It was pure cringeworthy to watch the whole thing. You cannot

>still watching memetano

Fantano is a just a plain music geek who's been thrown onto a pedestal by a bunch of hip hop fans. Wouldn't be a problem if people didn't take him so seriously.

It was tropes vs women tier of ignorance

>>75166052
>You cannot talk about jazz without touching on the technical aspects
Why?

>>75166052
This, it felt like he doesn't know what he is talking about

At the same time though, who the fuck cares about the technical aspects of cool jazz

>>75166052
for what it is it's not bad. it's better to foster love for jazz in some new fans than to disregard anyone that can't instantly explain music theory.

>>75166052
>>75166102
You guys are literal nobody.
Fantano job is literally talking about music.

>>75166101
Actual music criticism doesn't revolve around "muh feelings i get during the listening experience xD". Only mediocre and amateur "critiques" do that.

>>75166052
isn't he copying that Deep Cuts guy with this series?

>>75166156
>Music is objective
stop

>>75166141
>literally being known for reviewing recent entry-level garbage on YouTube, and having a terrible meme channel
I'd rather be a nobody.

who cares about this clueless retards boring music taste. he doesnt actually know lots about hip-hop and knows much less about everything else.

>>75166188
>I don't know what music theory is: The post

>>75166156
Okay, but you still haven't explained why music criticism should talk about the technical aspects

>>75166052
>luck
lol

It's not luck. He specifically markets himself to people who either don't know any music theory or just don't care. It's a bigger market for clicks and its easier to make videos for if you don't have proper education on the subject.

You guys are such angry dweebs about melon for all of the wrong reasons and you act like he does it on accident like he's the world's luckiest clown. Get a grip.

They were good album recommendations. Bill Evans is great

>>75166205
>I have not proven to actually be musically educated yet I try to bait people by saying Music Theory a lot
stop

>>75166159
>reccomending albums is copying someone

but yes, he posted a comment on one of Oliver's "Introduction To:" videos before starting the starter pack series

>>75166188
Music isn't "objective" (this means absolutely nothing, by the way), but criticism is.
You'd expect someone who makes his living off listening to music some artistic integrity, wouldn't you? You'd expect him to have a broad culture about most genres, not a really feeble toe-dipping experience listening to what's top rated on RYM only.
You'd expect him to know how music works, have even somewhat of a basic understanding of music theory, else why would his opinion matter more than the average joe you can meet in the street?

the day I care more about music theory than the feelings a song gives me is the day I kill myself not because I want to die but because I will no longer enjoy music and that would fuckin' suck

>>75166052
He's the world's biggest most influential music critic for a reason you know ;)

>>75166263
wew

I'm still waiting for the Baroque Period starter pack. The "world's busiest music nerd" hasn't reviewed one classical composition

>>75166052
Bro, he said is for listening jazz for the first time, he doesn't need to talk about the technical aspects of jazz cause the video is for the people who don't know about jazz, he knows about it, he choose not to talk about it cause it would be pointless in this case, if he would've do it he would look pretentious as fuck
is like y'all just searching and researching even the must miniscule and ridiculous reason just to throw shit at him
Also, if you dislike him so .uch why are you subscribed to him and watching his videos? I know the answer, you like him secretely and are afraid to say it

>>75166263
And that's exactly why you should never even attempt reviewing art as a whole.

>>75166291
He will eventually, you'll see

>>75166298
DAMN...

>>75166246
What are you even talking about? It's clear that Fantano can't offer anything other than emotional descriptors and explanations of personal preference. And music theory doesn't offer a basis on which to judge music, it's a descriptive discipline.
>the study of the theoretical elements of music including sound and pitch, rhythm, melody, harmony, and notation

>>75166052
Y'all know this is just his opinion, right? ;)))))

>>75166263
To achieve those feelings in music, you gotta know music theory

>>75166262
Not the anon you quoted, but you still haven't explained the benefit we get when a critic knows theory and discusses the technical side of things.
Just saying that it's important and ignoring theory is for "mediocre and amateur "critiques"' doesn't tell me why it's useful

>>75166313
>>75166339
You think I'm trying to make or review music? All I do is listen.

>>75166263
Exactly >>75166313 and >>75166325.

>>75166325
>emotional descriptors and explanations of personal preference.
stop

>>75166359
Care to prove me wrong? When did he offer anything other than that? Feel free to provide an example. But yeah, I should just stop because you're not interesting in having a conversation.

