Parallels between "jazz" and electronic dance music

[No_Spin]

i'm starting this thread because of the negative comments made about jazz in the genre/dislike thread. not because everyone needs to love jazz, but because to dismiss an entire genre is on par with dismissing the culture that it comes from.

this is not to compare jazz harmonies and song structures with electronic music, but to compare the circumstances surrounding there origins, evolution, and contraversies etc. also i'm not stretching really hard to compare the two, these statements are all widely held to be true. feel free to correct me, or add parallels, or even compare other genres to each other. this isnt to trick you, but to get you thinking. also i'm sure a good portion of you know all of this. i also am going to over simplify some things.

first off, both terms cover a very wide array of music.

-origins -
--- i'm sure most of you have read up on the origins of techno. basically, you had young, bored, (mostly) black kids in a handful of different urban areas that got involved in making music. a large part of the instrumentation was dictated by what was cheaply available to them. what happened to be cheaply available to them was used (discounted) drum machines/synthesizer/ and samplers, that had been discarded due to lack of interest from mainstream musicians at the time. these kids also had a wide array of influences ingrained in them from the culture in which they lived. lots of funk, soul, and jazz from there parents, and lots of sounds from eclectic radio shows local to their home towns.
--- with jazz, the circumstances are quite similar. similar group of people, different time period. a large part of what dictated the instrumentation was pretty much the same, what was available to them. in new orleans, what was available cheaply was used instruments left behind (and sold to pawn shops) by the military bands that came through the town. the people that began to create this music also had a huge array of influences, due to all the ethnic groups that happened to co-exist in new orleans at the time.
-- both genres current instrumentation, are still affected by these early circumstances

--clearly dance was important to both groups. the people that responded to the music, were other locals dealing with the same issues and living the same lives. essentially both quickly became dance/party music. common bonds, getting together to past time and have fun.


- early public perception-
---both genres were seen by the mainstream public to be closely related to drugs and sex, and other deviant behaviour.


-diy aesthetic-
--- mostly due to lack of interest by the powers that be, both genres have consistently had a DIY aesthetic to releasing their music.
-also, the writers and players (or producers and djs) quickly learned that to make a living off the music was through live performances and entertaining. -- traveling and performing for others to dance/ let loose, socialize, etc...

-common themes-
--- although both genres are largely instrumental, common themes became associated with both genres, mostly due to the composers (or producers) speaking on these topics and their listeners relating. not by being directly in the songs. these themes include humanitarianism, free thinking, indivuality, escapism, peace, understanding, time, the past and the future, etc...
also, common with both genres is that those not involved in the sound, often dont understand that these are important things within these scenes.


-evolution-
--- both of these genres have evolved quite rapidly and in many different/interesting ways. one common reason, is the desire to be unique in their expression. forward thinking and individuality is pervasive in both worlds, and many involved have brought different influnces along with them.
--- another common reason for the quick evolution, is due to attempts, by the powers that be, to standardize and profit off of the music. willingness to do so existed in both scenes, but a desire for some to distance themselves from those musicians was also strong.
--- both genres have subgenres that consist of relatively small number of artist, who's discographys span very short time periods.
--- also people in both of the scenes subgenres began to distance themselves from the other subgenres, creating cultures that feel they dont relate to each other, and often judging the other in nagative ways.

-aficionado-
--- both genres also have this in common. a large amount of people that enter these scenes (regardless of what point in time they entered) have a strong desire to understand its past. both groups have people that are very enthuastic about learning where this music that is new to them came from. these people are often annoyed by other newcomers not being educated about the genre. a jazz aficionado can be compared to a jaded fan of electronic music. both are often critical of many of the styles that are currently made, as well as, occasionally hostile towards other fans.

