"I'm 15 and I fucking love jazz" starter pack

...

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=9eShJiIRxm0
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Sun Ra
Brotzmann
Kamasi

The list goes on

1. It's a good album
2. You should listen to his other albums instead of judging an artist on memes you pleb. At least listen to him on Coltrane's Meditations album. This guy knows how to play spiritual shit

Good album though, one of the best Spiritual Jazz albums

thembi > karma desu user

it's a decent album but not even to his best

That one from Japan with the red cover

Spiritual jazz is for teenagers

No true jazz fan likes it

Strictly musically speaking, what makes his music inherently "spiritual"?

Why would I like jazz at 15?
I was listening to LB at that age

>no true jazz fan likes A Love Supreme

>Karma roast thread
Finally
The "I did one tab of fake lsd and couldn't listen to Creator all the way through because of my pleb sensibilities but that didn't stop me from pretending to have an out of body experience" starter pack

"spiritual jazz is for teenagers"

do you know how stupid you sound?

>an aspect of the music is for teens
>Coltrane is for teens
>Alice and John
>Having meaning in music is for teens

Real jazz fans don't say spiritual jazz. That's a made up RYM genre.

No true jazz fan uses Sup Forums either

that's a silly question, given that you can't really explain a spiritual experience, but if I were to say it would be jazz that takes middle-eastern instruments and instrumentation E.G., drones, ragas, progressions, and applies them in a hypnotic way so as to put the listener in a spiritual state. For example La Monte Young's Theatre of Eternal Music produced raga sounds using strings and then Young played a saxophone freely on top in such a way that he tried to emulate the movement of fire. (Hence the piece I'm referring to is called 'the fire is a mirror'

scaruffi list is all pleb

There's literally no other term for it

I don't think they meant it as a genre they just mean jazz which is made to evoke a spiritual response

"no true jazz fan"

> the album's bad lol
> but only patricians can enjoy it
=)

There's levels to everything, an album can still be bad on a Patrician level

Free jazz and in some instances bebop/post-bop

So what you're saying is that I could claim any jazz album is "spiritual jazz" and be correct?

No way does that encapsulate it, it has a sound generally more distinct than that - and the reference is to the specific themes of the music rather than the actual sound anyway

I love how all you caricature-ass jazz fans on Sup Forums think Mingus noodling for 14 minutes is the pinnacle. Just like the tonedeaf white critics of the time. There's a reason Jazz died after the Spiritual and Fusion eras, there was nowhere left to go. Don't @ me with Zorn or Kamasi, don't kid yourself.

true, but you're still not giving a good reason why Karma is bad, it's not my favourite by and stretch and it's far from being the best in Sander's output and one of his least creative, which he accounts for by making it long, but it's still a hecking lot of fun

Nah, shut up. It's basically always just free jazz with hippy bullshit thrown in. It's not distinct. You can't describe what that means.

>So what you're saying is that I could claim any jazz album is "spiritual jazz" and be correct?

no jesus christ did you just listen to the first part of what I said and ignore the rest?

also no you can't, because you'd just be lying, making shit up. If you don't actually get a spiritual experience from it, it's not spiritual for you is it. But the music is still DESIGNED to evoke this response

You mean the album covers, song titles, and costumes that the artist wears right? So nothing actually musical?

>autism
what's "good" jazz?

"it's basically always just"

4 words to prove you listened to one album of it and came to a conclusion on the whole thing

>Mingus noodling for 14 minutes is the pinnacle.
but this is correct

Wrong. The exception being in the case of bebop/post-bop, as mentioned in the previous post. The same thing applies though. Heck, it can be jazz fusion, too.

But spirituality is all just made up anyway

Sure, the equivalent of calling something 'Christian Rock' or some shit - it identifies the artist's intentions, but their are musical themes within it, certain instruments, free structures, emphasis on textures and different timbres, exotic eastern influences, drones, orchestral instruments, I could go on

Point me to an album that sounds like the OP without any 'Spiritual' link

...

"I'm OP & I just started listening to Jazz"
This thread is lame as shit

>>>reddit

Miles Davis's rym scores are fkn insane, is this all worth listening to?

Noah Howard - The Black Arc, and many other free jazz albums.

>autism

Sanders' timbres mmmmmm that's some good shit. Lonnie Liston Smith's fender work on 'Astral Travelling' is ungodly

>666
Spirit of the devil in the thread confirmed. We need all the Spiritual Jazz we can get in here

unironically this tbqh

no. but a lot of it is. Listen to Kind of Blue, Sketches of Spain, Miles in the Sky, Birth of the Cool. Leave off some of the other stuff till later

LLS is an absolute boss

Black people were at one point smart enough to make this type of music, where did it all go so wrong?

Not remotely similar

He was Coltrane's right hand tenor player for many awesome albums
Albert Ayler called him 'the son' of the holy trinity
He has released many exceptional albums

but OP listens to 'Karma' once, doesn't get it and loses his shit

LOL you have a shitty ear.

Here are some similar albums
Lonnie Liston Smith - Astral Travelling
Alice Coltrane - Journey to satchidananda

oh wait, those are spiritual jazz albums my bad

>propositions of "spirituality" are factual, descriptive claims about the social world
>"spirituality is all made up"
seek help

k

free jazz

uwotm8

New reaction pic.

