Jazz for aficionados

Frogman, your view to music is academic, the things you think, others (Rok) just might not FEEL. Its quite simple actually. I dont know why do you continue arguing. Regarding the subject of your discussion, personally I have not acquired the taste for music of that (70's) era, but that is a matter of my personal estethics on music, like it is with any other art form. It is completely understandable that we all have a different perspective on such things.

My hit of the day, Bobby Jaspar, Herbie Mann, Tommy Flanagan and Joe Puma on 'Flute Souffle' album.

http://youtu.be/otengS4cE3Q

O-10, thanks for weighing in and for bringing some calm to the proceedings.

Alexatpos, my view of music is far from academic; I beg to differ with your assessment. Much is said and done about keeping music in the realm of "can I FEEL it?" If that is as far as the listener's sensibilities go, that is a very simplistic and musically immature attitude and criterion for judging music; if judging must be done (Rok). Some music challenges the listener with sounds and "feelings" that he has never experienced before, and if the listener is willing to not be quick to dismiss it because he does not understand it, then the listener has an opportunity to grow; it's that simple. You are new to this thread and may not be aware of the fact that this "argument" has been a recurring theme on this thread. Question: I suggest there is good music of every decade and style, yes, including fusion. Now, Rok comes along, as he often does, and insists that it is simply noise, they are noise makers etc, that there is nothing good about the genre "fusion". Multiple attempts are made, with examples of worthy music, to show the other side of the coin. He insists it is noise (There was even a time when Rok insisted, probably still would, that Igor Stravinsky composed nothing but noise !?) So, tell me, just who is it that "continues to argue"?

As I said before, if I am going to participate here, I need clarity. As far as I am concerned there is no room for personal agendas. If it is also a personal agenda to insist on pointing out the obvious, that jazz is an ever evolving art form and that there is ALWAYS (every era) good music, different perhaps, and that all art is like a living thing: it reflects the human spirit in whatever era that spirit exists, then I suppose I am guilty of having a personal agenda as well. Additionally, it is not the responsibility of the art and artist only to make sure that the listener can understand or appreciate it (to like it is an entirely different matter), the listener has an opportunity (some would say responsibility) to grow during the process of learning to understand it IF HE SO CHOOSES; an important "if". But if the listener doesn't want to, or finds it too difficult, that does not give him the credibility to call it noise.

I hope that wasn't too "academic" for you.

Regards.

There is no truth on the human level without a marriage of emotion and intellect.

Alex and O-10, Thanks for the input:

Well, I'll go first: Got this from Wiki. They mention "Jazz Approach" and "Jazz Elements". They never call it Jazz.

Jazz fusion is a musical fusion genre that developed from "mixing funk and rhythm and blues rhythms and the amplification and electronic effects of rock music, complex time signatures derived from non-Western music and extended, typically instrumental compositions with a jazz approach to lengthy group improvisations, often using wind and brass and displaying a high level of instrumental technique. It was created around the late 1960s. The term "jazz-rock" is often used as a synonym for "jazz fusion" as well as for music performed by late 1960s and 1970s-era rock bands that added jazz elements to their music". -- wiki

My personal opinion is, it was just an invention to give the "hip" folks of the 70's something to embrace. Those that considered themselves too "Hip" for Rock and their unwashed moronic fans. Then some of the Jazz guys followed the money. It is what it is. I listened to it, bought it, thought it was Jazz. All before I knew better.

Cheers

"my view of music is far from academic;"

I would say it is more than that but has a larger than average academic portion that is quite "sound" in of itself.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.... :^)