>>75166052
>you can't have an opinion on music / make reviews because you didn't learn music theory and don't play an instrument
you're either retarded or nice b8 m8 (i don't like fanthano either)

>>75166339
>To achieve those feelings in music, you gotta know music theory

yeah, so that's why there's good musicians who can't even read sheet music.

t. plays multiple instruments and read books on music theory, I just don't use them as cudgel in 4chan debates

>>75166367
Yeah. I'm not going to prove a simple YouTube video search.
You're stupid and I rather do something productive.

File: download.png (4KB, 183x275px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 183x275px

>>75166263
Agreed! Brainlets assemble!

>>75166399
>I don't have anything to say, therefore you're stupid and I'm leaving
Sure proved me wrong right there. Thanks for "playing".

>>75166418
you got me there. guess I lost this one :'(

>>75166349
>but you still haven't explained the benefit we get when a critic knows theory and discusses the technical side of things.
Offering a new view, which might help understanding an artist's approach. Understanding where the artist came from with his music, what he wanted to achieve, and knowing his influences, knowing where he surpassed others and where are the weaker points of his music.
Being able to compare it to other works on a technical level is important. Of course there is always be a bias in our judgment, we are only human, but if we can come as close as judging music objectively as we can, it's a step further.

>>75166367
I seriously don't get your point, what's wrong with reviewing musix just for the emotion you get while listening to it?
Also, if you didn't know this, the music critics he make are for a general viewer, not just for people who know a lot about structure of music and studies mysic, so of course he wouldn't touch those topics often

>>75166052
>You cannot talk about jazz without touching on the technical aspects
LMAO
some people should just shoot themselves

BREAKING: Fantano Mentions Jazz Yet Again! Jazzfags on Suicide Watch! Razors and Rope Sold Out!

If Fantano discussed music theory and all the technical aspects of music-making as much as you do in your wet dreams he'd have nowhere as many fans as he does today

>>75166450
>what's wrong with reviewing musix just for the emotion you get while listening to it?
>Also, if you didn't know this, the music critics he make are for a general viewer,
Great, you acknowledged it. So, why have you been pretending he's any better than that? And it matters because music can be appreciated on a different level with the knowledge of music theory.

>>75166052
Bitch I bet you're one of those people who look at your food and say, EGH, THIS BURGER, TH-THIS BURRGER... YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO MAKE BURGERS... HERE'S A SPECIAL TECHNIC OF HOW TO MAKE IT, YOU JUST DID IT IN YOUR PERSONAL SHITTY TASTE

>>75166450
>what's wrong with reviewing musix just for the emotion you get while listening to it?
There's nothing "wrong" with it, just don't expect people who actually know a bit about music to take you seriously in your judgment.
>the music critics he make are for a general viewer
And he should be treated as such, therefore he deserves every criticism he gets ITT.

>>75166518
F O O D A N A L O G Y

>>75166518
How many times it has to be explained to you people? Here:
>>75166325
>>75166443
>>75166511
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49alQj7c5ps

>>75166511
>>75166532
I'm saying that he knows about all these aspects of music you all masturbate about and think you are superior for knowing them, he just don't talk about them cause his reviews are for a general public

>>75166543
Hey idiot music theory is still a theory

Checkmate atheists!

File: Penmayne-ProductLoRes_Siena-Fedora-Black-Black-Pleated-Band-Side-Feature_8de34720-f128-414f-9ed8-a797ad98df61_grande.jpg (16KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 480x360px

>>75166543

>>75166052
Anthony obviously knows theory and technical aspects. He just presents it in a way for people who know nothing. He's been reviewing music for years. He's had to have picked up some knowledge to an extent. He's also pretty good at bass.

>>75166156
That's actually exactly what music criticism is. Edward Aldwell himself only cared about music theory in relation to the creation of music, and thought music theory for analysis' sake was pointless.

>>75166566
Ah, the great resort of a man with no original thought or argument - a reaction image.

>>75166205
Are you implying that music theory is "objective"?

What's the fuss about here? He's just reviewing a different kind of pop music.

>>75166570
This, this is what I've been saying all this time and these assholes just ignore it

>>75166557
>I'm saying that he knows about all these aspects of music
If he did, he wouldn't waste his time making the surface level "criticism" that he does
That, or he's in only for the views and attracting a massive fanbase of ignorant teens, which I'm not sure is something to be proud of.
Take your pick, honestly.

