Greatest Jazz album of all time.

>>74273350
boi is he finna smoke some loud

>what's breathless
Kenny G > Mingus

>>74273350
>tfw not even the best mingus album

sad, but it's still a 10/10

>>74273350
>greatest Jazz album of all time isn't even a jazz album

good job OP

>Kind of Blue, The Black Saint, A Love Supreme. The list goes on...

File: 574846835735846.jpg (64KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 600x600px

/thread

>>74273407
Bossa Nova isn't jazz.

>>74273350
t. tone deaf white critic

>>74273424
it's brazilian jazz mixed with samba so in a way it is

>>74273426
That's every music critic.

File: Screenshot_2017-07-31-21-04-50.png (2MB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x2560px

Its obviously The Shape of Jazz to Come

>>74273374

>>74273424
Get off this board for once, most people irl will say it's jazz

>>74273491
Bossa Nova is its own thing. Fuck off with your argumentum ad populum.

>>74273350

>you now realize it isn't his hair

>>74273854
ha ha oh shit

>>74273350
can we please not meme this album to death on here thanks

Any noteworthy 2017 jazz releases?

>>74275860
Nobody cares.

>>74273854
no, it has always been a hat

>very limited amount of improvisation with non-existent amounts of melodic/harmonic development to make up for it
>simplified grooves that take away any of the more subtle/dynamic aspects of jazz drumming (even though many examples in jazz show you can have both)
>large arrangement that weaves in parts like a first year music school kiddie
>a "variety" of different parts that play too close together instead of being more syncopated, thus not being taken full advantage of to create dance rhythms nor actual depth/complexity

It's literally outdated, cliche dance music with no depth. The 60s equivalent of The Epic but not as bloated. Note how this album wasn't even that highly acclaimed when it came out; Downbeat gave it a 4/5 when just about any relatively decent record can nab a 5/5 from them. The Black Saint And The Sinner Lady didn't get praise until later by people who hadn't listened to more than a handful of jazz records and were too casual to fully digest the more intricate improvisations in real jazz music but also couldn't handle the depth in compositions of classical music.

File: 5dbf7c6e710e4df97899e907ee8a555d.gif (967KB, 245x213px) Image search: [Google]

967KB, 245x213px

dude, you couldnt convince anyone the last time you went on and on about this album, why try again? greatest jazz album in YOUR opinion im sure, but jazz is one of the most subjective genres out there, there cannot be a greatest album.

File: 41V39ETmgbL._SX355_.jpg (23KB, 355x349px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 355x349px

don't mind me

>>74276196
>no depth
>just because parts are repetitive and play "close together" means its bad

Also how do simple grooves take away aspects of jazz drumming? The drumming on this album is insanely varied

>>74277247
>Also how do simple grooves take away aspects of jazz drumming?
Because then it has to stick to one particular approach to its drumming for extended periods of time, where as jazz is best when it takes a more varied yet organic approach which this album doesn't do at all.
>The drumming on this album is insanely varied
Maybe if all you do is listen to radio pop music. It's very basic by jazz standards.

>>74277279
How does simplicity= a lack of quality? The drumming on the album is very good.

Also you havent shown me any example to prove anything you are saying

>>74277279
>>74277305
?

>>74277316
>>74277326
>How does simplicity= a lack of quality?
It certainly implies a lack of creativity when there's literally no other redeeming value here. The kinda jazz flappers used to dance to was more interesting in drumming than this ffs.
>Also you havent shown me any example to prove anything you are saying
Why do I have to show an example of something you have listened to? You're deaf if you can't for example hear that Solo Dancer has that intro bit where it's just straightforward hit hat hits, then the rest of the track has the exact same rhythm with the occasional dynamic change or hitting a cymbal. That's even weaker than a track known for having the most simple drumming out there like So What? by Miles Davis that still manages to somehow add more diverse rhythms with its snare inflections.

>>74277431
>no other redeeming value here
yes there is

You seem to be judging this album as a improv focused jazz album, when it isn't, "rhythmic variety" isn't really the goal of this record

>>74273350
i used to think this until i heard a love supreme

>>74277470
You certainly haven't brought any reason to think it's good. It's not like it has any compositional worth either with it's pop music tier two to four measure phrases. The music's not energetic enough even in the realm of jazz to be good dance/'body' music. No fun improv. Nothing.

>>74277504
A huge chunk of Track A has "fun improv"

But I listen to the album for its passion, its nice instrumental pallette, and its melodies, the album is certainly danceable with the grooves that you mentioned above, and I think theres enough energy in it to warrent an interesting listen.

