Gypsy Jazz. A must listen!

The guitarist is great.
http://browsermail.com/page.html?p=0000015Fu8vj7kXzcl2A+NgOsglburzIh74g

Goddamn...didn't think we had good guitarist nowadays. This guy kicks ass, thanks. Definately does gypsy jazz justice.

Jazz? this aint jazz in the slightest. I will agree he is a talented guitarrist, but i think there are others who are just as talented as this guy, but do far more interesting compositions.

>>3

It's called Gypsy Jazz you retard.

Gypsy Jazz is to Jazz ad Smooth Jazz is to Jazz

this aint jazz

as*

really, why cant we edit our own posts :/

Maybe if you guys weren't idiots you'd realize there is no set sound to jazz. Jazz is musical pricipals such as improvisations and other underlying factors, such as knowing your music theory and applying it. Knowing your theory and technicals is the similarity between jazz and classical/orchestra compositions, the difference being that classical is rigid structures and you sit down and create the composition note for note. In jazz you run in a mode or scale and come up with a bass tune and expand from that in the heat of the moment, and it creates things you'd never think of just trying to straight write music. Both are great anyhow, though. Jazz can range from big band to jazz principles and techniques set to an india raga. So please don't be a purist and try to stick to the same old jazz claiming it's the only kind. I respect it, but it's not the only way of playing jazz.

>same old jazz
that's exactly what i'm speaking out against. real jazz doesnt bore people.

but whatever

What's 'real' jazz? Gypsy jazz was made popular by Django and Grappelli in the early 50's, and though what that guy was playing was old, done and mostly ripped off of Django, he was still good at playing it. Django and Grappelli are two of the oldest, most influential jazz artist I can think of that are still credited today. Plus...'real' jazz? Gypsy jazz uses long melodic phrases and technical executions just as much in the same fashion as the oldest jazz, gypsy jazz is just a term that puts the overall sound of his jazz techniques into a easily understood term. When you hear smooth jazz, you think clean guitar and long phrases with a catchy tune played a little more excessivly than most forms of jazz. It's just a way to give you a basic idea of what kind of sound it'll probably utilize most, but it's all jazz at it's core. Jazz is just so varied and modified with the same principles that musicians found it easier to make sub-catagories in a broad musical language. Think of it as dialects of a language. There's god knows how many dialects in a single country of Africa, but they share the same roots and  basics.

>he was still good at playing it
well that sounds familiar, where did i read that before? oh yeah my post, #3: >I will agree he is a talented guitarrist

>easily understood term
perhaps my aversion is to categorizing music. once you pigeonhole yourself into a corner, just how creative are you being?

>When you hear smooth jazz, you think clean guitar and long phrases with a catchy tune played a little more excessivly than most forms of jazz.

no, when i hear smooth jazz, i hear uncreative shitty elevator music that couldn't engage a pea musically. it only exists because, god forbid, there are people in the world who like boring music

>but it's all jazz at it's core
then maybe we use different definitions of jazz. what i think of as jazz is music that challenges me in some way. what is the point of improvising when the listener can anticipate all of what's being improvised? yes, of course there exists familiar elements, but when the whole thing is familiar, it ceases to be jazz to me. from the one sample i heard, i can conclude that "gypsy jazz" is a fancy name for playing a normal traditional song really fast. but then all the player can do is blow me away with his playing ability, and then i go off looking for something worth listening to.

and yes the dictionary and most of society is inclined to agree with your definition, but jazz to me has always meant something more than just "improvising over a basic pattern"

>Jazz is just so varied and modified with the same principles that musicians found it easier to make sub-catagories in a broad musical language.

not quite right. music in general is so varied and modified etc etc, sure, but once you apply a genre to it, it ceases to become so varied. real jazz artists, to me, are the ones who easily and readily break genre barriers.

so using your language analogy, tell me which you think is more interesting: supermarket romance novels, or a piece of original literature written by, say, Margaret Atwood (off the top of my head, feel free to disagree)

continuing from >>10

i guess what i'm saying is that everything has its roots. i'm sure many a romance novel is influenced by William Shakespeare, but how many romance novels come even remotely close to equaling it? it's so damn easy for a subgenre of music, say smooth jazz, to lose touch with its roots. you can say it's all jazz because it all came from jazz; but you cant say that every jazz piece in the 21st century can hold a flame to (i'll use a well known one here, but you can substitute with any of a long list of names) Louis Armstrong.

And remember i'm not talking about playing ability, i'm talking about composition; i'm not talking about potential, i'm talking about the reality of the music that comes out.

