At 08:00 PM 3/31/01 +0200, skism wrote:
> >free-jazz has practicaly no links to most electronic stuff. it's mainly
> >based on a few soloists who pick a bunch of chords and fuck around up and
> >down the scale for a half hour.
mu said...
>> derrr... can't say I'd quite agree with that. Even in its
>> simplest terms,
>> free jazz is an attempt to move away from chords, scales and
>> soloists.
>Coltrane's stuff certainly doesn't do this. his later music is modal,
>in that he uses a particular mode or scale which he then improvises
>using all the notes in the particular mode (rather fast).
I don't consider Coltrane free jazz. He is clearly a precursor, and did
much to expand the vocabulary of jazz, but I don't believe he rejected
structures so much as expanded them.
> >>John Coletrane & Ornette Coleman are the
>> >probably the best example of this.
>
>> Of free jazz? Ornette's a good starting point, but that's like saying
>> "Kraftwerk's probably the best example of electronic music".
> I don't agree with this, I think coletrane & coleman are probably
> the best and most of what came after was poor imatation (with
> exceptions of course).
That sounds to me like an opinion with a very limited perspective - and a
whole other can of worms, and I'm not hungry right now.
> And it's not the same as saying "Kraftwerk's probably the best..."
> because electronic music was fairly new, whereas jazz had been established
> for half a century.
But free jazz hadn't - that's what they were being used as examples of...
Matt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org