Why do normies hate jazz with a passion?

I've never heard a normie talking about jazz let alone hating it

>normies
>passion
pick one

I've never heard jazz with any emotional substance or profundity.

>>74859700
Ah, I remember when I hadn't listened to Sun Ra too.

>>74859700
Is that because it's emotionally dishonest? Not enough post rock threads to contaminate?

They hate it because it so dominates the media. You can't switch on the wireless without some new jazz combo with their syncopated rhythms filling the air when all the people really want is a little innocent pop or rock. Why must hip hop be buried under these endless streams of jazz.

>>74859577
What are you talking about? Normies don't care about jazz. And they think "jazz" is just Kenny G and Frank Sinatra

>>74859598
I have, usualy "it's just noise" and "only pretentious people like it" stuff.

>>74859825
Apparently someone from /mu/ was in the wild.

Coming from a person who lives with a huge jazz fan, it's because it's not interesting unless it's blended with something else. I mean, really. Anything else. Squarepusher and maudlin of the well are the first things to come to my mind.

A lot of straightfoward jazz, while possibly unpredictable depending on what it is you're listening to, doesn't really have the structure to catch the average listener's attention nor does it have enough going on to intrigue a more eclectic listener.

>>74859577
they hate it because jazz pretends to be high art when it's really just background music for the elderly

>>74859851
And ambient music is music for housekeepers. Just hilarious, isn't it?

>>74859844
>Doesn't really have the structure to catch the average listener's attention
Are you implying that smooth "jazz", "fusion" and jazz pop are justified and aren't a disgrace to jazz?

>>74859844
>>74859881
And I'm sure casual listeners know or would even dare to listen to maudlin of the well of all bands.

>>74859844
>nor does it have enough going on to intrigue a more eclectic listener.
You must think classical is boring, too if you really think there isn't enough going on in a record like A Love Supreme. If anything, it just sounds like you lack the ability to be able to follow the kind of complex harmonic changes and intricate improvisation that makes up the jazz genre.

>>74859860
not all housekeepers are clinically retarded

File: Elegant_gypsy.jpg (81KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 300x300px

>>74859881
I seriously see nothing wrong with fusion

>>74859951
I meant fusion like Weather Report's Heavy Weather, hence "fusion".

>>74859951
>I'm white
OH IT SHOWS

>>74859974
What?

>>74859923
Classical has a time and a place for listening and has its hands in the pot of everything that's come after it. I could say the same thing for jazz too, but I just don't enjoy listening to it myself until it hits experimental stages where instruments non-traditional to the genre begin to get incorporated. That's close to the exact relationship I have with classical music.

Post Rock > Jazz

>>74860079
This isn't uncommon. It happens with a lot of genres of music. Classical and Jazz most often though because the content of the music is so complex that it's tough for new listeners to really be able to pick up on the details. Just like a radio pop listener will have a tough time picking up details on a Radiohead track, listeners of both of those would have a tough time picking up on details in classical/jazz works. Hell this idea can go outside music as well. Give the average person Infinite Jest and a Harry Potter book, they'll always immediately find the latter more enjoyable when the former is more creative, complex, and engaging ultimately.

"Experimental" stages of classical/jazz are much easier to listen to because they often water down the various complexities for the sake of one overt, easier to latch onto sound. In jazz this would be Sun Ra and Jazz Fusion in general. You brought up Squarepusher and MotW, their respective attempts at jazz are very shallow compared to the real thing, lacking the variety in rhythms, dynamics, and melodic/harmonic progression that makes the genre worth listening to.

I was just getting a good laugh out of this whole thread but this
>>74860236
is actually very well said and completely correct

File: R-732591-1489436614-6994.jpeg.jpg (135KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 600x600px

>>74860236
What would you consider "real jazz" then?

Would third stream be real jazz?