Do you have to be a musician to love jazz?

[wjd]

Do you have to be a musician to love and truly appreciate jazz, or is it possible for a non-musician to be a real jazz lover?

[Noj]

Non-musician and real jazz lover, here.:cool:

[D.D.]

Non-musician either.

[Fran]

Obviously not



Keep the Blue Flame Burning

[El Gaucho]

why are we doing this again?

[wjd]

Originally posted by El Gaucho
why are we doing this again?

Actually, I started the post in the hope that a certain poster would not return after the break to All About Jazz, and that this subject could be discussed more intelligently than it was the first time.

[sal]

I'm a musician, and I do believe that it has enhanced my love for jazz greatly, especially in helping me gain a greater understanding for what is actually taking place. But I don't think you need to be a musician to love and appreciate it.

[solarjazzband]

Well I'm too lazy to find the original thread, so here's my relpy;
When I meet a 'normal' guy, who has never touched an instrument, and he loves Kurt Rosenwinkel, it's so strange for me. And I once met such a guy... But I think it are mostly musicians who love someone like Rosenwinkel. So he might be only wellknown in the musicians scene.

[wjd]

Originally posted by solarjazzband
Well I'm too lazy to find the original thread, so here's my relpy;
When I meet a 'normal' guy, who has never touched an instrument, and he loves Kurt Rosenwinkel, it's so strange for me. And I once met such a guy... But I think it are mostly musicians who love someone like Rosenwinkel. So he might be only wellknown in the musicians scene.

I know at least 10 non-musicians who are quite familiar with his music and love it. This is not so strange.

[andreimatorin]

Originally posted by wjd
I know at least 10 non-musicians who are quite familiar with his music and love it. This is not so strange.

Well if you know at least 10 non-musicians who love jazz why are you asking this question...

Besides that, I actually believe that a non-musician can appreciate jazz in many ways that a music can not. I think that in some respects, trained musicians become too critical of the music and take it more as a science than an art. Of course this is not always the case. I believe that ideally, you want to become a trained musician who can use the extra knowledge, but in some ways forget that when you have to play or criticize someone's playing. The other day i heard a quote about someone describing Monk went something like "He had the knowledge of an old man, but played like a 3 year old child." This is arguable but i think you can see my point.

Non-musicians CAN have a certain sensibility that trained musicians neglect because of all the technical things they are taught to care about. I also believe that if you can't really put into words what's going on, it holds a kind of mysteriosity that is otherwise lacking if you can decifer everything one does while playing.

Anyway, i should go to sleep... just got back from a brad mehldau concert a scullers jazz club (boston). VERY VERY GOOD. Another Berklee grad by the way, for those of you who were talking smack about my school ;)

[Swinger]

Non-musician here as well.

I've never been a musician (and probably never will be).

[Jazz Kid]

non-musician here:)

[Muskrat Ramble]

This is all anecdotal, but so it goes:

First off, I loved music and jazz long before I ever played the guitar. Since that's true of so many people, it's obviously possible (though jazz is indeed a very complex form of music, and its subtleties are easy to miss if you don't have musical training and/or a good ear). Secondly,

Non-musicians CAN have a certain sensibility that trained musicians neglect because of all the technical things they are taught to care about.

I've experienced that myself. When you start playing, it tends to focus your listening on particular instruments (i.e., the one(s) you play) and particular technical or theoretical issues over just grooving to the whole gestalt of a tune. You can easily find yourself analyzing and picking a tune apart while listening. That's not a bad thing at all, but it can change how you hear and emotionally or intellectually respond to music. I used to know a pro jazz guitarist and composer who said that playing totally changed the way he appreciated and enjoyed music and that he missed the supposedly "simple" way a non-musician enjoys it. I know another pro guitarist who's been playing for decades, and he's pretty much totally burnt out on music now because of it.

[LectricGuitarDude]

Because 'Jazz' is undefinable its hard to answer your question.

Someone once told me that he like jazz. Diana Krall. Now I don't consider Diana Krall to be a jazzer at all. I also hate how people think Norah Jones is a jazzer.

As for your question, yes it is possible for non-musos to like jazz (by my defenition), but they would have to be what I call 'musically mature'. As in, theyve been around good music for awhile and they know how to *listen*, or have some musical knowledge.

Not everybody is 'musically mature' and I think that most of the people who are, happen to be musicians.