>>75166563
>>75166566
>this is the scope of brainlet arguements

>>75166101
Jazz revolves around improvisation. What essentially makes one jazz record better than other is the solist take on a given tune, which many times is well known among jazz musicians (the standards). Aproach to chord changes, scale vocabulary and application of harmonic techniques (e.g. tritone subs) are certain topics that are evaluated on a musician's performance. Otherwise our opinions would restricted to the "I like it/I don't" type of judgement.

File: you.jpg (1MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3840x2160px

>>75166586
do you think I give a fuck

>>75166557
>I'm saying that he knows about all these aspects of music you all masturbate about and think you are superior for knowing them
I'm not superior to him? How can I even pretend to be? For all we know he might know music theory very well. A review which consists only of personal preference and emotional descriptors is virtually meaningless for anyone other than the reviewer.

>>75166543
did you even watched the video. if anything, it provides support to Fantano's approach (which, by the way, isn't completely devoid of music theory)

>>75166589
How many times?
>>75166543

>>75166298
>he knows about it
[citation needed]

>>75166630
>virtually meaningless for anyone other than the reviewer.
not really.

>>75166511
Literally no one does you dumb cunt, and if they do theyre idiots

>>75166636
>>75166630
> A review which consists only of personal preference and emotional descriptors is virtually meaningless for anyone other than the reviewer.
This is the objection here.

/mu/ is the tsundere in the melons harem

>>75166649
Yes, let's see it.

File: 5644.jpg (7KB, 209x204px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 209x204px

>>75166052
Why do you think he concentrates on lyrics so much? An Italian mathematician knows more about theory than him

>>75166670
thats where its wrong though

File: n8umjWj.png (3KB, 698x1284px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 698x1284px

>>75166566
>>75166616

>>75166648
That didn't answer my question.

>>75166724
At least watch the video.

File: 1503000807114.png (1MB, 2000x1874px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x1874px

>>75166701
do you think I give a fuck

>>75166205
>I just started learning music theory last month: the post

>>75166398
Reading sheet music is unrelated to having knowledge in music theory

>>75166769
At least put some effort in and make it funny.

EVERYBODY STOP! CONSIDER THIS:

Fantano is a retard and you are all retards

>>75166730
I watched the video before you even replied the first time. It still doesn't answer my question. I'm asking if the post was trying to say music theory is an objective standard.

File: 1502441773861.jpg (25KB, 500x501px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 500x501px

this entire thread

>>75166339
this is so blatantly untrue

anyone address the fact that jazz is shit lol

>>75166610
>he's in only for the views and attracting a massive fanbase of ignorant teens
I wouldn't say it in that way, i'd say he is doing it cause he is informing people who don't know a lot about the new music that is comin out, saying which ones he liked and which ones he did not and why without going to far in music theory cause that would be to much for them

>>75166819
>I'm asking if the post was trying to say music theory is an objective standard.
If you've watched the video, how are you still asking the same question over and over again?
>>75166325
>And music theory doesn't offer a basis on which to judge music, it's a descriptive discipline.
>the study of the theoretical elements of music including sound and pitch, rhythm, melody, harmony, and notation
Nowhere does it say or even imply that it offers a basis on which to judge the quality of music.

>>75166156
Music and art as a whole functions as a conduit through which to express and communicate ideas and emotions. Evoking emotion is at least half of what it's all about. Technique and theory is certainly interesting, and people who have knowledge of it definitely have a higher capacity for appreciation of it, because appreciating both the art in and of itself and the technique behind it is broader than appreciating only the art. But the same is true in the opposite direction. Appreciating only technique is about as shallow a reduction as one can make, and it limits your appreciation to one compartment of a broader whole.

Interest in the quantitative aspect of art, and in this case I mean the numeric complexity of the theory, is nice, but that reduces the art to mathematics. Interest in the performative technique of art, i.e. how fast and challenging the physical element of the music is to perform, reduces the art to essentially athleticism. There are typists that can type 450 words per minute, just as a pianist can play a unfathomably difficult piece at a ridiculous pace, but a typing isn't art either. The emotional element of art is the point at which it transcends the mere intellectual aspects of it.

Maybe you know this already, but your post reads as incredibly shallow to the point of being vapid. Sorry if this comes off too formal, in essence all I mean to say is that not caring about the emotional aspect of art is fucking retarded.

>>75166222
On the flip side, I think you should be open to the idea that there is added value to it all when you recognize the technical work put into it.