>pop music tier two to four measure phrases
How many phrases should it have, Mr Bernstein? And how does "two to four measures" equate to "pop tier" nothing on here has a pop structure, no accessible playing, no relation to pop to be found. Are you saying its "pop" simply because its catchy? Have you ever thought the melodies are catchy simply because they're good?

>>74277504
>The music's not energetic enough even in the realm of jazz to be good dance/'body' music.
Mode D-F is pretty energetic.

>>74277574
>its passion
Wtf does this even mean?
>And how does "two to four measures" equate to "pop tier"
How does it not? The idea of melodies being that long at most is a pop music idea so they can be repeated and be more easily digested by masses.
>no accessible playing
>lacks the intricate improv of jazz that requires careful listening from listener
>lacks the complexity in melodic development/harmonic progression of classical music
>is easy listening tier in terms of stuff that can be considered "dance music"
>not accessible

>makes compositional jazz that lacks the complexity of both the classical and jazz around it
>"no relation to pop found"
The album sounds like the epitome of pop music with its simple dance grooves and two to four measure long melodic phrases that often play the role of chorus sections.
>>74277590
Compared to where the album starts, yeah. Compared to other jazz or the dance music that has existed since its inception, no.

>>74277749
Theres intricate playing all over the record, what are you talking about?

Honestly, why does complexity matter that much? I still defend the fact that there are moments of complexity, but seriously, why does complex=good and simplicity=bad?

On the liner notes of The Black Saint, Mingus had his psychotherapist review the album, saying that his lack of technical musical experience "didn't matter" This record is about the sounds, and the passionate players, and the themes that run through the music, it can't be compared to most Jazz albums because it wasn't composed like other jazz records. There is a ton of harmony and detail with the melody and grooves and you can't tell me a single album that has as much passionate playing as this one does.

File: jonbenjamin-wellishouldhave-cover-900x900-300.jpg (495KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 900x900px

Shit taste ITT

>>74277898
>Theres intricate playing all over the record, what are you talking about?
>doesn't point out anything like I have been doing
Don't bother discussing with me when you don't plan to put an ounce of the amount of effort I do. I have cited its simple melodic phrases that dominate the record multiple times to show otherwise.
>Honestly, why does complexity matter that much? I still defend the fact that there are moments of complexity, but seriously, why does complex=good and simplicity=bad?
Because music needs something to be engaging. Cool, in-depth improvisations, complex melodic/harmonic work, timbrel manipulations, very high visceral energy, atmosphere, etc. This album has none of this.

>and you can't tell me a single album that has as much passionate playing as this one does.
Is this some high school tier "but they don't play with SOUL" garbage? I asked you to define this. But you still haven't. I'll say it again, stop wasting my time if you plan to bring nothing new and just spout the same exact shit.

>>74277954
You should have not looked like a goofy nigga.

>>74277980
Most of D-F doesnt repeat melodies, and when it is it either conveys atmosphere (the bit that is introduced in the beginning that is played again during the middle, the flamenco playing) or very high visceral energy (the climax near the ending). The trumpet solo on Track B is a "in depth improvisation" and doesnt have any repeated grooves.

Again, simplicity does not = a lack of a quality, a lack of engaging "SOUL"ful playing and lack of interesting melodies/arrangements does. TBS doesn't have these problems, and again, just because it isn't the most complex doesn't mean it's the worst. It makes up for that with, again, passionate playing. The drumming on D-F, the loud, intense brass arrangements at the end of Track A, the muted Sax solo on Track B as well as the delicately rising and falling of dynamics during the groove of track B, which transitions into the intense build up of second half of that track, the piano playing and wild, dense "latin dance" sections of Track C, there is atmosphere, well crafted melody/harmony (such as how most instruments seem to be improvised but fall under a huge harmony, being very natural and organic yet beautifully composed in most tracks.) and visceral playing, (again, the best example of this is the second half of D-F)

You seem like the type of guy to go "I like this" then find out it isn't as complex as some Bach piece then throw it into the trash. You don't really care about the music, more so sheet music and fun facts your music theory teacher taught you when you were 14. This over-reliance on theory makes it hard to criticize certain albums (you know you shouldn't judge a rap album the same way as a classical suite right? Same way you shouldn't judge a Jazz record the same way you'd judge a third stream record, or judge a John Coltrane record the same way as a Charles Mingus record) detracts from the fact that music is an auditory experience, and there's no album that fits the term "auditory experience" like TBS.

>>74273350
But that's not Oh Yeah!

>>74276036
The new Angle 9 is decent

>>74273350
mingus more like dingus

File: T.monk1.jpg (288KB, 1200x630px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1200x630px

ahem.