From Che Sent Mon, Apr 13th 1998, 00:48
From Che Sent Mon, Apr 13th 1998, 00:48
At 05:32 PM 4/10/98 EDT, KaisrSolze wrote: >>I think of this as basically being programmed jazz. Not that it isn't >>doing things never before done with jazz (for instance, extremely flanged >>perfect 96th-note-triplets ascending in perfect linear pitch or volume >>ain't exactly Max Roach or Buddy Rich) > >I really am not feeling this comment at all... Maybe it's just my flawed>outlook, but programmed jazz isn't jazz at all. The way I see it,>jazz=improvisation. Bahhh...it either moves you or it doesn't. How it's done doesn't matter. Labels are for intellectual wankers. It's about the music, remember? For me, the Bukem Jazz-Lite doesn't move me. It's too nostalgic, too concerned with copping the sound rather than the feeling. in contrast, the new Chocolate Weasel has some tracks that capture the spirit of jazz without sounding like a watered down ripoff. But, to engage in a bit of intellectual wankery, I give you this to ponder. Frank Zappa, one of the greatest improvisational guitar players ever, and considered by many to be engaged in an updated form of jazz, gave up recording with some of the finest musicians in the world & turned to composing with a Synclavier (ultra-high end synthesizer & composition computer) in the last years of his career. I saw a film where he complained that the musicians couldn't capture what was in his head faithfully enough - it was easier to teach the computer. And to quote Frank, "Jazz isn't dead, it just smells funny". Che