Members A. Einstein Posted November 26, 2011 Members Share Posted November 26, 2011 If the class is pre-1900 European and American orchestral and chamber music... the lectures are roughly: Antike Medieval (-1450) Renaissance (-1600) 1600 bis 2000: Baroque Bachscher Choralsatz Klassik (Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven Clementi, Kuhlau...) Wiener Klassik Schubert Romantik Harmonik of Richard Wagner Neoklassik 20th Century 1900-1050) 20th Century (1950-1999) Zeitgen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted November 26, 2011 Members Share Posted November 26, 2011 Too much education can lead to narrowmindedness. Over educated people sometimes tend to see what "Can't be done" rather than "can" and they will draw up their complicated formulas to prove it. I hate to be this directly blunt, but this is so wrong I can't even begin to tell you. It's been typically just the opposite. I really don't feel like debating this again because it rears its head so many times, especially in the context of learning music. Suffice it to say that it will almost every time expand your horizons, palette, and knowledge, and not close it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted November 26, 2011 Members Share Posted November 26, 2011 There's something weirdly elitist about bashing an elitist from 1960 that I can't quite put my finger on....Such an easy archetype to bash. Hahahahaha!!! I apparently didn't read the OP closely enough!!! I didn't realize it was a teacher from the 1960s!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 26, 2011 Members Share Posted November 26, 2011 totally agree with TekknoChristian, talked to Snoop Dogg, he knows what a C minor triad is, anything more would confuse him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted November 26, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 26, 2011 ...but when it comes to be-bop... I just don`t get it and honestly, I don`t hear any emotion there! This is the thing, to me, music like any art form should express some sort of emotion and I`m sure be-bop does that for a lot of people but for me.... it just doesn`t cut. Its completely possible that your professor(s) just didn`t get it. My wife and kids don`t get any jazz. Thats why I put it on yesterday when no one was home (and to be completely honest, I shut it off after a couple of tunes because it did nothing for me).I guess what I`m getting at is we all find an emotional bond with certain music genres. For some its the repetitive of dance, for some its the unrestrained energy of be-bop, for others its the rawness of a punk band, for others the grandness of a symphony orchestra or the intimacy of a string quartet. Whatever the case, it all addresses an emotional need for all of us. So does jazz have a "limited emotional expressivity"? Yes, for some. ^ That's a great point. For years I didn't get Bach. To me, then... it was more math than music. It wasn't speaking to me on one of my receiving channels. It seemed cold. Now? For me, it is one of the most expressive types of music. Bach entwined in progressing permutations. And that logic is the logic of a snowflake or chaos theory. It is the logic of God. It just depends on where you're coming from, what your experiences are and what your expectations of the music are. As much as I'm not a Grateful Dead fan, every time I hear them say, "Either you get it or you don't", I'm willing to concede the point. I don't get it. That's OK too. We don't have to get everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 26, 2011 Members Share Posted November 26, 2011 best is when you don't listen to any music at all, then it can't happen that you don't like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted November 26, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 26, 2011 best is when you don't listen to any music at all, then it can't happen that you don't like it That sounds very far from "best". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RockViolin Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 Oh, I agree but that is not what I was saying. If the class is pre-1900 European and American orchestral and chamber music, it makes sense to not teach folk, blues, rag, etc. My piano teacher when I was growing up said he would only teach classical, not rock, folk or jazz. He didn't deny they existed or if they were good or not, just that he didn't that. Never bothered me as he was the best music teacher and one of the very best teachers I ever had. I didn't hear anyone play better than him till I saw Peter Serkin on stage in 1977. The only thing he couldn't sight-read was when I brought my book of Scott Joplin rags. He just couldn't get it. He sat back and studied it for about ten minutes, then plyed through the entire book, beautifully, periodically complaining 'This is SO corny!' Then 'The Sting' came out and ragtime had a real renaissance....... Music is music and there is good and bad in everything. Style/genre is no more than a convenient stereotype/categorization, when someone blurs the line, there are always atavistic self-described "purists" to try to roll back progress. I was seeking to clarify. Simply, that there are possibly good reasons to limit the discussion. I wasn't saying you were saying...My stance here is somewhat defensive. I've seen quite a few misconceptions, at HC in general, LL not withstanding, regarding classical music and the musicians that play it. It troubles me. But I'm not surprised. I'm a classical musician that managed to cross over. I played by ear for a loooong time before I learned to read. Maybe that's why. My short suit is looking at chord symbols and doing the math whilst I relieve my ear of the responsibilty. Never got to where they were truly integrated.Anyway, what was once an advantage, perhaps became a limiting factor, because I could not bear to choose. It's complicated. One of my favorite sayings, if you search my posts. It's all just music, after a while. Far more important than trying to grog the innate emotion of a style of music is the emotion one presents it with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members yanktar Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 I was seeking to clarify. Simply, that there are possibly good reasons to limit the discussion. I wasn't saying you were saying... My stance here is somewhat defensive. I've seen quite a few misconceptions, at HC in general, LL not withstanding, regarding classical music and the musicians that play it. It troubles me. But I'm not surprised. I'm a classical musician that managed to cross over. I played by ear for a loooong time before I learned to read. Maybe that's why. My short suit is looking at chord symbols and doing the math whilst I relieve my ear of the responsibilty. Never got to where they were truly integrated. Anyway, what was once an advantage, perhaps became a limiting factor, because I could not bear to choose. It's complicated. One of my favorite sayings, if you search my posts. It's all just music, after a while. Far more important than trying to grog the innate emotion of a style of music is the emotion one presents it with. I think we actually agree. After all Wynton Marsallis is not only one of (if not THE) leading jazz trumpet player, he's also one of the lead classical trumpet players. Bennie Goodman played Mozart's concerto for clarinet. Copeland