-improvisation-
--- improvisation is not widely a part of electronic music, but there is still something in common with it. a large part of improvisation (although it may sound completely random to some) is really about learning different "licks" or techniques, to put into a new context when you think they fit the mood. otherwise known as a 'bag of tricks.' often these 'licks' in improvisation are taken from other jazz music. learning a melody from another song you like, (or learning a part of another famous solo) and hinting at that melody in your improvisation. lots of hinting at the past, and saying "hey guys, remember this one?"
--- this is not done in electronic music in the same way, but hinting at other genres, and the past is very common in production techniques. using a synth patch that was very popular ten years ago, in a new way, using similar rhythms, or even all sampling the same breakbeat, and using it in your own way. 'hey guys, remember this one'
--- also these hints are often lost on newcomers to the sounds.


both genres currently have extremes that seem to contradict each other. vocal house compared to idm or ambient music for example.
or smooth jazz kenny g compared to the most free form, avant garde stuff, like peter brötzmann and keiji haino. both have subgenres that are sometimes seen to be self indulgant and irrelevant, as well as some that is seen to be cheesey.

(i'm tired and a bad writer so my points came across a lot less effective then i had imagined, but oh well)

[XeviouS]

Originally posted by No_Spin
i'm starting this thread because of the negative comments made about jazz in the genre/dislike thread. not because everyone needs to love jazz, but because to dismiss an entire genre is on par with dismissing the culture that it comes from.

this is not to compare jazz harmonies and song structures with electronic music, but to compare the circumstances surrounding there origins, evolution, and contraversies etc. also i'm not stretching really hard to compare the two, these statements are all widely held to be true. feel free to correct me, or add parallels, or even compare other genres to each other. this isnt to trick you, but to get you thinking. also i'm sure a good portion of you know all of this. i also am going to over simplify some things.

first off, both terms cover a very wide array of music.

-origins -
--- i'm sure most of you have read up on the origins of techno. basically, you had young, bored, (mostly) black kids in a handful of different urban areas that got involved in making music. a large part of the instrumentation was dictated by what was cheaply available to them. what happened to be cheaply available to them was used (discounted) drum machines/synthesizer/ and samplers, that had been discarded due to lack of interest from mainstream musicians at the time. these kids also had a wide array of influences ingrained in them from the culture in which they lived. lots of funk, soul, and jazz from there parents, and lots of sounds from eclectic radio shows local to their home towns.
--- with jazz, the circumstances are quite similar. similar group of people, different time period. a large part of what dictated the instrumentation was pretty much the same, what was available to them. in new orleans, what was available cheaply was used instruments left behind (and sold to pawn shops) by the military bands that came through the town. the people that began to create this music also had a huge array of influences, due to all the ethnic groups that happened to co-exist in new orleans at the time.
-- both genres current instrumentation, are still affected by these early circumstances

--clearly dance was important to both groups. the people that responded to the music, were other locals dealing with the same issues and living the same lives. essentially both quickly became dance/party music. common bonds, getting together to past time and have fun.


- early public perception-
---both genres were seen by the mainstream public to be closely related to drugs and sex, and other deviant behaviour.


-diy aesthetic-
--- mostly due to lack of interest by the powers that be, both genres have consistently had a DIY aesthetic to releasing their music.
-also, the writers and players (or producers and djs) quickly learned that to make a living off the music was through live performances and entertaining. -- traveling and performing for others to dance/ let loose, socialize, etc...

-common themes-
--- although both genres are largely instrumental, common themes became associated with both genres, mostly due to the composers (or producers) speaking on these topics and their listeners relating. not by being directly in the songs. these themes include humanitarianism, free thinking, indivuality, escapism, peace, understanding, time, the past and the future, etc...
also, common with both genres is that those not involved in the sound, often dont understand that these are important things within these scenes.


-evolution-
--- both of these genres have evolved quite rapidly and in many different/interesting ways. one common reason, is the desire to be unique in their expression. forward thinking and individuality is pervasive in both worlds, and many involved have brought different influnces along with them.
--- another common reason for the quick evolution, is due to attempts, by the powers that be, to standardize and profit off of the music. willingness to do so existed in both scenes, but a desire for some to distance themselves from those musicians was also strong.
--- both genres have subgenres that consist of relatively small number of artist, who's discographys span very short time periods.
--- also people in both of the scenes subgenres began to distance themselves from the other subgenres, creating cultures that feel they dont relate to each other, and often judging the other in nagative ways.

