Why Is There Such An Anti-Jazz Vibe Here?

Indeed, Pollyanna. At least you're not in venues where they can hook him up to cables and fly him around in a pixie outfit :)

Why wy, Professionals are musicians who sold their soul, of course! No one who accepts money to perform an art can truly be an artist. These people put motral concerns, such as bills and rent, above all else. They are willing to perform anything just to get a buck. They are untrustworthy and are quick, probably so they can maximize their time by running from gig to gig. All are to be scorned, especially the successful ones that "make a living off of music". Studio/session drummers are the worst of the crop. They might as well be accountants and lawyers!

There's also the drummer who is not a "professional" but will play any style. In fact, they MUST play any style, EVERY style. They are one of two things: Geeks or Non-Committals. Every facet of life has the smart people who become absolutely obsessed with their chosen area, sometimes through research, sometimes through practice. These people are Geeks. And there are Drum Geeks. You can spot them because they'll usually ask which style you want them to play when you ask a simple "Show me what you got". Frequently, Drum Geeks also swear by pitch-tuning and lambast other methods. Non-Committals are just afraid of commitment. You also have them in every facet of life. They just refuse to be anchored to anything. The "nice" version of the phenomena is "Free Spirit". As anyone who has dealt with "Free Spirits" in relationships can tell you, it can be very... very... annoying at times. But they are diverse and creative, despite rarely putting said attributes to work on one thing long enough to excel at it.

And before you ask, drumming teachers are their primary category first with the addendum that they have some sanity as they figure $25 from a half hour class or a half hour gig... it's all the same. Teachers also lost most of their hearing, which is good for dealing with beginners like me, and have an incredible amount of patience... or just dose off alot... you know, loss of hearing, not hearing drums, easy to sleep when all you hear is silence. Teachers are to be appreciated, however, also keep in mind that teachers may shape your choice of music. Be careful which teacher you pick or you might end up loving modern day punk. Or become a jazz snob.

Oh, I almost forgot: Electronica. Also known as "Most 80s music" or "The Great Drummer Famine of the 1980s". Yes, I stole that last title from someone who suggested it. Much like Electronica stole disco and had illegitimate children with... well, who knows. The room was dark, the night was young. Elements of rock, pop, industrial, disco, and on and on... Hair metal reigned supreme, "Mod music" was hip (except it was called New Wave) and Goth was big. It was a scary time, but not as scary as the Disco Depression. Techno also falls under this category. Uhn-tss-uhn-tss-uhn-tss. Greatest export to come out of my Eastern European homeland. Oh and Breakbeats/DnB/Rave Music. I actually like breakbeats. Not very imaginative, but it definitely gets you moving. Unfortunately there are no breakbeat drummers, just DJs with a drum machine.
 
Last edited:
Well Moldy, one can never trust a teacher who only charges $25.00 per half hour!!!
 
Brilliant Moldy........the lot of it

But this:

There's also the drummer who is not a "professional" but will play any style. In fact, they MUST play any style, EVERY style. They are one of two things: Geeks or Non-Committals.

was the bomb!

Very funny man.....best read I've had yet. It's worthy of it's own thread!!
 
I am now the self-proclaimed president of the Moldy Fan Club

Hahaha can I join? That was a great assesment! This thread took a turn for the better I think. I don't know Moldy but if all of that poured out of his mind, I can't help but picture Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory. Cool stuff.
 
Hahaha can I join? That was a great assesment! This thread took a turn for the better I think. I don't know Moldy but if all of that poured out of his mind, I can't help but picture Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory. Cool stuff.

Bazinnga....................
 
I'm really happy to hear that. There was too much drama and hate floating around for my liking. As I always say.... MY DRUMMING BROTHAS.... let us not fight each other.... we are all tub thumpers in the end. Let us instead focus our efforts on guitarists with their loud amps, singers who are constantly offbeat and bassists who shoot us dirty looks.

And yes, this all spawned out of my brain, except for the part(s) I admit to stealing. I get into these creative spurts once in a while.
 
IT just keeps going on. There is an "Us vs. Them" sentiment being nursed. Everybody is worried about who thinks who is credible. I feel like some of the metal fans are intimidated by the jazz fans and take a defensive stand initially.Jazz people may be coming off a bit condescending. I could say that if you "understand" death metal you'll like it but that's false. If you understand jazz you won't necessarily like it.