>>75166141
Fantano does it poorly

>>75166867
its too much for him as well though

>>75166806
t.spectacularly clever individual

File: Saint_Germain_-_Boulevard.jpg (30KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 300x300px

It's great he's directing some of his youtube audience to Jazz. He's obviously not knowledgeable about it but then that is not the point.

>>75166861
No but anyone will eat up some retard aimlessly blowing on a horn if he dresses nice enough/is black enough

>>75166890
He does it "poorly" cause its for people that is just starting to know about it

>>75166785
please explain how music theory offers a legitimate, objective way to determine the quality of music.

>>75166886
How does it feel that you wasted so much time for writing something it has been said many tes and responded many times?

>>75167043
idk, just wanted to add my two cents. Didn't read the whole thread.

Has there ever been somebody who knows music theory that says music theory doesn't matter?

>>75167043
>>75167056

And still, different people can articulate things in different ways. I think a lot of this thread is people on two sides of a spectrum dismissing each other, without much overlap.

>>75167038
for one thing it actually talks about the music

>>75167078
No, and Fantano is not one of those

>>75167078
I know music theory, and while I wouldn't say it doesn't matter insofar as it's a great tool for any person actually making music, I think judging something based merely on theory is a mistake.

>>75167088
What side are you on?

>>75167078
No, because they know that even if you dont know it, you're subconsciously using it all the time

File: jazzthreadgay.png (191KB, 713x571px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 713x571px

why does anybody take jazzthreadguy seriously then when he is basically exactly the same

>>75167142
Read the whole thread

File: 1504555727656.jpg (98KB, 650x641px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 650x641px

>>75167117
wow the first intelligent post ITT

>>75166612
I think the first dude was being ironic.

>>75166188
Criticism is making an objective analysis.
You clearly don't understand what objectivity and subjectivity are. Objectivity is looking at something for what it is, subjectivity is looking at yourself through it. Fantano just spouts buzzwords and says a number so he doesn't do either... But subjectivity is literally smalltalk and not a matter of discussion.

>>75166543
>free from aesthetic or artistic judgement
literally 40 seconds in and the video you linked has already undermined your argument. a music "reviewer" has no responsibility to bring theory into their discussion because a review is not descriptive in the same way that the analysis of a composition is. Conflating the two would either make for the most boorish, dry review lacking in a definitive argument, or the most ridiculous analysis with completely indefensible claims about the piece. Want to explain why a piece sounds the way it does, how it was put together or where its influences are drawn from? that's the realm of theory. Want to articulate the aesthetic experience of a piece, its emotive qualities, textures and lyricism? That's the realm of criticism. Please learn the difference.

>>75166313
And if you can't understand a work and its intentions then you can never get art anyway because that's literally all that art is.

>>75167134
No side. I like that I can notice and appreciate music theory, it helps distinguish real work from genetic manipulation of the most addictive qualities of music. An example would be some song that sounds simple, but I know it's deceptively unique, and the writing was just clever enough to take something different and craft it in a way that sounds natural to the point that nobody without that insider knowledge would be able to tell that it modulated a bunch of times or something.

But if somebody is blowing their load so hard on just being clever and they forget that arguably the most challenging and rewarding element of music is to make somebody feel something beautiful (not just pretty, but like beautiful in how pretty or horrific or furious it make you feel) is really reductionary.

Sometimes musicians are so wrapped up in clever modulations, complex polyrhythms, or just moving their appendages around in challenging ways that all you can hear is the technique, and it sounds to me like they don't really have any specific emotions or like philosophy to communicate, and it comes off as incredibly shallow. Like I said in a different post, some people can type 450 words a minute, which is impressive, but it doesn't make them an artist.

File: 66236569.jpg (110KB, 462x348px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 462x348px

>>75166156

>>75167038
See >>75166614

>>75167404
Yeah, I take for granted that what you wrote here isn't common sense. The whole point of making something is to communicate something. Most music is a commercial commodity, however, or just simple entertainment so that's most often the focus of the work.
You can't discount that the concept of a work can be about technicality - like Trout Mask Replica sort of is in a lot of ways. The work still needs to carry out a purpose in getting a certain idea about technicality across - the idea that was the reason for the work in the first place. It's good to have a skill and all, but that doesn't mean you have anything worthwhile to say.
This was a mess of a comment, but there were some points in there somewhere so whatever.

do you guys like jazz
what's your favorite jazz album

>>75167142
he touches on chord and scale theory stuff at times and even that is way more than what fantano ever does

>>75167404
it's quite possible to notice if the same chords are rehashed again and again or the piece is pure technical wank without knowing theory at all

File: 1505467441943.jpg (45KB, 716x717px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 716x717px

>this thread still exists

>>75167558
I know I can be wordy, especially in off the cuff conversations like this.