>>11
Look, you're thinking of jazz in the wrong way. Jazz is a musician's music, it's not a sound, it's principles, it's techniques, it's improvisation. I hate smooth jazz just as much as you, and the guy really wasn't anything phenomenal, he was decent. Think about this: Miles Davis' original compositions were very, very different from his later ones. But they were both jazz. People like to name things and term stuff, and yes, that's not true creativity but it clears up misconceptions and it makes verbal communication easier when you don't have acess to an instrument. But then again, where do you think the term jazz-fusion came from? Jazz-fuision can be basically anything with, once again, the things that truly make up jazz. The improvisation and the technical aspect of it; musician's music. The thing jazz-fusion cover is anything from jazz/rock to afro/jazz. But they sound radically different from "traditional" jazz. But if you know anything of technique, finesse,and improvisation, they're really not that different. Stephane Grappelli started off with "gypsy jazz" with Django but he eventually and ultimaly went to jazz-fusion, becuase it's unrestricting and unbiased. It's pure music. But not "pure" jazz to purist becuase they believe it's a branching off. The thing is, most music has formulas and restrictions becuase they all have the "same" sound, "this band is rock, and so it that band" why? becuase they have similarities in the sound. Jazz isn't restricted by sound, it's not restricted by certain scales or intervals. It's only defining triat is a level of technical skill, emotion, and improvisation. Metallica always has a certain sound, correct? Sure, sometimes they sound a little different, but they usually have a set sound. Artist like Miles Davis, they have many sounds, but you can tell who they are by their personal playing style, not a genre of music. They improvise, they think out of the box, they create. There's no original jazz except chronological order, and the gerne names are only to define similar triats between compositions and to make communication easier. But as I was saying before, the truest of all is jazz-fuision, becuase the jazz defines the use of technique and improvisation, and the fusion says it can sound  like anything at anytime. Artist like John Mclaughlin range from rock to ragas from india...all on the same album. So unless you are ignorant and narrow-minded, you quickly realize there is no set sound for jazz, that would be demeaning to the music. Now, I can understand if you like some of the older jazz better, that's great and your opinion. Like I said, I hate smooth jazz too, and gypsy jazz was never my favorite, but instead of labeling music, just go by artist. I only use the labels if I dont' have a cd or can't express it easily.

this thread needs longer posts

this thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer posts

>>13
that should fufill your need

this thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer poststhis thread needs longer posts

>>14
not enough.

>>14
>>15
I'm a grown up. I realize that having a government that doesn't lie constantly may be too much to ask for. But... couldn't the lies at least make sense?

Telling lies that make sense is just a mark of respect for the people you're lying to. For instance, when I'm housesitting for my friends and I sell their most valuable possessions on Ebay, when they get back I tell them their house was robbed. I don't tell them the Pope came over and ate their TV, stereo, and jewelry.

My friends appreciate it when I tell the first lie. It allows them to pretend they're not complete idiots for asking me to housesit for them. (Plus, it makes me feel good, because in a certain sense it's not even a lie. After all, their house was robbed.) But if I told them the second lie, it would show I have such contempt for them I think they'll swallow anything. Then they'd be forced to do something about the fact I sold all their furniture, and nobody wants that.

I was thinking about this recently when I read this story about Condoleezza Rice. Rice was recently sent out to do damage control after the 9-11 commission reported Iraq didn't have a collaborative relationship with Al Qaeda, and she said this to NPR:
"What I believe the 9-11 commission was opining on was operational control, an operational relationship between al Qaeda and Iraq which we never alleged."

Now, this is obviously a lie. The 9-11 commission was not opining about whether Iraq had operational control over al Qaeda.

But it's also a lie that makes no sense whatsoever. Because... why would the 9-11 commission opine on something the Bush administration NEVER ALLEGED? If no one had alleged that something might be true, why would the commission investigate it? It's like saying, "What I believe the 9-11 commission was opining on was whether Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden got married in Vermont, which we never alleged."

This is why it's imperative that George Bush be defeated. We need people in the White House who will put more effort into their lies.

Well, at least Rice put a little bit of imagination into her lie. You gotta respect that a little bit. As contrasted with Darth Cheney, who flat-out lied, in such a bald-faced way that the poor CNBC reporter didn't even know how to deal with it:

Transcript, CNBC�s �Capital Report,� June 17, 2004

Gloria Borger: �Well, let�s get to Mohammed Atta for a minute, because you mentioned him as well. You have said in the past that it was quote, �pretty well confirmed.�

Vice President Cheney: No, I never said that.

BORGER: OK.

Vice Pres. CHENEY: Never said that.

BORGER: I think that is...

Vice Pres. CHENEY: Absolutely not.

Transcript, NBC�s �Meet the Press,� December 9, 2001.

Vice-President Cheney: �It�s been pretty well confirmed that he did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April.

I feel the need, the need for weed!

Marijuana MUST be legalized.