*Note*
Before you read any further I'm NOT here to defend myself. If anyone here feels like I'm attacking them or like I'm being overly defensive, please drop me a line. I'm not into that game, It's music. The lines that divide us aren't important to me; I'm interested in building bridges, not burning them.

The unfortunate part is Jazz is so much more broad than Death Metal. My step dad plays a lot of Avant Garde stuff that I don't really appreciate, but it's labled "Improvisational Jazz." Now before you say "That's not jazz," there's a difference between what he does with hims Improv Jazz band and what I have done in a local Avant Garde band. It's difficult to understand but I really don't think that's why I'm not into it, I just don't have a feeling for it. I would like to hear more of a groove. That's what I want and Improv Jazz doesn't have it, thus I don't like it. On the other end of the spectrum, I love pretty much anything else the man plays. He's an incredible jazz and classical musician and I've learned a ton from just listening to him.

Jazz seems to be kinda lump and it's not an everything or nothing sort of genre, as death metal isn't. I'll assume most jazz people haven't taken the time to listen to an incredibly diverse array of death metal and truly critique it, look for things they like, and looked for bands with similar elements. This is the same way that most death metal haven't taken a truly in depth look at jazz to really get a feel for it.

I feel like maybe some of the Jazz people here hold Jazz to a higher standard than they do metal, it's more acceptable for metal fans to respect jazz than vice-versa, but it's also easier to go that direction. Jazz players seem to make the point that "if you only played jazz, you'd like it, if you understood it like I do." Let's make sense out of it: You play jazz because you like jazz. I play metal because I like metal. I've spent years honing my ear and finding metal I can appreciate, you may have spent years honing your ear to find jazz you like. It might be more involved in jazz but it's the same idea.

Imagine what would happen to me right now if I said the words "I don't like anything Tony Williams ever did." Regardless of how well I backed up that opinion I feel like a lot of the jazz fans would largely attribute that to a lack of understanding and thus I'd lack credibility on the topic.

What I will say is now that I have some sort of a perspective on jazz I understand how it can become a sort of monotheistic type of genre. I could sit here and spout names of bands jazz fans might appreciate but it all comes down to taste. Nobody is better than anybody, we all just have these different tastes. Metal heads need to get less defensive and jazz players might just need to accept us for who we are. I feel like many of the metal heads are the larger part of the problem though... It's tough when you feel like people are looking down on you.

Maybe we all need to kiss and make up?
 
Gee, the basis of jazz IS improvisation. "It sounds like guys making it up as they go along". What a stunning conclusion. See the part of my comment again about understanding it. I don't give a damn if you like or not. That's not what i am talking about at all.

...apparently you missed the word "randomly", which is ironic considering your harping about reading comprehension. There's a difference between "improvising" and "randomly hitting stuff", but then you'd know that if you'd actually read what I wrote.

Begone, wastrel. I am done with thee.
 
Jazz has a long and varied history and though not taken seriously as a commercial enterprise by some, one need to be reminded that music rarely is a commercial enterprise and one cannot reduce everything to market. This world is a regenerating, organic miracle, not a market play place for the elites.

I spent last night seeing some jazz and then talking with the bass player on end about Schoenberg, Bartok, and the relations between their music, Bill Evans and Scott La Faro, and, Herbie Hancock and Wayne Shorter. Very vital and exciting stuff. I really can't imagine you would get that at most concerts, and I am sure that all the guys going back to the bar after the Grammies were not their for an exciting discourse on the relationship between post-tonal theory, Eminem, Lady Gaga and Green Day. Not to say that their music is not enjoyable; but putting things in perspective, one needs to sort out who the real geniuses that are living amongst us are.
 
Last edited:
Not to say that their music is not enjoyable; but putting things in perspective, one needs to sort out who the real geniuses that are living amongst us are.

Regardless of who wrote it or how well versed in theory and technique they are, everyone is in fact entitled to their OPINION. Whether I enjoy the antics of GG Allen or the "genius" of Miles Davis my opinion is still my own. We're not arguing about who deserves what, we're trying to figure out why people aren't getting along. You may have just found the root of the problem, who is really entitled to this label?

In an idealistic community, the people who have credibility would be the most recognized, but the truth is the people who can market themselves are the most recognized. That's not to say that some that are marketed aren't geniuses but it just points that you can't necessarily say that only your crowd come out to be the "geniuses." It's like saying you're the president because you're better versed in politics Obama. That's just not the way it works. Nobody is entitled to anything they can't manage to obtain themselves.
 
