unequaltemperament

[unequaltemperament]

Random thought: Whoever made figured bass probably enjoyed learning polynomial long division.

[unequaltemperament]

[unequaltemperament]

This video focuses on some other stuff like the gender gap in jazz! Definitely recommend. There's a whole lot to be said about Laufey and jazz in case you haven't noticed. But that does not mean that Laufey is a horrible person or anything like that. Laufey makes great music! Like I said, I love her music! But a lot of the media is pushing her to be a savior of jazz which is creating a lot of much needed discussion about a lot of things.

So I just watched Adam Neely's video on Laufey. I agree with his point on her not really being jazz- and I'm a Laufey fan!

But something he brought up which I wanted to address was defining jazz. I have a couple comments.

1. Of all of the definitions and analogies that could have been used, Neely used Wynton Marsalis's definition. I think Neely was already aware of the problems in the definition and he mentioned it, but it still bugs me. Jazz is an extremely broad genre. Marsalis, however, believes otherwise, speaking out time and time again against free jazz, jazz fusion, etc. His view of jazz eliminates decades of innovation. It restricts jazz to a box, unable to develop and grow. Which leads me to my next point...

2. Jazz is dead. I'll prove it. Listen to Duke Ellington's version of Take the A Train. Now listen to Donna Lee. Then Spain by Chick Corea. Then listen to Sphere No. 1 by Cecil Taylor. Oh and then Shifting Sands by Avishai Cohen. I can go on. These are all supposedly "jazz". If a genre is supposedly a "category of artistic composition...characterized by similarities in form, style, or subject matter", then how can we have such vastly different pieces? Here's my take on this: jazz is not a genre. It's a family. We could say jazz is ragtime. Or we could just have ragtime and the early 1920s/30s swing and big band music as the parents of this family. And from here, bebop was born and then cool jazz and free jazz were born. Next came modal and Latin and hard bop. You could continue (and fix any errors in) this lineage until you reach whatever we consider to be "jazz" today.

Maybe you can come up with a definition of jazz now. But I challenge you to come up with a definition that'll last for the next 10 years, or 50, or 100. Music is constantly evolving. Why shove music into a bunch of boxes. Let it be free. See what happens.

All this to say: genres are stupid. Don't make "jazz" or "pop". Make music.

[unequaltemperament]

So I just watched Adam Neely's video on Laufey. I agree with his point on her not really being jazz- and I'm a Laufey fan!

But something he brought up which I wanted to address was defining jazz. I have a couple comments.

1. Of all of the definitions and analogies that could have been used, Neely used Wynton Marsalis's definition. I think Neely was already aware of the problems in the definition and he mentioned it, but it still bugs me. Jazz is an extremely broad genre. Marsalis, however, believes otherwise, speaking out time and time again against free jazz, jazz fusion, etc. His view of jazz eliminates decades of innovation. It restricts jazz to a box, unable to develop and grow. Which leads me to my next point...

2. Jazz is dead. I'll prove it. Listen to Duke Ellington's version of Take the A Train. Now listen to Donna Lee. Then Spain by Chick Corea. Then listen to Sphere No. 1 by Cecil Taylor. Oh and then Shifting Sands by Avishai Cohen. I can go on. These are all supposedly "jazz". If a genre is supposedly a "category of artistic composition...characterized by similarities in form, style, or subject matter", then how can we have such vastly different pieces? Here's my take on this: jazz is not a genre. It's a family. We could say jazz is ragtime. Or we could just have ragtime and the early 1920s/30s swing and big band music as the parents of this family. And from here, bebop was born and then cool jazz and free jazz were born. Next came modal and Latin and hard bop. You could continue (and fix any errors in) this lineage until you reach whatever we consider to be "jazz" today.

Maybe you can come up with a definition of jazz now. But I challenge you to come up with a definition that'll last for the next 10 years, or 50, or 100. Music is constantly evolving. Why shove music into a bunch of boxes. Let it be free. See what happens.

All this to say: genres are stupid. Don't make "jazz" or "pop". Make music.

[unequaltemperament]

Yay! New blog!

I'm currently reading Twentieth Century Harmony by Vincent Persichetti.

I'm a pianist and double bassist. I play jazz, but I've played a fair bit of classical music. You won't hear much classical music theory unless it's really cool, I'm integrating it into my music, it's from the romantic or twentieth century eras, or it's just really really stupid and I'm dying of laughter.

I also love exploring other genres! I'm currently trying to learn a bit about Hindustani and Carnatic music theory.

Ok I should sleep now. I'll probably post something within a week. Maybe.