But I could be wrong...

Cheers,


(btw jazz to me does NOT include smooth jazz or anything like it, vocal stuff such as route 66 or my funny valentine, 'fusion' that is not related to the jazz tradition in any way (i like good fusion but theres a lot of crap that goes by that name), or dixieland (sorry, cant stand the stuff).

[Colman]

k in my jazz amjor class my mid term is.... one question

What is jazz?

i havent written it yet but i think about it everyday. i was making my friend lsiten to head hunters by herbie hancock in the car one day and they were like this doesnt sound like jazz to me.. to witch i replied well.... it is. he ok scat to it. to wich i tried and fialed pretty bad. he said oh well cant you scat to jazz? i said not all jazz...

he replied... what is jazz? could jazz be snoop dogg?

i said no

he said y not

i said.... well.... i dont know.

jazz is jazz who to say one thing is jazz and one thing is not. i dont think of snoop as jazz but when he put a hancock beat behind his words who's to say thats not.


so jazz is what jazz is to you

and to me vocal is jazz horns are jazz and computer can be jazz

jazz is what jazz is

[LectricGuitarDude]

LOL! I wish you all the luck in the world with that report!

Define Jazz! Wow! That questions almost as old as jazz itself.

For me, jazz is what is linked (reasonably closely) to the jazz tradition. Herbie's Head Hunter's is. But if someone tried something like that in 1940.. it just wouldnt be linked to what jazz was back then. Jazz is a tree that keeps on growing. New branches grow, only when they are connected to other branches, which in turn were connected to what was there before it.

On top of that, we all have our tastes. There is the branch with the funk in it, and others with latin in it. There's Ella, and there's Chaka Khan. There's Miles' Quintet, and further up, Miles's 80s stuff. It's all jazz. I just choose to not like Dixieland for instace.

And on top of that, we have our opinions as to just how far off some of these branches are to the main trunk. Some people may not consider 'Tutu' by Miles to be jazz. And I don't consider Norah Jones to be a jazzer.

And that is the end on my ramblings. If that made any sense at all. Once again.. good luck with answering the eternal question.

[Tenorman]

I think a better question which was hinted at earlier, is "Do you have to be musically aware or knowledgable to appreciate the finer points of Jazz?"

I would sit on the fence on that and say possibly.

People like music for a variety of reasons. Most people who are not musically knowledgable like a piece of music because it "appeals" to them.

Now I play a couple of instruments (or more accurately play at playing them) but my musical theory knowledge is zilch. Many of the early jazz pioneers were self taught and could not read. I think that it would be a reasonable assumption that they probably could not give you the notes of a chord (at least the horn men). They played the notes that sounded right to them. If they were following any form of theory, it was because the theory follows the practice of what sounds right. Could they, therefore appreciate their own music if they did not understand the theory?

I think I have just argued myself round in a circle:confused:

[LectricGuitarDude]

I reckon, if you are used to being around music that has a bit more to it that the latest dance music hit, you might just get jazz.

Back in the day, when the early jazzers played it by ear, they did know what they were doing cuz they were musically aware, and they were knowlegable. Just not in a theoretical kind of way.

A fave guitar player of mine had this to say:

"To really improvise- to say something you feel at the moment- is the most difficult thing in the world. If you play what you know, then it's not real. To truly improvise Requires you to not know anything, in a sense. The most beautiful thing is to play something for the first time in your life."
-John McLaughlin

Well, in my opinion. you would have to have an exceptional musical mind to be able to pull this off. Jazz has evolved considerably since the early days.

Going back to my earlier post, I believe you gotta be what I call 'musically mature' to truly appreciate jazz. You don't have to be a musician, and you don't have to know about how all the different arps relate to all the different chords etc.


But then, that's just my opinion, on a topic that has no real answer.


btw.. another interesting quote:

"Soloing is part cognitive and part intuitive. The most important thing for a musician to understand, is the function of the rational mind. There are three stages. During the first stage you have to acquire tools. Arpeggios, scales and approach patterns for instance. Work on the fingerings, practice a line - always in all 12 keys - and get solid on the new material at different tempi.

Stage two comes into play when you are able to recall the new material instantly. Then you should focus on a good sound and articulation. Master different dynamics.


During the third stage... you have to forget everything, and just play! The third stage is all about filling the notes with emotion."

-Kai Eckhardt