Can you find me ONE (1) jazz song that's as good as this random Bach piece?https://youtu.be/AAuRjtRifhk
>opinions stated as fact>"but I'm actually right"imagine if I could snap my fingers and everybody who thought like you died instantly it wouldn't be world peace but we'd be so much closer
>>129781455That's not a jazz song.
>>129781463baby brains
goofy jester music from a time nobody alive now can relate to
>>129781471Is that a jazz song?
>>129781447runescape ahh music
>>129781491is mayonnaise an instrument?
>>129781490>>129781496It's literally just an organ lol
>>129781539literally?
>>129781547No, figuratively
>>129781554fugueratively?
>>129782176I have to admit that got a laugh out of me.
Classicfags are boring
This is Bach, he isn't some random composer, he is often seen as the greatest who ever lived. Even still its not a zero sum game, you can enjoy different styles of music. Ive listened to the album youve posted for hours in the last month yet sometimes I don't want to listen to organ music and ill through on some simplistic pop
>>129781490>nobody alive now can relate toAnd that's a good thing.
>>129782365>popthe plebian reveals itself...
>>129781447Bach is the GOAT of music
>>129781447the entirety of Neu!'s debut album mogs that shit, baroque music is mindnumbingly boring
>>129781447this is the logical conclusion of musichttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJSd7AGHQ7g
>>129785307if music concluded hundreds of years ago... what do we do now
>>129781447here: https://youtu.be/u1O9YuXNbLs
>>129785331enjoy the music that was written hundreds of years ago
>>129781447https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mnq275lVmU&list=RD6mnq275lVmU&start_radio=1wake up motherfucker... start listening to the real
>>129785338yeah this sucks compared to like any classical piece lolmaybe the harmony is interesting if you've only ever listened to pop
>>129785338Sounds like a baby smashing random keys on the piano compared to thishttps://youtu.be/-1BcfTdRSpE
>>129785490sounds like temu chopin
>>129786670Chopin died 20 years before Scriabin was born lol
>>129781447Not as good, but I believe you'd like this:https://youtu.be/9RsN2b85Jho?is=Me5D31vlgysl2hgN
>>129786670Every pianist after Chopin is temu Chopin
>>129786695yeah exactly, it sounds like a poor imitation. Monk's work is both more original and more authentic.
>>129785338I barely listen to either jazz or classical but I'd much rather listen to this than Bach. This speaks to me on some emotional level, whereas the Bach piece hardly does. This has a theme and a direction, some kind of arc with different intensities, whereas the Bach piece has almost none.
what's that bach jam that goes like this https://voca.ro/179fkGXIFTVKit's really good but his only good song imo (afaik)
>>129787339thank you
>>129785490>>129786670>>129786695>>129787249wow, the beginning of that piece sounds almost identical to the beginning of this Chopin piece https://youtu.be/QHcEH2Rliko i knew it sounded familiar
>>129787311Scriabin got much more unique as time went on. If you're just mad at his early stuff for being Romantic music I have no clue what to tell you. Most musicians start out being heavily influenced by others before developing in their own direction.https://youtu.be/WlqGkVc29Gw>Monk's work is both more original and more authentic.You're not even trying to argue that it's better lmao.
>>129787400Listen to Parsifal and then listen to Mahler's 9th. You're going to lose your mind. I guess Mahler was a shit musician then.
>Can you find me ONE (1) payphone that's as good as this random Ford Mustang? great thread
>>129787417i find it very very funny that you started off by saying Monk sounds like smashing random keys and then now post some postmodern atonal garbage which is literally just a pianist smashing the piano as hard as he can
>>129787538Scriabin is not and was never atonal.
>>129787566wow, so it sounds that dissonant unintentionally? that's quite an achievement!>>129787417>Scriabin got much more unique as time went onok, so what you're saying is, his good stuff is not original and his original stuff is not good?