Actually, you can't equate politics and aesthetics because while politics is democratic aesthetics is not. If you go down that road, you ultimately end up saying that anything is as valid as anything else. So why study, why try for excellence? Any hack drummer is equal to Vinnie Colaiuta if I like it.

That having been said, politics is a popularity contest; but because someone is elected president, does not mean that they are the most qualified for the position. look at Jimmy Carter. And because someone has great ideas, doesn't mean those ideas will transfer over well to the whole of the population, look at Ronald Reagan. There is a bill that will work better then another bill regardless of who writes it and their popularity. But in a democracy, there is a give and take, as Obama pointed out recently, that is the necessity of fair and equal government. The bill becomes something else. Winston Churchill said, "Democracy is not the best form of government. it is the best we have." the other side of tyranny. or "The worst democracy is better than the best oligarchy."

Music purchasing is just as democratic, and there is also a first amendment issue at hand, who gets to say what, and who gets banned for saying what. I certainly don't want to go back to the days of the censors. The current market system can be just as exclusive. You have to sell something to be heard. You have to get press and create controversy to sell. All this has little to do with music making. But it is still better than the best oligarchy, where I would be told who to listen to and what to buy.

When we start of talk about aesthetics, we are talking about value, and there is a question of who values what and why. Metal, for example, is largely valued by a working class audience. Jazz is largely valued by a more bourgeoise audience of academics and artistic elites. It even gets funded through donations and public grants.

The issue becomes more controversial when you think about these types of entitlements. You have two kids applying for college, one spent two years with a noted jazz drummer and performed with the all-state jazz ensemble. The other toured with his death metal band, wrote, and released an album. Who gets the scholarship? In academic jobs often you will see a message, don't send your cds. Like someone who is actually writing and performing music has nothing to say. From my experience, they have more to say than most academics.

So yes, music making and purchasing is democratic; but that does not mean that it is all aesthetically equal. Some people are putting out new and original music. Some are just re-hacking what has been done for fame and fortune. Some people write great beats, other people steal them, sample them and make a fortune from them. One does not need to be innovative to be enjoyable.

Ultimately, there is a question of innovation. Why do people still talk about Bill Evans and Scott La Faro? Why does so many use a middle eight now since The Beatles? Schoenberg never made much money in his life; but went on to influence countless musicians including jazzers. Bach has influenced many composers: Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin and even the likes of Eddie Van Halen and Yngvie Malmsteem. So is every composer writing in the baroque period just as good if I like him? Just as good to me. In the end that is what matters to the listener. Just as good to the community of musicians at large. That is what matters to the musician.
 
So yes, music making and purchasing is democratic; but that does not mean that it is all aesthetically equal. Some people are putting out new and original music. Some are just re-hacking what has been done for fame and fortune. Some people write great beats, other people steal them, sample them and make a fortune from them. One does not need to be innovative to be enjoyable.

I agree with this. For some reason we've all turned into limp-wristed relativists so that it becomes OK to say that some X-factor dick is just as valuable to music and as artistic as a pioneering songwriter with an original message. The best art in history has been produced by people who believe that some art is just better than some other art. Arguments can be put forward for this. For example, those who love Radiohead will probably be listening to OK Computer in 50 years time. Those who are fans of Generic Pop Act #5 will almost certainly have forgotten them in 2 years. Why? Because their music was never made to be deep, wasn't slaved over, was made just for money, was made to conform with every rule in the book of trite music. Art is about journeying as far as possible into an aspect of human nature, of culture, of poetry. Some people try and do this and fail; some suceed; most would rather just churn out average but universally palatable music. I say don't be afraid to believe in the inherent value of a piece of art.
 
I really do feel like we're barking up a similar tree but I'm failing to articulate as eloquently as you. I feel that there can be a genius in any field but that we don't tend to see all of them. I was trying to point out that not all geniuses are involved in jazz. I wasn't really debating the legitimacy of any political system, I was trying to point out the way things are. I never said everything is best this way.

I am in college, I'm not in music school. If I was going to college for music I would have banked on my classical background and not my metal background. It's of more value to colleges, however that doesn't change what music I prefer. While I love listening to Bach, I'll probably continue to prefer the music of Mastodon for the foreseeable future.
 
Back
Top