Jazz is just a bunch of aimless bullshit wankery

Jazz is just a bunch of aimless bullshit wankery

Is this how people who don't know music theory describe music?

you're so wise. pic is very fitting

Trips ask the good questions.

reminder to sage

I agree. It's a waste of talent: all the amazing musicians, all the hours of practice, just to make elevator music.
I just watched that movie Whiplash and I kept thinking: how can someone take jazz so seriously? No matter how well you play it it just sounds like I've been placed on hold with tech support.

jazz is much more enjoyable than any other type of music

LUKE WANT MILKIES

Beat me to it

Eric Satie didn't know music theory but made better music than any jazz musician.
No, it's not. Jazz is objectively the worst genre of music because it can't convey sentiment. It's music a robot would write. Mechanically perfect but can't tell a story.

>Eric Satie didn't know music theory but made better music than any jazz musician.

BEING THIS much of a cracker

why did you quote the second guy
proof niggers can't read

laughable opinions. good luck with your life.

>can't make an argument
No, good luck to yours.

Sup Forums is such a shotholw board these days. I assume 1/4 of the posts are paid advertisements from Disney or mcu

>it can't convey sentiment
In other words, it is too abstract for you as you are used to music with predefined sentiment being shaved down your throat by musicians whose only parameter in making music is the viscera or emotional impact

>Satie didn't know music theory
Citation needed.

>people with these sorts of opinions are the ones discussing music with you on this board, RIGHT NOW

>During his initial enrollment at the Paris Conservatory, Satie was labelled the “laziest student in the conservatoire” by his instructor Émile Descombes in 1881. While known for his compositional intuitions as a student, Satie lacked the sight-reading and technical skills needed to move beyond the intermediate keyboard classes.

makes you wonder

To think this whole time I've been talking to people who thought jazz was a form of self expression.
It makes me sick too, user.

He studied music more intensively later but he was overwhelmingly self-taught when he wrote all his well known stuff.

Ultimately though he wasn't a great composer, and didn't really write a lot of good music.

i wonder what type of music you listen to if you think jazz is worthless. If you are into Bach but don't like jazz, I think you should evaluate why you like Bach. If you are into minimalism or dnb or most electronic and experimental music, you should know that these are heavily indebted to jazz. If you are rockist, well i don't really expect a better opinion.

make no mistake, this is a forum for 16 year old turboplebs

yeah but that shit slaps

"things that rock plebs say" for 400

I don't think it's worthless, it's great for learning how to play an instrument as part of a band. It's totally unlistenable though.

I don't listen to music though because I can almost always catch the underlying currents that are indebted to jazz and it's just a total turn off.

...

Life is just a bunch of aimless bullshit wankery

>muh emotional music :(

I can respect jazz but I basically never want to actually put it on for enjoyment. I can analyze it and appreciate the skill and passion of the performers and composers...but it just feels like work.

>DUDE YOU GOTTA KNOW HOW TO PROGRAM A GAME IN ORDER TO PLAY IT
>DUDE YOU GOTTA KNOW HOW TO DIRECT A MOVIE IN ORDER TO WATCH IT
>DUDE YOU GOTTA LEARN HOW TO PAINT IN ORDER TO ENJOY MONALISA
fuck off theoryfags

Shitty analogy. Mona Lisa takes no knowledge of painting to appreciate, but if you wanted to understand the impact and worth of a masterpiece painting like this, you'd definitely need to know at least rudimentary art skills. Jazz is a lot closer to cubism and the avant garde than Mona Lisa.

I disagree. I think it gets closer to the visceral human experience than most other forms of music. Improvisation is intimate that way, and you have to know how to hear it. It's not about theory, it's like being able to empathize with the music.

But 90% of jazz isn't able to achieve this, and a lot of jazz musicians are just aimless bullshit wankers.

Do you really believe that theory doesn't enhance a person's musical experience, or are you just lazy?

BOOPITY BOP ZIP ZAP BAM
BIPPITY BAP BAP DIBITYBOP BOP BA DOP

not that guy, but theory really doesn't help you enjoy music, it just helps you understand it. theory is based on how humans perceive music anyway. it's like being able to appreciate a painting without knowing the names for all the colors.

theory helps you be more discerning and better able to recognize skill

Get a load of this kid

Keyboard class =/= music theory
Jesus Christ

completely accurate op

...

I'm tired of people comparing music to visual art. Almost everyone can see a painting and identify the colors, it is an innate human ability. But by default, humans can't immediately recognize and label a chord progression or identify musical structure without understanding the theory first. Color theory is intuitive, music theory is not

you had to learn the names for the colors from someone else.

music theory is just knowing what to call certain sounds

>It's music a robot would write. Mechanically perfect but can't tell a story.
Be honest, how much jazz have you actually listened to? Like, are you listening exclusively to cheesy fusion or bebop made by Japanese child prodigies or some shit?

Because showing someone what the color red looks like is just as difficult as showing someone what a DbAug11 sounds like

we I like it

By "identify colors" I meant distinguish between them and then know how they work together in the whole peice. A person can do that without being told what to call the colors. However an untrained person could not intuitively distinguish between, for example, a root and a fourth, and then understand how each is used in a particular song.

False equivalence. That's more like explaining the subtle touch that putting the right colors next to each other will give to a picture. Showing someone what the color red looks like is like showing someone what a C sounds like

Without reference most people could not distinguish between a c and any other note. But I can show you the color red without any context and you will know it's the color red.

Holy fuck what amazing bait

because crying about muh music theory is the whitest thing you can do bruh

>random scribbles that dont look like anything
why do rich white guys do this shit lmfao

Bruh are you claiming jazz is some soul brotha music? LOL black people couldn't give a fuck about jazz, it's been white for a loooong time. Keep it up with the soul tho brotha lol

>only parameter in making music is the viscera or emotional impact
So you admit that jazz literally doesn't care about emotion?

Are you seriously implying that any jazz ever could stand up to Bach? In every important way jazz is inferior bro

I disagree man, played two gigs last week with an all black band and both had about an 80% atleast black audience. Not just old folks either.

>literally went to a music school
>implying sight reading and skill as a performer are "theory"

Well honestly jazz could stand up to bach, its not necessarily better, but it stands up to it. Also jazz is clearly superior in pretty much every way relating to rhythm. Jazz is rhythmic music and classical is melodic, thats why sonny rollins can play one note for a whole chorus.

No OP, you are wrong. Jazz music is not even completely improvised, sometimes not at all.

they're having fun, it's not aimless

...

Why is doing white things bad exactly?

>Being this delusional.....