>>75167558
>The work still needs to carry out a purpose in getting a certain idea about technicality across - the idea that was the reason for the work in the first place.

I don't know if I'm misinterpreting this or not, but I definitely think that technicality is more of a byproduct of higher ideas, not the idea itself. Like, it's hard to communicate fear through lyricless music, but the process of trying to communicate what it feels like to be afraid will almost inevitably result in some atypical theoretical techniques imo.

>>75167638
Sure, I mean for me it's been literally impossible not to organize the music in my head in a way that recognizes those most typical of patterns since I was like 15. But I definitely think there are people that have next to zero aptitude for it, and might not be able to recognize it even if trained. Being in music school for a few semesters made it evident that literally most professional musicians are just choir kids that thought they were cool, and will spend the rest of their careers as mere tools of various composers. And a lot of the composers will just be regurgitating the rules taught in music theory themselves. Very little true intuitive understanding or talent.

>>75167830
I'm interested in you, what are your fav. music artists, composers, musicians?

>>75166601
>defending fantano

>>75166298
I'm almost certain you are underrage

>>75166093
>mfw I never watch his videos I just get the jist then proceed to meme the hell out of it
;^]

File: adorno-thumbs-down-header.jpg (44KB, 640x320px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 640x320px

>pop music critic reviews pop music
>this somehow causes a freakout

Why?

>>75166093
uh-oh, somebody's favorite album only got a 4/10

>>75168070
>favorite album is from the 2010s

>>75167874
I feel like you aren't going to like this answer but I'll bite.

Modern bands I like would be Animal Collective (Sung Tongs through Oddsac mostly), Grizzly Bear (yellow house and veckatimest), Joanna Newsom's great although I think she should definitely change up her aesthetics a bit, certain Death Grips albums are incredibly interesting, To Pimp a Butterfly was awesome, Dirty Projectors has a couple that are really great, Radiohead (mostly OKCP and Kid A), and honestly I did learn a lot from The Beatles.

I feel like that comes off as an incredibly generic answer, but for me balance between interesting music theory and simple communication of earnest emotional or philosophical truths results in bands that are both poppy as well as atypical in a lot of ways.

But I'd say I listen to almost just as much classical music as well. It'd be easier to name individual pieces that I love for that, some of which would be:

Beethoven's sixth, pathetique op. 13-1, Turkish march

Claire de Lune is gorgeous

The Flower Duet

Tchaikovsky's Dance of the Mirlitons, Waltz of the Flowers, pizzacato

A lot of the stuff in Fantasia is fantastic, love the rendition of Ave Maria

The Rite of Spring

I could go on, but yea I love classical music (when it's good).

>>75168114
this

>>75168055
Jazz elitisits who get mad about nothing pretty much

>>75168125
Interesting, thanks for answering

>>75166614
this

File: IMG_1601.jpg (21KB, 365x202px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 365x202px

>this thread is still alive

>>75166101
Because then you get commercialized phony Afrocentricism and trust-funk nightmares.

>>75166614
Okay sure, but the point of that video was not saying any of this at all, is just recommending good entry level jazz records, I'm sure Fantano knows about this.

>>75168272
>>75167651
It's one of the better ones I've been a part of lately honestly. Not to credit Fantano with that, but we digressed into music theory and philosophy, which is incredibly interesting.

>>75168329
Probably the most discussion I've ever seen on /mu/ lol

>>75168360
Yea I should really instigate conversations like this more often on here. We are the ones that provide the content after all.

>>75168329
Yeah, to be honest I feel like I've learned something by reading this pointless thread really

But so far nobody has talked about what cool jazz records you should listen to instead.

File: 1503208691342.jpg (48KB, 540x720px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 540x720px

>>75168329
>>75168360
/mu/ isn't for discussion, it's for memes and shitposting just like the rest of the internet

Learning music theory is a massive waste of time. Some of the most innovative musicians of the 20th century didn't know shit about theory

>>75168526
>>75166785

>>75168555
"Nigga i can't read shit lol" - Bach, on music theory

File: 1448934875607.jpg (17KB, 480x469px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 480x469px

>>75168125
>The Rite of Spring

>>75168526
I think a lot of those musicians, while not classically trained, used a lot of music theory intuitively. Shoulders of giants, etc. And even so, some of them have knowledge that you're probably unaware of, and there are also musicians that do know music theory that did some great stuff. It's by no means a bad thing to pursue knowledge, despite that good work can come from people without it occasionally.