This times 10.

What's some "I'm 19 and just read a few JTG reviews so I think I know everything about jazz" core?

honestly... this is the best way to go

enjoy the trip 15 year old dude

>John Zorn and Kamasi in the same category
I guess free jazz isn't "real jazz" now, right? And Kamasi is one short step above smooth jazz, given that he's playing with hip hop artists. Hardly anything new or unique in his playing. Not to mention that jazz was a commercially dead genre since its departure from swing. Less and less government funding as a consequence of that didn't help either.

The majority of this thread.

Kind of Blue
A Love Supreme
Bitches Brew
The Black Saint And The Sinner Lady

Are all the top choices for "rock/indie pleb that pretends to like jazz only so it gives him cred and that his garbage music has artistic merit" starter pack

Here's the checklist
>album cover is a picture of the artist in an awkward pose
>music is bland 60's throwback hard bop
>album/artist is obscure and only known about and appreciated by "real jazz fans"

swing > bebop

go on would like to hear your perspective...

be back soon

what a fucking awful thread

what do you guys think of this comp?

bait TAKEN FUCK YOU

You're doing God's work user

Grant Green is a LEGEND. Don't like his cover of Round Midnight tho.

i think this is my fav of his covers

youtube.com/watch?v=9eShJiIRxm0

I bet OP is the same guy who always shoehorns the phrase "harmonically interesting" into every discussion

have you heard down Go Down Moses or Jericho? I can play both on piano so they have a special place in my heart. With that being said, I also love his Django, and favourite things is excellent too

idiot

"true fan" lmao holy shit why are some jazz fans so pretentious?

also I like jazz but I don't claim to be an expert, the genre is massive and I don't claim to know a whole lot beyond the big artists but I don't put people down for that shit. I've probably listened to about 300 jazz albums total.

yes, i have both those songs on vinyl though i usually prefer when he plays in trios (green street is another i have that i love to death)

I've only probably listened to 100 or so =( you got any favourites?

...

what's the point of going thru the effort of making this. it seems so pointless

honestly at the risk of sounding like a massive pleb, the one OP posted is among my favorites. but I also really like A Love Supreme, Ascension, On The Corner (always thought that was the best Miles album desu), The Black Saint And The Sinner Lady, Escalator Over The Hill, For Alto, and I also like a bit of earlier stuff like Louis Armstrong, Charlie Parker and Art Tatum. And some Duke Ellington as well.

But like, I can literally already predict people replying to this post with "ZOMG SUCH BASIC TASTE ENTRY-LEVEL Sup ForumsCORE BLAH BLAH BLAH" but honestly I don't care because I genuinely enjoy that stuff and I'm excited to see what else the genre has to offer once I get through the well-known stuff.

honestly it doesn't make much sense to dive into the most obscure/weirdest stuff right away, does it? everyone has to start somewhere. the big names in jazz have a lot of historical context that is important in the development of jazz, or at least "mainstream" jazz. ignoring them just so you can seem like you have super special taste would be dumb (but that's what like everyone on Sup Forums does.)

I can use it in the future, when the 2 or 3 people come back to be annoying about it again

listen to thelonious monk desu

people who whine about taste being entry-level have a stick up their ass, dumb elitism

I don't even understand what point you're trying to get across...

>I fictionalise an enemy so I can validate that my pedestrian taste is at least authentic

annoying about what? is it meant to be an """"argument"""" against the people who like that album or hate it? why the fuck does it matter what ANYBODY posts here?

I've never met a 15 year old unironically into jazz

>that one guy who doesn't know a thing about music theory and gets mad when people who do know something about theory talk about it
stop being that guy

i liked jazz when i was 16

"harmonically interesting" is not based in music theory. It's just "interesting" + look mom I know theory. It doesn't mean *anything* without context

>hasn't gotten to the "interesting harmonics" chapter in his 'introduction to listening to music' book
oh dear

I've listened to some Thelonius Monk. Monk's Dream is really good.

this, teenagers don't fucking listen to jazz, they listen to hip hop and rock and metal n shit

>i never was in jazz band
plenty of kids liked jazz

>people who whine about taste being entry-level have a stick up their ass, dumb elitism
agreed

How many of you actually listen to anything pre-bebop?

15 year olds dont listen to jazz

My favorite soundtrack of all time, but I think this might just fit the bill

No. Probably about three of those, in fact. What happens is that his albums are much more disproportionately rated by his die-hard fans, because nobody else wants to bother listening to his prolific output just because he decided to put out too many poorly thought out and hasty albums.

The music isn't "smart". The only jazz that approaches "smart" is Mingus and Coltrane. Mingus is very light-skinned too. Also, this jazz never sold well and would sell even worse today.

That shit sucks. Yoko Kanno is a hack.

What would being "harmonically interesting" have to do with music theory? Music theory is a descriptive language, and "interestingness" is a subjective bugaboo.

Stop misusing the term music theory. Knowing your scales, how to construct chords and how to keep time isn't music theory.

another great jazz thread down the tubes. thanks for the laugh Sup Forums

well aren't you just the little exception

yeah i was thank u :)

jazz is for plebs though

>go on would like to hear your perspective...
>be back soon
Six hours later - come on nothing. Can't say I'm surprised.