Free Jazz

[Forresterc]

So i'm taking an intro to Jazz class at UNC, and we've gotten to Free Jazz. I searched the threads here and was surprised to find nothing on it. I'd really like to hear what y'all think about it.

For those of you who'd like some clarification on Free Jazz, it is an emphasis on freedom of music and performer. Examples: atonal melodies, lack of triadic harmonies, like of meter, lack of chord progression, possible unorthodox intonation and instrumentation.
It can often take place with many musicians playing improv at the same time without and preconceived melody or chord structure

Personally, i think it's horrible. It blurs what is considered music in the first place and other than in concept it holds close to nothing of value. If ur going to make abstract music it needs to be very deliberate (composed, no improv). Thats my opinion

Some Youtubes

First, here's Cecil Taylor, a free jazz pianist (and if there is a "good" free jazz, he's probably very close to it).



Second, in support of my opinion, here is some Gyorgy Ligeti (a composer of abstract music)

 

[ry_z]

It blurs what is considered music in the first place

You say that as if it were a bad thing.

Personally, I look at free jazz as noise music: it's much more about the texture of sound itself than anything else.

I do absolutely love Ligeti, as well. I've been listening to his stuff a lot lately.

 

[Stealthdjentstic]

The people playing it always seem to know their shit though.

 

[Forresterc]

Personally, I look at free jazz as noise music: it's much more about the texture of sound itself than anything else.
lately.

I would disagree that free jazz is about textures. Ligeti is much more about textures (Continuum and Atmospheres) in my opinion.

Free jazz i believe is more about channeling the subconscious, or to create emotional music without preconceptions of what that is suppose to sound like. This creates a much for visceral (and hopefully) pure sound.

I'm also happy to see someone else knows of Ligeti. I really enjoy his work.

 

[Forresterc]

The people playing it always seem to know their shit though.

Cecil Taylor was classically trained.

And i think if someone wants to be taken seriously they have to know their shit, otherwise there wouldn't be a glimpse of hope to be taken seriously.

 

[ry_z]

I would disagree that free jazz is about textures. Ligeti is much more about textures (Continuum and Atmospheres) in my opinion.

Well, I mean it's more about texture than melody, harmony, etc. I definitely agree about Ligeti, though. Atmospheres is pure texture.

Free jazz i believe is more about channeling the subconscious, or to create emotional music without preconceptions of what that is suppose to sound like. This creates a much for visceral (and hopefully) pure sound.

I definitely agree with this. I just seem to have more sympathy with it than you do.

I'm also happy to see someone else knows of Ligeti. I really enjoy his work.

 

[stuz719]

Personally I'd rather listen to free jazz than Dixieland jazz, which I find about as appealling aurally as having someone scrape their fingernails down a blackboard.

Just how many times can you listen to or play "Oh when the saints go marching in" in a cacophonous howl on a hellish combination of trombone, trumpet and banjo before you descend into utter insanity?

 

[signalgrey]

i gotta say. i took some music theory classes and i could not STAND free jazz. at all. i sure there is some value in this style, but it was just painful. thats just me.

 

[ralphy1976]

i gotta say. i took some music theory classes and i could not STAND free jazz. at all. i sure there is some value in this style, but it was just painful. thats just me.

sadly i second this. i admire them for enjoying and being able to create it but as far as i am concerned....

 

[Prydogga]

I don't know what it is, but this is really cool, I've never delved too far into jazz sub-genres and the like, (Miles,Herbie etc is about as far as I go) but this, instantly I kinda loved it, I don't understand the structure, that is, if there is one, but I know I enjoy it.

 

[Mr. Big Noodles]

I wouldn't consider Cecil Taylor to be free jazz. Maybe third stream. Then again, I think it was Charlie Haden said something along the lines that all jazz is free, and there is a spectrum of freeness to that jazz.

 

[Dragonfly]

I like this for some reason, don't really find any logic in it, but listening to it playing in the background really gives me a nice feeling of an ongoing story.

 

[skeletor88]

I studied free jazz as a part of my course last year at uni.

I can totally understand how it can seem like pure shit and totally weird but it can be interesting. It's such a strong expression of emotion I would think it would be pretty hard to compose it before the performance. The improvising is pretty much is the jazz aspect of the it all. Composed stuff similar to this I would just call it abstract or experimental.

 

[ElRay]

Out of curiosity, what's your opinion of late Coltrane? Along with Cecil Taylor, Coltrane is arguably one of the founders of free jazz.

Heck, what's your opinion of our own JacksonPlayer's Stuff?