>>129787612Dissonant != atonal>his good stuff is not original and his original stuff is not good?Never seen someone get this pissed off at Scriabin lol. I like both.
>>129787631>>129787566lol he is the first example given on the wikipedia page for atonality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atonality>Late 19th- and early 20th-century composers such as Alexander Scriabin>Never seen someone get this pissed off at Scriabin lolthis is the first time i've ever listened to him. i disliked both pieces but for different reasons, the first because it is clearly derivative and uninspired and the second because it just sounds bad.anyway you didn't address the point which is that you can't criticise Monk or jazz in general for being dissonant while at the same time praising pieces that have been described as atonal. i can understand why someone who listens exclusively to pop would give this reason for disliking jazz but for you it makes no sense.
>>129787373Shit, now I want to know. I faintly recognize that air
>>129781447Probably most Jazz pieceshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBn_lQBh9JA&list=RDkBn_lQBh9JA&start_radio=1
>>129787373>>129787781https://youtu.be/QAXNtHdQB08?is=NLUm3HeQ1nPc2CD1
>>129787702When did I criticize Monk for being dissonant?
Apples to oranges. Jazz is about improvising and classical is about composition
>>129788167Wrong. Most classical composers were master improvisers. Bach especially.
>>129788155>>129785490>Sounds like a baby smashing random keys on the piano
OP here, I don't even listen to any other artist because what is the point if they aren't as good as Bach. My playlist is exclusively Bach
>I don't even listen to any other artist because what is the point if they aren't as good as Bach. My playlist is exclusively Bach
>>129788346If you think the extent of that criticism is "dissonant bad" then you're not gonna make it.
>>129788167wrong on both accounts
>>129781447https://youtu.be/dURiJSJkWFM
>>129788383Mozart underrater get off my board
>>129788486Nostalgic
>>129788413Just admit you are racist.
>>129788605I accept your concession
>>129788614shut yo cracka ass
>>129787339>whereas the Bach piece has almost none.Well you're clearly just a retard, but thanks for gracing us with your (as you admit) uninformed musings
Fine, I'll fucking post ithttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_tAU3GM9XI
Bach and Coltrane were both geniuses in tune with higher powers, it's such a sadness that earthly plebs still confined by genre compartmentalizations are spiritually castrating themselves with these false distinctions.
>>129787566some of his later piano sonatas (allegedly) don't have key signatures, they might be confusing this kind of ambiguous tonality with atonality
>>129786670Scriabin is Chopin with testosterone.
>>129787702>lol he is the first example given on the wikipedia page for atonalityNta but no, he isn't. He's mentioned in the third paragraph alongside a whole grab-bag of composers (Debussy, Hindemith, Bartok, Prokofiev, Stravinsky and Varese), which already tells you the term is being used very loosely. Once a label covers music that different, it stops being useful. Especially since some people use the word as a vague and derogatory hodgepodge. Wikipedia isn't great for stuff like this.Anyway, I like both Scriabin and Monk, for completely different reasons. If anything, they sometimes share a kind of angular melodic contour (very broadly speaking), but they come from different planets.Also, I wouldn't call early Scriabin derivative and uninspired, that's clearly a misinformed and reactionary comment (probably because that other guy is being a dismissive fag). He starts from Chopin but already stretching the harmonic language far beyond that. It's a starting point, not an endpoint. And late Scriabin is very interesting and sonically rich, but also undoubtedly an acquired taste.If anything, "post-tonal" is a better label. That puts him closer to Debussy or Ravel (all three draw on things like the octatonic scale sometimes), rather than someone like Schoenberg, who sounds more random and rough.>>129791488Yeah, the late ones often drop key signatures, but I don't think that necessarily makes them atonal. There are still tonal anchors, recurring sonorities, pitch centers and a clear harmonic logic and gravity that becomes quite perceptible once your ear adjusts. Multiple listens and following the score obviously helps, but even perceptually it doesn't come across as "random" in the way free atonality or serialism can. It's just not functional harmony.So it really depends on how you define atonality. Used this loosely, it stops being a useful term and just becomes a catch-all for anything that isn't straightforwardly tonal.
