On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, skism wrote:
quoted 3 lines free-jazz has practicaly no links to most electronic stuff. it's mainly> 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. John Coletrane & Ornette Coleman are the
You mean Coltrane. The above is a pretty funny description of Trane's
post-quartet stuff (though he tended to work more in modes) but doesn't
really get to the meat of Ornette. But I digress. By the way, I object
wholeheartedly to the inclusion in other e-mails of the likes of Evan
Parker and Derek Bailey in the realm of "free jazz". What's "jazz" about
their performances, beyond the "guy playing improvised music with a
saxophone" definition that most people probably have? Then again, Pita is
probably considered to be IDM. So fuck it, another boring thread about
semantics.
I also forgot to include the improvisational aspect of jazz as one of its
fundamental qualities (bringing it, essentially, to "improvised music
following a blues-derived structure"). Most IDM/electronica you could
cite as being comparable to jazz is only "jazzy" because it uses jazz
samples (like "Chomp Samba"). As opposed to the Detroit brethren (and
their heirs) who can make something funky and soulful while using neither
funk nor soul samples. Furthermore, there are little similarities between
jazz and [I]DM at the song/piece level. That's not to say you can't give
it the old college try. I do, however, think that DJs are the unheralded
improvisors of the dancefloor.
-rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org