Kind of Blue

I like all kinds,of musical Jazz,just hate that one note ,crazy play whatever you can jazz....it makes no scents. 

I guess its FREE Jazz....sorry it's just noise...

I don't understand the more extreme reactions to "labelling" genres of Jazz expressed here.  

It can be very helpful to know which sub-genre a particular recording falls into, simply for the sake of finding other recordings one might enjoy. This is especially true for those who've just begun to dip their toes into Jazz.  

it doesn't have to be anything more than this. 

No reason to get one's undies in a knot!    

The usefullness of labels is evident for classyfying music files by genre, instruments, names, countries, eras etc ...

But in my musical habits they means no more... Only the musician name count and had real value ...

The point is over any useful labels only the musicians matter as musicians...

Jimi Hendrix as Bach is a musician... The best  and more useful labelling if we keep only one is the musicians name ... For me...

I don’t understand the more extreme reactions to "labelling" genres of Jazz expressed here.

It can be very helpful to know which sub-genre a particular recording falls into, simply for the sake of finding other recordings one might enjoy. This is especially true for those who’ve just begun to dip their toes into Jazz.

it doesn’t have to be anything more than this.

No reason to get one’s undies in a knot!

@stuartk I’ll clarify.
You may have experienced this scenario one or several times in your life:
Someone says, “you should check out (insert artist name). You’d like it. They are (insert genre/sub-genre label, a label that may or may not have one or several hyphens).” You say, “ok. Will do,” then go and check out said artist, only to find the label/genre used to describe it seems wildly inappropriate. You say, “what? THIS is (genre/sub-genre label)?!?! This doesn’t sound like (genre/sub-genre label)!!”

On top of being lazy, conformist, and disrespectful to the specificity of an artist’s personal and individual expression, that type language and communication is not even useful, practical or helpful.  
It’s the opposite - very often, it’s just unhelpful and inefficient communication.

For instance, on this very thread, a perfect example is shown of the unhelpful, inefficient communication that occurs when this sort of label-mongering is flippantly (and with an almost indignant air of authority) employed.  
This was actually uttered, “(Tubular Bells by Mike Oldfield) is firmly in the prog-rock genre…”    
“Prog-rock,” is a term most commonly associated with music like Yes, Rush, Emerson, Lake & Palmer, Jethro Tull, etc.   
Imagine a person (understandably) being under the impression that “prog-rock” sounds like Yes, Rush, Emerson, Lake & Palmer and Jethro Tull.  
Now imagine what they would think after checking out Tubular Bells by Mike Oldfield, doing so thinking that it would sound like Yes, Emerson, Lake & Palmer, or Jethro Tull.  
If you know what those bands sound like, and you know what Tubular Bells sounds like, it’s easy to see how, in this instance, objectively bad communication took place.  
Such is the nature of walking around and tossing out willy-nilly these generic, cookie-cutter labels to describe music.  
“Indie-psych-folk?”  
WTF is that?  
It’s nothing. Just worthless word salad. That’s just one of many examples of worthless label-mongering that commonly occurs in communication about music.

You seem to think valuing the individuality of an artist, putting our big-boy pants on and “using our words” to describe music instead of lazily trotting out generic label-mongering, and taking issue with poor communication is “extreme” and an instance of one “getting their undies in a knot.”