-aficionado-
--- both genres also have this in common. a large amount of people that enter these scenes (regardless of what point in time they entered) have a strong desire to understand its past. both groups have people that are very enthuastic about learning where this music that is new to them came from. these people are often annoyed by other newcomers not being educated about the genre. a jazz aficionado can be compared to a jaded fan of electronic music. both are often critical of many of the styles that are currently made, as well as, occasionally hostile towards other fans.

-improvisation-
--- improvisation is not widely a part of electronic music, but there is still something in common with it. a large part of improvisation (although it may sound completely random to some) is really about learning different "licks" or techniques, to put into a new context when you think they fit the mood. otherwise known as a 'bag of tricks.' often these 'licks' in improvisation are taken from other jazz music. learning a melody from another song you like, (or learning a part of another famous solo) and hinting at that melody in your improvisation. lots of hinting at the past, and saying "hey guys, remember this one?"
--- this is not done in electronic music in the same way, but hinting at other genres, and the past is very common in production techniques. using a synth patch that was very popular ten years ago, in a new way, using similar rhythms, or even all sampling the same breakbeat, and using it in your own way. 'hey guys, remember this one'
--- also these hints are often lost on newcomers to the sounds.


both genres currently have extremes that seem to contradict each other. vocal house compared to idm or ambient music for example.
or smooth jazz kenny g compared to the most free form, avant garde stuff, like peter brötzmann and keiji haino. both have subgenres that are sometimes seen to be self indulgant and irrelevant, as well as some that is seen to be cheesey.

(i'm tired and a bad writer so my points came across a lot less effective then i had imagined, but oh well)

No one should "hate" Jazz. It is a very vast genre most people my age have very little undertsanding of, including me. I RESPECT JAZZ

[corbettfields]

Originally posted by No_Spin
i'm starting this thread because of the negative comments made about jazz in the genre/dislike thread. not because everyone needs to love jazz, but because to dismiss an entire genre is on par with dismissing the culture that it comes from.

this is not to compare jazz harmonies and song structures with electronic music, but to compare the circumstances surrounding there origins, evolution, and contraversies etc. also i'm not stretching really hard to compare the two, these statements are all widely held to be true. feel free to correct me, or add parallels, or even compare other genres to each other. this isnt to trick you, but to get you thinking. also i'm sure a good portion of you know all of this. i also am going to over simplify some things.

first off, both terms cover a very wide array of music.

-origins -
--- i'm sure most of you have read up on the origins of techno. basically, you had young, bored, (mostly) black kids in a handful of different urban areas that got involved in making music. a large part of the instrumentation was dictated by what was cheaply available to them. what happened to be cheaply available to them was used (discounted) drum machines/synthesizer/ and samplers, that had been discarded due to lack of interest from mainstream musicians at the time. these kids also had a wide array of influences ingrained in them from the culture in which they lived. lots of funk, soul, and jazz from there parents, and lots of sounds from eclectic radio shows local to their home towns.
--- with jazz, the circumstances are quite similar. similar group of people, different time period. a large part of what dictated the instrumentation was pretty much the same, what was available to them. in new orleans, what was available cheaply was used instruments left behind (and sold to pawn shops) by the military bands that came through the town. the people that began to create this music also had a huge array of influences, due to all the ethnic groups that happened to co-exist in new orleans at the time.
-- both genres current instrumentation, are still affected by these early circumstances

--clearly dance was important to both groups. the people that responded to the music, were other locals dealing with the same issues and living the same lives. essentially both quickly became dance/party music. common bonds, getting together to past time and have fun.


- early public perception-
---both genres were seen by the mainstream public to be closely related to drugs and sex, and other deviant behaviour.


-diy aesthetic-
--- mostly due to lack of interest by the powers that be, both genres have consistently had a DIY aesthetic to releasing their music.
-also, the writers and players (or producers and djs) quickly learned that to make a living off the music was through live performances and entertaining. -- traveling and performing for others to dance/ let loose, socialize, etc...