>>75166614
>otherwise our opinions would be restricted to the "I like it/I don't type of judgement

God forbid

>>75167404
generic**

This thread is why I hate jazz

>>75166052
>watching the melon
*lil tip*

>posting about the melon on /mu/
*medium tip*

>"muh plebs can't into $genre without music theory" on /mu/
*a big ol' tip*

>all three together
*BINGO BONGO DO I HAVE A TIP FOR YOU*

File: 1505334520700.jpg (18KB, 639x475px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 639x475px

>>75166052
I imagine the people who'll take these recs seriously are the same people who listen to 'lo-fi hip-hop'

File: 1504126692640.jpg (266KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 1200x1200px

>>75166052
It was quite awkward. He often didn't know how to describe a record other than as 'cool' or laid back. I'll normally give Fantano credit, he's confident talking about music and can efficiently describe it. But this video featured a great deal of uhmming or pauses where he desperately tried to find a synonyms for cool. Iirc correctly he admited that one of the records he'd only heard because he was assembling the list which made me think he doesn't have a great deal of passion about what he was saying.

>>75166339
joni mitchell knows nothing about music theory

>cool jazz
>the biggest known modal jazz album in there

more upsetting desu

>>75170240
yes she did, she didn't make all the songs she did through trial and error, she knew what she was doing

>>75170289
Kind of Blue is cool jazz, but used modal jazz elements (most notably in So What).
Early 60s Coltrane is more reflective of what modal jazz was

Why can't people just listen to and enjoy music?

>>75170372
People do, but jszz is a different thing. If you don't understand what's going on, it's like listening to music with lyrics in a different language. You may really like it, but you won't fully understand and appreciate it to the greatest extent if you have no idea what they are saying

>>75166614
>Otherwise our opinions would restricted to the "I like it/I don't" type of judgement.
Not always a bad idea, even some of the most widely appreciated art isn't going to wow everyone.
People generally just like what they like, there's not really any need to be pedantic about why they like it.

>>75168499
Nothing against his list, the problem is with the video itself.

Notice that he didn't comment on the performance of the musicians. Notice that he barely mention the name of the tunes.

Also, the best cool jazz tracks are not on entirely cool jazz albums.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jyyut4XJj3M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTMqes6HDqU

File: 1480208097898.png (55KB, 1006x600px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1006x600px

>>75166263

File: 1500691835510.jpg (30KB, 422x750px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 422x750px

>>75166420
>>75166420
>>75166420
>>75166420
>"Thanks for playing""

>>75166052
So is he just a lightning rod for this board's collective rage or do you faggots actually specifically hate Fantano this much?

File: piero.jpg (97KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 600x450px

>>75166052
''I am not too interested in the instrumental technique. I am more interested in emotion than in technique. Traditionally, jazz has been associated with technique (an odd mis-interpretation of the original spirit of Afro-american music by white intellectuals). I do not enjoy listening to music for the sake of a brilliant solo. That solo has to deliver emotion. If it is technically breathtaking but does not deliver any emotion, that musician is not very interesting to me. There is a difference, in my opinion, between a juggler and an artist. If the playing is barely passable, but it delivers a lot of emotion, that musician is a genius''
-Piero ''Most Patrician Man Alive'' Scaruffi

so many dream theater fans in this thread

>>75171532
he could have saved himself a lot of time and just paraphrased this as:
>I don't understand jazz

>>75171646
>Scaruffi
>Doesn't understand jazz

go cry on a corner because girls dont give a shit about how much do you like technique in music

His list includes

>The Dave Brubeck Quartet - Time Out Listen: >John Coltrane Quartet - Ballads
>Bill Evans Trio - Portrait in Jazz
>Miles Davis - Kind of Blue
>The Ben Webster Quintet - Soulville

Damn.... he has better taste than most of /mu/

File: nhsnhs.jpg (125KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 600x600px

>>75171717
normie entry tier jazz, this is a real man's jazz album

>>75171671
Scaruffi's taste in jazz is shit you retarded drone

>>75166052
I listened to a lot of jazz for some time, but can't figure out the differences between the subgenres. If cool jazz is laidback, does it mean that every ballad should be classified as cool jazz? Is the John Coltrane Ballads album cool jazz?

>>75167117
this guy knows what's up