Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 08-18-2006, 09:39 AM

from a listener's viewpoint, jazz is as comprehensable as, say, hip hop is--if you focus on the turntablists and recognize the sides being cut up, you are in on both the joke of the piece and the intertext network the piece sets up. so you understand the piece differently because you are familiar with the tradition being refashioned.
same thing with jazz: the only real distinction is the depth of the tradition and its age. for example, if you are listening to bop, it is good to know something of cheesy 40s pop--which is not the easiest thing to accomplish is 2006, frankly, even given the saturation of historical material triggered by digital recording technologies. you also need to know the history of the music (jazz) up to bop. two major reference sources.

the distinction between these forms lay in the way in which referencing works. in bop, the references were done in two main ways: via harmonic structure and via allusion. both were fit into a fairly rigid system based on the harmonic substructure (the chord changes), which determined the scales (sequences of pitches) that were ruled in or out. so you would need to focus on allusions at the level of form, or on the level of compositional features---hip hop presents you with a wider range of sonic features in the allusions that it makes because it is the recordings that are being cut up--so you can recognize collage elements from the qualities of the recording and so dont have to rely on recognition of compositional elements alone. for example, when tribe called quest chops up roy ayers or the crusaders, you can be tipped to it by the particular qualities of ayers recordings AND by the compositional elements ayers used. (and had there been no roy ayers, there would be no tribe)

that's about it.
if you are playing bop or bop-influenced music (it's 2006--i dont personally see the point of playing charlie parker in 2006, but that's just me--charlie parker was better at beng charlie parker than anyone else has managed to be--well, except for sonny stitt.. maybe...) then you have to cultivate a different relation to these same features simply because you are making choices about phrases or pitches within the rules that govern bop as a form--which is different from recognizing them in the playing of someone else.

all that says is that playing the music and listening to it are not the same activity.
and that one is not better than the other.

it's pretty simple (i just cant say it that way)

08-18-2006, 09:39 AM	#44 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	from a listener's viewpoint, jazz is as comprehensable as, say, hip hop is--if you focus on the turntablists and recognize the sides being cut up, you are in on both the joke of the piece and the intertext network the piece sets up. so you understand the piece differently because you are familiar with the tradition being refashioned. same thing with jazz: the only real distinction is the depth of the tradition and its age. for example, if you are listening to bop, it is good to know something of cheesy 40s pop--which is not the easiest thing to accomplish is 2006, frankly, even given the saturation of historical material triggered by digital recording technologies. you also need to know the history of the music (jazz) up to bop. two major reference sources. the distinction between these forms lay in the way in which referencing works. in bop, the references were done in two main ways: via harmonic structure and via allusion. both were fit into a fairly rigid system based on the harmonic substructure (the chord changes), which determined the scales (sequences of pitches) that were ruled in or out. so you would need to focus on allusions at the level of form, or on the level of compositional features---hip hop presents you with a wider range of sonic features in the allusions that it makes because it is the recordings that are being cut up--so you can recognize collage elements from the qualities of the recording and so dont have to rely on recognition of compositional elements alone. for example, when tribe called quest chops up roy ayers or the crusaders, you can be tipped to it by the particular qualities of ayers recordings AND by the compositional elements ayers used. (and had there been no roy ayers, there would be no tribe) that's about it. if you are playing bop or bop-influenced music (it's 2006--i dont personally see the point of playing charlie parker in 2006, but that's just me--charlie parker was better at beng charlie parker than anyone else has managed to be--well, except for sonny stitt.. maybe...) then you have to cultivate a different relation to these same features simply because you are making choices about phrases or pitches within the rules that govern bop as a form--which is different from recognizing them in the playing of someone else. all that says is that playing the music and listening to it are not the same activity. and that one is not better than the other. it's pretty simple (i just cant say it that way) __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 08-18-2006 at 09:41 AM..