that what's most helpful in the end is what Louis Armstrong said: "There is two kinds of music; the good and the bad". 

If we remember this, it can help us avoid getting too hung up on what's most naturally appealing to us and keep us focused instead upon what's  being communicated and the skill/invention that's on display, whatever the style.

Needless to say, this is often difficult! 

 
lg1
199 posts
 
I’ve been “around” a fair bit of visual art/discussion of visual art and I find the OP’s premise certainly rings true on a lot of levels although with a lot of room for alternative analogies…IMO the musical genre commonly known as Smooth Jazz strikes me sorta like Monet’s water lilies and a lot of Renoir’s figurative work.  Coltrane & Miles, evoke the visual art of, say, a Robert Motherwell or a Jean-Michel Basquiat to me.  It’s very subjective, of course, and who knows why one genre is one person’s cup of tea and another’s cue to turn off the sound system?  I find Smooth Jazz very likable and have recently discovered/rediscovered the rather sizable catalogue of Grover Washington Jr.’s music.  Certain moods have me listening to other subcategories of Jazz with less frequency but with equal enthusiasm.  Listened to two of Eric Dolphy’s earlier albums yesterday and plan to listen to more (Tidal) in the coming days whilst working on a fairly representational (realist) charcoal piece.
bigtwin's avatar
bigtwin
1,205 posts
 
Smooth Jazz.  An oxymoron?  
aewarren
658 posts
 
Actually a misnomer. It's neither smooth nor jazz.
But I think the OP is on to something. The elevator in my building has a picture on the wall that would qualify as realism. And smooth jazz comes from the speaker next to it.
More to discover