Ray

 

[Groove]

I was listening to Cecil Taylor really hoping and looking to like it, and the more i watched the more i asked, what is this building up to? Where's it going? And alas it didn't go anywhere.

I get the point its a strong expression etc, but it is purely expression for expressions sake. There is no direction to it, or channeling of it for a specific purpose. It is merely just a self-indulgent explosion of noise of meaningless incoherence as far as i can tell.

I always thought this when i got to that one awful song on every 70's King Crimson record, that was otherwise flawless, i had to experience the clashing of randomly hit cymbals and obscurely constructed chords. I don't know, i just don't get it

 

[Forresterc]

i gotta say. i took some music theory classes and i could not STAND free jazz. at all. i sure there is some value in this style, but it was just painful. thats just me.

Yes, i hate it too. In concept i think it's great, in practice i think it's horrible.

I don't know what it is, but this is really cool, I've never delved too far into jazz sub-genres and the like, (Miles,Herbie etc is about as far as I go) but this, instantly I kinda loved it, I don't understand the structure, that is, if there is one, but I know I enjoy it.

there is no preconceived structure, so unless u feels like creating one in the middle of a song, there isn't going to be one.

I wouldn't consider Cecil Taylor to be free jazz. Maybe third stream. Then again, I think it was Charlie Haden said something along the lines that all jazz is free, and there is a spectrum of freeness to that jazz.

I would 100% call him free jazz. He makes no composition which i would think being required to be called third stream. U could call it third stream free jazz though, because he is classically trained, but thats like calling my band Alternative Progressive Jazz Fusion Fuck Rock. Very unnecessary labeling and u can't hear half of it in the music.

 

[Forresterc]

Out of curiosity, what's your opinion of late Coltrane? Along with Cecil Taylor, Coltrane is arguably one of the founders of free jazz.

I think he was very honest in what he was trying to do, so in a since i guess he was making really good free jazz. I'm still not fond of it though. I'll stick with A Love Supreme.

I think if he lived he would have developed Free Jazz into something else, probably better, and maybe more abstract, but as it is i don't feel like that part of his life he had reached his full potential in what he was pursuing.

 

[SnowfaLL]

Its a funny genre.. My two favorite teachers in my life (both in my last year of music college) are Free jazz artists.. and what they do is quite unreal on stage. Things like purposely breaking guitar strings and using it to manipulate the other strings, using pool balls to skip over piano strings, that kinda stuff.. Its odd, but like someone said above, You have to prove yourself as a real musician before you can go in this direction, otherwise people wont take you seriously =[

I can say when doing music for the sake of "Art" like Free jazz.. It gives you lots of opportunity to get grants for composing/living, as long as you make it sound as it has cultural developmental benefits, such as teaching others. Its just surreal how many "Free composition" artists are living off government grants to make this type of music, way more than musicians of any other genre, it blows my mind.

 

[Forresterc]

I can say when doing music for the sake of "Art" like Free jazz.. It gives you lots of opportunity to get grants for composing/living, as long as you make it sound as it has cultural developmental benefits, such as teaching others. Its just surreal how many "Free composition" artists are living off government grants to make this type of music, way more than musicians of any other genre, it blows my mind.

R U serious!?
I want one!

 

[sonofabias]

Artists of interest in free jazz you might consider checking out : Coltrane's Ascension , a meditation when he was searching for a higher state of consciousness ( non chemical ) with most of the next generation of major players. Ornette Colman, "Free Jazz", Thelonius Monk, especially Monk/Trane . Sonny Simmons, whose records are very hard to find but he's considered 'legendary'. Sun Ra and the various incarnations of his "Cosmic Orchestra", he was one the earliest pioneers of free jazz.Horace Topscott and his UGMAA ( Union of Gods Musicians and Artists in Ascension) Orch. (very beautiful spiritual music) Most of the artists from the AACM out of Chicago ( Anthony Braxton , Muhall Richard Abhrams , Malachi Favors etc., The Art Ensemble of Chicago ( I saw them several times as a kid ) Charles Mingus , a true revolutionary !For guitarists , Derek Baily (prepared guitar, believe it or not) and Bern Nix (played guitar w/ Ornette) I don't want to forget The World Saxophone Quartet ( first two recordings were amazing) they 're somewhat more recent.!What you should understand is free jazz was a revolution on two fronts : the leading improvisers of their day desired to go beyond be bop and the limitations of playing the "changes " as well the growth and anger of civil rights movement in the U.S., they coincide hence "Free Jazz" Cheers