2. misc-audio
  3. 169601-165740

Is improvisational jazz to impressionism art as smooth jazz is to realism art?

So, I’ll acknowledge up front, I’m an engineer. Civilian and Warfighter lives can be in the balance depending on whether our company products perform as required or not. As a result, I try very hard to drive the entropic world we live in towards black and white as much as possible. I need to put order to chaos. When i look at art, impressionistic art requires a lot of mental work to make sense of. I just don't see it or get it, appreciate it or like it. I also find, as hard as i may try to enjoy improvisational jazz, that i don't get it, appreciate it, or like it. Instead, I love Realism art and instrumental smooth jazz!!
Reading from Audiogon forum pages for a couple of years now, i feel like i should feel inferior because 1. I don’t appreciate the free flow of expression that is improvisational jazz and 2. I love that there is a tune and thread in smooth jazz. I love the guitar artistry of Chuck Loeb, Chris Standring, and Acoustic Alchemy; the trumpet expressions of Rick Braun, Cindy Bradley, and Chris Botti; and the bass works of Brian Bromberg. 
I’m curious if there are many others out there that equate order (or lack there-of) in their music tastes to that of their taste in the visual arts?
Also, are there many other music lovers who would rather enjoy a good smooth jazz listening session than improvisational jazz?  If so, who do you listen to?
128x128estreams
marklings
61 posts
 
Jazz is improvisational, all jazz is improvisational.

If it is not impro than it's not jazz, maybe pop or lounge or you name it, whatever but not jazz.

In other words what I get from your post is "I don't like jazz". No objection there, personal opinion. I studied jazz piano 3 years and came to the conclusion that I just don't like it. I like order and structure and purpose and overall sense of a composition. I don't judge those who dig jazz and I understand those who dig it, I just don't.

If you like order as you say try Bach !!!
whipsaw
758 posts
 
Jazz is simply inferior to classical music. Jazz musicians don't know where the right notes are and "hunt" for them by trial and error, while classically trained musicians find them instantly. Just look at Jazz bassist or guitarist - they "walk" all over fretboard until they find right note. Sure, it looks like improvisation, but don't be fooled - it is lack of proper training.
I'll bite:

ROTFLMAO!
estreams's avatar
estreams OP
6 posts
 
@marklings, i was about to take umbrage to your ‘if its not impro than its not jazz” comment. But i first went to the Musical Dictionary and found this under the heading What is Jazz:
“Jazz also inspired the development of “smooth jazz,” which is a form of pop music that has some similarities with jazz. Smooth jazz uses many of the same instruments as jazz – saxophones, pianos, double basses, etc. – but musically it’s quite different. Smooth jazz has little or no improvisation and limited poylphony, which are the defining features of jazz. It also has much simpler rhythms. If you listen to the drums in a smooth jazz song, you’ll notice that the beat is very straightforward. Critics find this boring, while fans of smooth jazz find it easier to listen to. But they agree that smooth jazz is musically distinct from “real” jazz.”

i think there is room for both of us to enjoy the form of jazz that gets our toes tapping. 
tostadosunidos's avatar
tostadosunidos
1,197 posts
 
No, but "burnt" is to "baccarat" as "icon" is to "teeter-totter."
streamerdude
54 posts
 
Why don’t y’all just go to the next step and fit in with today’s America, stop arguing and start blaming… unbelievable comments on this thread.
More to discover