JAZZ vs CLASSICAL

Classical, because although I like both good compositions and good improvisation, I prefer good composition.

First post edited, for the sake of the thread

This is a really odd poll, purely for the reason that there is no dichotomy between the two:

Jazz harmony and classical harmony have practically no difference, only different terminologies
Both jazz and classical have an improvisation element, the only different being is that because of modern teaching methods, classical style improv is now almost a dead thing
Both jazz and classical utilise syncopation
Both jazz and classical have been known to utilise the same instrumentation
Jazz and classical both pay enormous attention to articulation and dynamics
Both require a broad sense of melody to pull off convincingly

I could go on, but really, they are too similar to separate.

Polymorphia wrote: The Pessimist wrote: This is a really odd poll, purely for the reason that there is no dichotomy between the two: Jazz harmony and classical harmony have practically no difference, only different terminologies Both jazz and classical have an improvisation element, the only different being is that because of modern teaching methods, classical style improv is now almost a dead thing Both jazz and classical utilise syncopation Both jazz and classical have been known to utilise the same instrumentation Jazz and classical both pay enormous attention to articulation and dynamics Both require a broad sense of melody to pull off convincingly I could go on, but really, they are too similar to separate. Jazz and classical are two distinctly separate traditions with distinctly different historical developments. Sure, they are becoming more and more alike, especially since jazz has been introduced into academia. But their respective traditions started from different backgrounds. In a vague sense, classical music began with math and philosophy, jazz began with feeling and experimentation. Because each of the elements of one's origin were introduced at different points in the other's development, how they improvised, how they used syncopation, how they used what they knew and felt culminated in sounds that weren't necessarily alike. But as I've said before, I don't really like separating genres based on physical characteristics, but on the traditions from which they come. It's hard for me to determine, based on physical characteristics, where genres start and end, so this makes it easy for me to separate them and just roll with the punches.

You're half right. They do have different traditions, but they essentially come from the same sort of thing. Classical music evolved from European folk music and Medieval religious choral music (which if you think about it is still folk music). Jazz evolved from blues and African American folk music. Both came out of abject poverty and oppression, and it wasn't until Jean-Phillipe Rameau that Classical music theory became solidified as an actual academic thing. It's also worth noting that most classical composers did not necessarily live as aristocrats themselves, more worked FOR aristocrats, and thus after reading the biographies of Bach, Mozart, Purcell and Telemann I can deduce that they also lived as the proletariat.

I agree with you that it's wise not to separate genres based on the physical content, as it often creates boundaries so blurred that they may as well not exist. Tradition is probably the only effective way to do this, but heirarchising music would prove a bit silly because of this as you'd have to heirarchise them by tradition, which is an ignorance unto itself.


Edited by The Pessimist - January 10 2014 at 14:50

The Pessimist wrote: Polymorphia wrote: The Pessimist wrote: This is a really odd poll, purely for the reason that there is no dichotomy between the two: Jazz harmony and classical harmony have practically no difference, only different terminologies Both jazz and classical have an improvisation element, the only different being is that because of modern teaching methods, classical style improv is now almost a dead thing Both jazz and classical utilise syncopation Both jazz and classical have been known to utilise the same instrumentation Jazz and classical both pay enormous attention to articulation and dynamics Both require a broad sense of melody to pull off convincingly I could go on, but really, they are too similar to separate. Jazz and classical are two distinctly separate traditions with distinctly different historical developments. Sure, they are becoming more and more alike, especially since jazz has been introduced into academia. But their respective traditions started from different backgrounds. In a vague sense, classical music began with math and philosophy, jazz began with feeling and experimentation. Because each of the elements of one's origin were introduced at different points in the other's development, how they improvised, how they used syncopation, how they used what they knew and felt culminated in sounds that weren't necessarily alike. But as I've said before, I don't really like separating genres based on physical characteristics, but on the traditions from which they come. It's hard for me to determine, based on physical characteristics, where genres start and end, so this makes it easy for me to separate them and just roll with the punches. You're half right. They do have different traditions, but they essentially come from the same sort of thing. Classical music evolved from European folk music and Medieval religious choral music (which if you think about it is still folk music). Jazz evolved from blues and African American folk music. Both came out of abject poverty and oppression, and it wasn't until Jean-Phillipe Rameau that Classical music theory became solidified as an actual academic thing. It's also worth noting that most classical composers did not necessarily live as aristocrats themselves, more worked FOR aristocrats, and thus after reading the biographies of Bach, Mozart, Purcell and Telemann I can deduce that they also lived as the proletariat. I agree with you that it's wise not to separate genres based on the physical content, as it often creates boundaries so blurred that they may as well not exist. Tradition is probably the only effective way to do this, but heirarchising music would prove a bit silly because of this as you'd have to heirarchise them by tradition, which is an ignorance unto itself.

I agree that an objective heirarchy of musical traditions is silly, but these polls aren't really meant to objectively decide anything. I think VOTOMS is just looking for subjective opinions, anyway. Whether the poll is based physical classification or tradition, I don't know. I would like to think that we naturally classify the "big" genres with lots of diversity (i.e. Classical, Jazz, Rock) by tradition, but VOTOMS might not be thinking that as a person who has studied a little bit of it.

Just a note: when I stated that Classical music started from philosophy in math I was thinking earlier— the tuning system, for instance, and the Greek/Roman philosophies of sound. Jazz really didn't even start with that. It was the rhythm/feeling/language of what they played with no mathematical strings attached. Indeed they both came from folk music, but those folk musics were inherently different because of the cultures from which they arose. Poverty and oppression was indeed present in both, however.


Edited by Polymorphia - January 10 2014 at 15:19

dr prog wrote: Classics is melodic. Jazz is more about the playing. Classical for me for sure

Edited by Rick Robson - January 19 2014 at 12:49

Then there's this -

dr prog wrote: Classics is melodic. Jazz is more about the playing. Classical for me for sure

What on earth are you talking about? Have you ever heard Sarah Vaughan, Stan Getz or Chet Baker? What about Miles, Jan Garbarek, Kenny Wheeler and Wynton Kelly?

Regarding the post above me... Let's just remember that we are comparing over 500 years of music to only 100 years of music.

The Mystical: Where do you study?

Since I was a child I listen to classical and I started listening to jazz very recently, so...