used folk music themes continually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 I think we actually agree. After all Wynton Marsallis is not only one of (if not THE) leading jazz trumpet player, he's also one of the lead classical trumpet players. Bennie Goodman played Mozart's concerto for clarinet. Copeland used folk music themes continually. I throwed all Lee Morgan, Woody Shaw, Kenny Dorham, Louis Armstriong and Miles Davis trumpet album in the shredder as well all transcription - I always had some strange feelings they are not the original solos, and buy all Wynton Marsalis albums right now. You have all Wynton's solo transcription at end of next week. They are certainly the original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members philbo Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 I`m not surprised. Even you as a teacher know that there are many people in the class room that simply do not belong there. In my experience, the teacher is the biggest obstacle to learning, just as the ego is the biggest obstacle to enlightenment in Buddhism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 Enlightment of the Buddhist kind, a mental illness from Asia which swaped all over the world recently, most often happen to the subject while taking a {censored}. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 Does Jazz music have a "limited emotional expressivity" ? The limit is more with the listener. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members the stranger Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 Does Jazz music have a "limited emotional expressivity" ? I'd have to say it's quite the opposite. Jazz places less limits and structure on music, therefore expanding the palette. Seems fairly logical to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 see below... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 In my experience, the teacher is the biggest obstacle to learning, just as the ego is the biggest obstacle to enlightenment in Buddhism. This is a subject for another thread but yes I do feel the same, the teacher has a huge impact on how well the student learns. I`ll also add just from my own experience, I find that if I can relax and just enjoy the actual process of learning (reading, writing, calculating math, etc...) for the sake of simply learning, I actually do quite well acquiring and retaining the info. However, when I start to stress and press... its pointless. I think a teacher sets the tone for this... they either relax the student or press the student and I learn better in a relaxed setting. The music instructor who placed a limit on jazz was impressing their own limitations on the students which is bad teaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 3shiftgtr Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 In my experience, the teacher is the biggest obstacle to learning, just as the ego is the biggest obstacle to enlightenment in Buddhism. Um, a BAD teacher is an obstacle. A great teacher is an inspiration...... The art of teaching is not a de facto obstacle to learning..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 3shiftgtr Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 Enlightment of the Buddhist kind, a mental illness from Asia which swaped all over the world recently, most often happen to the subject while taking a {censored}. Wow. I'm not a buddhist, but if I was, I wouldn't let that mean spirited, judgmental, holier than thou, sentence piss me off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 Wow. I'm not a buddhist, but if I was, I wouldn't let that mean spirited, judgmental, holier than thou, sentence piss me off. tell me your religion and I translate it into your faith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Goobers Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 This thread is a troll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 27, 2011 Members Share Posted November 27, 2011 best is you learn all the musical basics by yourself, then the chance is pretty good that you are a unique original after Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 3shiftgtr Posted November 28, 2011 Members Share Posted November 28, 2011 tell me your religion and I translate it into your faith cuz U so smaaaaahhhht......an all deeeeeep and stuff.....yoooouuuuu must be the one with all the everything brain...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 28, 2011 Members Share Posted November 28, 2011 cuz U so smaaaaahhhht......an all deeeeeep and stuff.....yoooouuuuu must be the one with all the everything brain...... in my cubic yard, yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gabriel E. Posted November 28, 2011 Members Share Posted November 28, 2011 The good thing about university musical education is there is a lot of great things being taught and some great musicianship and musicians can develop there. The bad thing is that often (not always) these programs breed nazi like academia. They put paramaters and concept around expression, creating labels and thus making it fit nicely into their well researched academic papers. The rhetoric of expression is secondary to the rhetoric of analysis and research. All of which must pass the utmost in peer scrutiny. And by accordance, anything outside of that which does not fit into advanced musical pedagogy, is deemed unvaluable. It'll make them crane their neck and look at you with pity....as though you don't even know the depth of your own stupidity.And the sad thing about it is that most university bred jazz programs do the same thing. All intellectual all the time. If someone expresses themselves with something other than the berklee approved b5 subs, they AREN'T PLAYING JAZZ.....Classical nazi's, jazz nazi's, blues nazi's, metal nazi's, Nazi nazi's.......they all suck. I think that's a university thing, not just a music department thing. Higher education institutions are invaluable but they occasionally deserve the "ivory tower" moniker that they get pegged with. I went to an "Oxford-wannabe" liberal arts college in Canada in the late 80s/early 90s and it certainly attracted its share of tweed-wearing, pipe-smoking "only the classics" snobs who refused to recognize any philosophical trends post 1890. It's just another form of escapism. And there certainly are plenty of jazz snobs. Look at Stanley Crouch and Wynton Marsalis. Those two have done more than anyone else to establish a jazz orthodoxy and discredit any innovations post 1960 (of which there have been many) as "not real jazz". And people have bought it hook, line and sinker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rasputin1963 Posted November 28, 2011 Author Members Share Posted November 28, 2011 And there certainly are plenty of jazz snobs. Look at Stanley Crouch and Wynton Marsalis. Those two have done more than anyone else to establish a jazz orthodoxy and discredit any innovations post 1960 (of which there have been many) as "not real jazz". And people have bought it hook, line and sinker. Yep. Wynton Marsalis decreed that Jazz, by definition, must: a). swing, andb). employ the blues scale If they don't, Marsalis said, "Call it what you like; I don't care what you call it. But it isn't Jazz." I'm guessing he is drawing a historical lineage directly from the African form known as the Bembe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.