-common themes-
--- although both genres are largely instrumental, common themes became associated with both genres, mostly due to the composers (or producers) speaking on these topics and their listeners relating. not by being directly in the songs. these themes include humanitarianism, free thinking, indivuality, escapism, peace, understanding, time, the past and the future, etc...
also, common with both genres is that those not involved in the sound, often dont understand that these are important things within these scenes.


-evolution-
--- both of these genres have evolved quite rapidly and in many different/interesting ways. one common reason, is the desire to be unique in their expression. forward thinking and individuality is pervasive in both worlds, and many involved have brought different influnces along with them.
--- another common reason for the quick evolution, is due to attempts, by the powers that be, to standardize and profit off of the music. willingness to do so existed in both scenes, but a desire for some to distance themselves from those musicians was also strong.
--- both genres have subgenres that consist of relatively small number of artist, who's discographys span very short time periods.
--- also people in both of the scenes subgenres began to distance themselves from the other subgenres, creating cultures that feel they dont relate to each other, and often judging the other in nagative ways.

-aficionado-
--- both genres also have this in common. a large amount of people that enter these scenes (regardless of what point in time they entered) have a strong desire to understand its past. both groups have people that are very enthuastic about learning where this music that is new to them came from. these people are often annoyed by other newcomers not being educated about the genre. a jazz aficionado can be compared to a jaded fan of electronic music. both are often critical of many of the styles that are currently made, as well as, occasionally hostile towards other fans.

-improvisation-
--- improvisation is not widely a part of electronic music, but there is still something in common with it. a large part of improvisation (although it may sound completely random to some) is really about learning different "licks" or techniques, to put into a new context when you think they fit the mood. otherwise known as a 'bag of tricks.' often these 'licks' in improvisation are taken from other jazz music. learning a melody from another song you like, (or learning a part of another famous solo) and hinting at that melody in your improvisation. lots of hinting at the past, and saying "hey guys, remember this one?"
--- this is not done in electronic music in the same way, but hinting at other genres, and the past is very common in production techniques. using a synth patch that was very popular ten years ago, in a new way, using similar rhythms, or even all sampling the same breakbeat, and using it in your own way. 'hey guys, remember this one'
--- also these hints are often lost on newcomers to the sounds.


both genres currently have extremes that seem to contradict each other. vocal house compared to idm or ambient music for example.
or smooth jazz kenny g compared to the most free form, avant garde stuff, like peter brötzmann and keiji haino. both have subgenres that are sometimes seen to be self indulgant and irrelevant, as well as some that is seen to be cheesey.

(i'm tired and a bad writer so my points came across a lot less effective then i had imagined, but oh well)

good job!!

if i may can i BSP a jazztronica night in portland, every wednesday with jazz maestro derek sims playing with various electronic artists ? @ pi.rem :)

[James Capricorn]

Originally posted by No_Spin
i'm starting this thread because of the negative comments made about jazz in the genre/dislike thread. not because everyone needs to love jazz, but because to dismiss an entire genre is on par with dismissing the culture that it comes from.

this is not to compare jazz harmonies and song structures with electronic music, but to compare the circumstances surrounding there origins, evolution, and contraversies etc. also i'm not stretching really hard to compare the two, these statements are all widely held to be true. feel free to correct me, or add parallels, or even compare other genres to each other. this isnt to trick you, but to get you thinking. also i'm sure a good portion of you know all of this. i also am going to over simplify some things.

first off, both terms cover a very wide array of music.