>>129791483>Bach and Coltrane were both geniuses in tune with higher powersone is better.
>>129794189Correct
Bach is the most over rated and insisting upon itself musician in all of music. The Jacob Collier of his time who was obsessed with technicality rather than just making music people actually want to listen to. Its no mystery why no one really cared about him during his own time.
>>129794395
>>129794468Not a real thing. Go jerk off to /r/graphporn or some shit
I have nothing against Bach and I appreciate it for being authentic and inspired. It's just so antithetical to modern sensibilities that I'd have to sit down and really force myself to not be filtered by it. I've simply not yet felt the need to do this.
>>129794395bach's music is not that technical and you sound like a babby talking like this. what else do you find overly-technical? grade 3 math textbooks?
>>129791483>nigga doot doots are as good as BachYeah, no.
>>129794477>not a real thing
>>129795092agreed, not as good. slightly better
>>129791483objectively true and correct opinion.Anyone who uses music as a proxy for their rertarded political opions is a subhuman and deserves to be shot. That includes:>>129781447>>129788346>>129795092Music can be good in an infinite number of ways. Bach 100% exhausted the tradition in which he was born into, something I think no other musician was able to do since or after. And that is amazing.The cultural movement of jazz that emerged in the 40s and lasted basically until 70s is among the most fruitful music trends in history. In 30 years they wrote as many masterpieces as the europe did during half a millenia (from 1100-1600). Context matters when talking about art, even the statements I made aren't the whole truth. The point is to be curious, find something new. Listening to music should almost never be masturbatory.
>>129792637(not true btw)
mmt 91
>>129794730Its way more technical that what came after, don't pretended to be dumb
>>129799123Nta, but the whole point is fallacious. "Technical" is not in conflict with "good to listen to." Obviously bach is enormously popular nowadays which undermines their point further.It's pretty retarded to compare bach to collier, which was likely just telling. Collier is not technical at all in comparison to bach
>>129799351Just trolling*
>>129795915>In 30 years they wrote as many masterpieces as the europe did during half a millenia (from 1100-1600).Do Amerikeks really?
>>129795722>saxophone music>better than BachBarely even a real instrument, it’s like banjo or a drum kit
>>129799702Dumb possible argument you could make
>>129785045Bach was my #2 on spotify last year, and I don't listen to pop. I suggest you stop judging people. It's not good for the psyche or the soul.>>129785109Can't argue with this. Reading the thread, I do both Scriabin and Chopin. Mahler not for me.>>129791483Correct. Divinely inspired.>>129794395I'm sorry you feel that way. I'd think the emotion from the Cello Suite would be pretty universal. I get why say the Brandenburg Concertos might be overwhelming and offputting to some people, but he wrote a ton of music and it's not all super technical.
>>129800637>Coltrane>divinely inspiredlmao
>>129781447https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNnY4J0-gRQI hate when Bill gets noodle-y.So I'm sad to say, I think this nig might top Bill:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fW8NQgqYoVQ>>129789460Yeahh
>>129799123disgusting esl post, go back to your hispanic-coded metal threads little jimbo
>>129781447Shorty George
>>129785045Fade Away and Radiate
>>129800637>I suggest you stop judging people. It's not good for the psyche or the soul.kinda true
>>129800836>literally not an argumentlmao
Bach was an advanced maths guy,, he wrote music that literally can be played on a mobious striphttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUHQ2ybTejU&list=RDxUHQ2ybTejU
>>129802066wow
>>129797755True. Chopin is for boys, Scriabin is for men.
>>129794506>antithetical to modern sensibilitiesAnd that's a good thing!
>>129800930This is super sweet, especially the part when the trio comes inhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXBOyYDWtg0https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpExU--YDnYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z8EVAnHiRk
