Why do rockists like Free Jazz?

Why do rockists like Free Jazz?

Because it was marketed mostly via the album format and doesn’t consist of “standards” thus implying the music was composed by the people performing it.

they think inaccessible = good

also they think aggression, high energy, and volume levels are the only ways to convey emotion in music

oh and in case you want proof

notice how they only enjoy the most abrasive and chaotic free jazz

What are some quiet, slick free jazz albums

poptimism honestly needs to die

bump. also intredasted

Most stuff with Manfred Schoof stay pretty reined in

...

Jimmy Guiffre

Because it's interesting and intense like a lot of hard rock music is. Ascension is a fucking masterpiece no matter what your musical background is though

I'm a rockists and I like Third Stream

Jimmy Giuffre - Free Fall
Trio 3 - Visiting Texture

An older example and one from this year respectively.

It's always either chaotic zero nuance free jazz or the kind of later Mingus style third stream which also has a more poppy feel in how everything's arranged which leads it to lack the kind of nuance jazz does as well.

purely for posturing

Ha! Yeah, right. Rock fans couldn't care less about free jazz (or any jazz, for that matter). People who idolize over the Sup Forumscore charts, rollingstone, pitchfork, etc aren't exactly using their brain to look more seriously into this type of music by themselves. If you look up a list of best releases from any publication you can always guarantee that the "best" jazz is primarily early 60's-early 70's bebop/hard-bop/cool jazz/fusion. Sometimes you might get a little bit of Ayler or Coleman, or even Taylor in there, but it's basically always Davis, Coltrane, Mingus, Brubeck, Hancock, Mobley, Evans, Hill, etc. Not that I wish to necessarily imply that these artists or era(s) are bad, but when it comes to casual, non-jazz music fans, this is generally what they're listening to. I love free jazz and I love the single era music from the 20's and 30's. This is the real biggest problem to me: music fans do not care about pre-bebop music. They don't care about music that isn't strictly part an LP release. That's the real definition of a rockist, isn't it? Even a lot of people who are really into jazz today seem to be more at home with 80's-present jazz, and I think they're rockists too.

By the way, I'm not convinced that anybody in this thread is at all genuinely interested in jazz, and once again the true poseurs here, like the opening poster, are on the low end of the dunning-kruger scale. OP personally sounds like he's asshurt because he doesn't get it. Prove me wrong. Name your top 10 bandleaders of the great depression era if you're such a smart and non-rockist badass.

Kamasi Washington x10

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Rick and Morty. The humour is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical physics most of the jokes will go over a typical viewers head. There's also Rick's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his personal philosophy draws heavily from Narodnaya Volya literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these jokes, to realise that they're not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Rick & Morty truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in Rick's existential catchphrase "Wubba Lubba Dub Dub," which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenev's Russian epic Fathers and Sons. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Dan Harmon's genius wit unfolds itself on their television screens. What fools.. how I pity them.
And yes, by the way, i DO have a Rick & Morty tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid

this is a good post

ill fuck all yer mums

Then again, there's also the fact that the vast majority of the jazz created before the LP era was basically the popular music of the day. Sure, people like Ellington and Goodman elevated the form, but the advent of bebop was pretty much the catalyst that caused jazz to shift more into the realm of art music. It's a coincidence that that happened to more-or-less coincide with the shift toward the LP format.

There is unironically nothing wrong with rockism, if I listen to Miles Davis and don't enjoy 30s jazz it doesn't make me a "poseur" (lol). Just accept that people have different tastes to you and get over it, enough whining

The problem with pre-LP format recorded music is that 78s are a fucking pain in the ass to play or acquire in good quality, so obviously you're forced to just buy the next best thing, which is some arbitrary compilation release on LP or CD (Ken Burns Jazz, Smithsonian Folkways, 'Best Of') that either has too much or too little.
If I just wanted to hear the first version of 'Take the A-Train' by Ellington from the 78 era, I either have to find the 78 and a player that will actually take it, or get a cd/lp with the song on it, among others that I may or may not even want. The third option is of course to pirate it, but then you have to deal with all the associated quality concerns.
It's not just a problem with Jazz, too. Any old time, country, blues, and the like music is a fucking pain to get the right recording, so you just have to buy the cow and get some enormous box set in hopes it'll have it.
The only time that the compilations really work out is for less prolific artists, you can get some entire discographies in one set, Robert Johnson for example, others like Hank Williams or Billie Holiday that died or quit before the LP era with a prolific set of 78s are a pain to get right.