Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner - Non Classical Why jazz?

So really why? Jazz has always seemed to me quite vulgar and even impotent in comparision to real classical music. I am wondering what is it that drives people to keep playing it. I understand there is heavy aspect of improv- but what I dont understand is why restrict yourself to the general schematics of jazz. I think there are plenty of wonderful jazz musicians(thelonius, tatum, etc..) but I can't understand how they never broke out of their jazz shells. In my opinion jazz is a cancerous blemish on the body of classical piano, though I'd be interested in hearing others idea(especially if you actually play jazz in a somewhat competant manner).

Ah! Elitism at it's penultimate finest

Hi Pianoplayerman,

Perhaps I can put this whole issue into perspective by comparing what happens in the music world with the art world.

For example, suppose I'm a watercolorist. I love watercolor and have always enjoyed paniting in this style. Now, along comes an oil painter and says, "I can't understant what anyone sees in watercolor painting. It's not really art."

Do you see how inane this comparison is? The real reason many classical pianists fall into this comparison/put down trap is that they feel threatened by something that isn't "sophisticated." This isn't to say Jazz isn't sophisiticated. It is to say that judging an art form is a purely subjective and therefore relative act.

You like classical piano. Good for you. Now, can you allow for other forms of expression without feeling the need to defend your own idea of what "good" is?

The world is big enough to contain many forms and styles of music.

--------------------------------
Play New Age Piano
http://www.quiescencemusic.com

This reads like a very well-done parody. Good job, PPM!

Perhaps if the watercolorist restricted himself to only the few colors which he liked it, the analogy would be more accurite.

Are you for real?
This is awesome!

90 years ago you might have had an argument. Just like Rock&Roll coulss have been called a cancerous on jazz 60 years ago. And Rap on Rock 20 years ago.
But to think that today Jazz is hurting classical music... come on...

And you, sir, are an ignorant, cancerous blemish on this forum.

Did my old piano teacher get a PianoWorld account somehow? Sheesh.

Perhaps some of you misunderstand my words. What I am saying goes beyond mere opinion, I happen to be stating the obvious:

Jazz piano, is a restrictive artistic medium. An individual jazz piece cannot escape the grasp of the medium of jazz as a whole- thus all jazx pieces end up sounding like variatoins of one another(at least in terms of color and a general sense of tonality).

In addition I can't imagine you could find a single person on this board whom would contend that jazz, as a medium, uses the most vulgar of human impulses as a foundation. With this in mind, how, in goo consciousnse,could anyone tolerate such music(or rather loosely connected noise in the opinions of many).

How, in good conscience, could anyone tolerate such atrocious spelling?

This idiot is really going to town isn't he?

Quote..." An individual jazz piece cannot escape the grasp of the medium of jazz as a whole- thus all jazx pieces end up sounding like variatoins of one another(at least in terms of color and a general sense of tonality"

I'm betting that you don't have a thorough understanding of jazz music and/or it's history. Jazz, like classical music has changed through the decades and it's change is a VERY audible. Try googling it or find some videos in Youtube.

Additionally, your previous comment reminds me of people that state all classical music sounds alike. Surely you don't agree with that assessment.

Surprise, Quiescen...I agree with you completely. Good explanation.

Successful troll is successful

Well, I think he means contest, but hey - I say:
YEAH!!! Vulgar is good! Especially as a "human impulse".
No wonder I love jazz!

I'm betting the "1994" in the OP's username is a birth year?

That's everyone's best guess. Makes him a juvenile delinquent. :rolleyes:

LOL!!

Characterizing jazz as 'cancerous' is about as ridiculous as dismissing classical as "that longhair music", one I've heard all my life (well, not so much recently...).

On a more constructive note, I would urge OP to visit the following link, and peruse especially the "Musician to Musician" and "Theory and Analysis" rooms.

http://forums.allaboutjazz.com/index.php

1994...number of neuron firings per year maybe?

Confusing "contest" and "contend" is kind of hilarious, given that it creates a statement that's the opposite of what's intended. Good thing he's not a lawyer; cases have been lost—and malpractice suits won—over less.

It reminds me of a lawyer I once knew who confused "prescribe" and "proscribe." 'Nuff said.

Steven