-origins -
--- i'm sure most of you have read up on the origins of techno. basically, you had young, bored, (mostly) black kids in a handful of different urban areas that got involved in making music. a large part of the instrumentation was dictated by what was cheaply available to them. what happened to be cheaply available to them was used (discounted) drum machines/synthesizer/ and samplers, that had been discarded due to lack of interest from mainstream musicians at the time. these kids also had a wide array of influences ingrained in them from the culture in which they lived. lots of funk, soul, and jazz from there parents, and lots of sounds from eclectic radio shows local to their home towns.
--- with jazz, the circumstances are quite similar. similar group of people, different time period. a large part of what dictated the instrumentation was pretty much the same, what was available to them. in new orleans, what was available cheaply was used instruments left behind (and sold to pawn shops) by the military bands that came through the town. the people that began to create this music also had a huge array of influences, due to all the ethnic groups that happened to co-exist in new orleans at the time.
-- both genres current instrumentation, are still affected by these early circumstances

--clearly dance was important to both groups. the people that responded to the music, were other locals dealing with the same issues and living the same lives. essentially both quickly became dance/party music. common bonds, getting together to past time and have fun.


- early public perception-
---both genres were seen by the mainstream public to be closely related to drugs and sex, and other deviant behaviour.


-diy aesthetic-
--- mostly due to lack of interest by the powers that be, both genres have consistently had a DIY aesthetic to releasing their music.
-also, the writers and players (or producers and djs) quickly learned that to make a living off the music was through live performances and entertaining. -- traveling and performing for others to dance/ let loose, socialize, etc...

-common themes-
--- although both genres are largely instrumental, common themes became associated with both genres, mostly due to the composers (or producers) speaking on these topics and their listeners relating. not by being directly in the songs. these themes include humanitarianism, free thinking, indivuality, escapism, peace, understanding, time, the past and the future, etc...
also, common with both genres is that those not involved in the sound, often dont understand that these are important things within these scenes.


-evolution-
--- both of these genres have evolved quite rapidly and in many different/interesting ways. one common reason, is the desire to be unique in their expression. forward thinking and individuality is pervasive in both worlds, and many involved have brought different influnces along with them.
--- another common reason for the quick evolution, is due to attempts, by the powers that be, to standardize and profit off of the music. willingness to do so existed in both scenes, but a desire for some to distance themselves from those musicians was also strong.
--- both genres have subgenres that consist of relatively small number of artist, who's discographys span very short time periods.
--- also people in both of the scenes subgenres began to distance themselves from the other subgenres, creating cultures that feel they dont relate to each other, and often judging the other in nagative ways.

-aficionado-
--- both genres also have this in common. a large amount of people that enter these scenes (regardless of what point in time they entered) have a strong desire to understand its past. both groups have people that are very enthuastic about learning where this music that is new to them came from. these people are often annoyed by other newcomers not being educated about the genre. a jazz aficionado can be compared to a jaded fan of electronic music. both are often critical of many of the styles that are currently made, as well as, occasionally hostile towards other fans.

-improvisation-
--- improvisation is not widely a part of electronic music, but there is still something in common with it. a large part of improvisation (although it may sound completely random to some) is really about learning different "licks" or techniques, to put into a new context when you think they fit the mood. otherwise known as a 'bag of tricks.' often these 'licks' in improvisation are taken from other jazz music. learning a melody from another song you like, (or learning a part of another famous solo) and hinting at that melody in your improvisation. lots of hinting at the past, and saying "hey guys, remember this one?"
--- this is not done in electronic music in the same way, but hinting at other genres, and the past is very common in production techniques. using a synth patch that was very popular ten years ago, in a new way, using similar rhythms, or even all sampling the same breakbeat, and using it in your own way. 'hey guys, remember this one'
--- also these hints are often lost on newcomers to the sounds.


both genres currently have extremes that seem to contradict each other. vocal house compared to idm or ambient music for example.
or smooth jazz kenny g compared to the most free form, avant garde stuff, like peter brötzmann and keiji haino. both have subgenres that are sometimes seen to be self indulgant and irrelevant, as well as some that is seen to be cheesey.

(i'm tired and a bad writer so my points came across a lot less effective then i had imagined, but oh well)

[X-Perience]

A lot of people don't like jazz, and that's fine. It really isn't for everyone. But a lot of genres of music became what they are today because of jazz, and theres no doubt about it, without jazz the music nowdays would probably sound a lot different then it does. Of course theres no prooving it either way, I guess.

Unless someone has a time machine of course.. Find me on the Collaboration thread, I have a jazzy experiment I would like to try.