Re: [LAU] New music: And it's time for: Bach again! Bach again! :-)

On 2010-06-25 10:59, Joep L. Blom wrote:

> This is an interesting discussion.
> I agree, partly, that Bach wrote music which can be interpreted as
> jazzy.

That's not really what I meant. Also I don't think it's especially
tasteful to swing Bach. I'm just saying that the basic melodic
principles of baroque and bebop is very similar. There's a lot of
differences or course, but melodically and harmonically there's a lot in
common.

> However, the harmonic complexity we use nowadays was not invented then.

Hmmm. Complexity... I think I understand what you're aiming at, but (and
as I say this a a jazz pianist about my own music) jazz is for the most
parts quite simple harmonically speaking compared to classical music. A
lot of II-V and II-V-I with only a few standard secondary functions
(mostly dominant) and almost exclusively root position chords.

Yes, we use bigger chords and accept greater dissonance in the
harmonies, but that has the unfortunate effect of blurring the
functions. Like in C, the dominant triad is G (G-B-D) and the
subdominant triad is F (F-A-C), no notes in common. In jazz you would
often use the II as subdominant as 7th chord, Dm7 (D-F-A-C) and at least
a dominant 7th chord, G7 (G-B-D-F), not the two chords have two notes in
common. More realistically a pianist would voice this as Dm9 (F-A-C-E)
to G13 (F-A-B-E), now with three notes in common.

I'm also not saying that jazz is stupid, but I don't think it's fair to
consider it more complex than classical music in general.

And of cource we could start talking about the more advanced jazz (Wayne
Shorter or something), but then there's Wagner :-)

> Bach's music is primarily polyphonic (listen e.g. to the Brandenburger
> concerts or the Goldberg variations) using, sparingly, simple chords.

You don't have to play more notes at the same time to have a chord. Even
a single melodic line will suggest underlying harmony. Bach used lots of
b9's and stuff...

> In de realm of the classical music we have Debussy to thank for modern
> harmonies together with the extensive use of the 6-tone scale and other
> modern musical ideas. However the use of -9, -13 and many other
> combinations in chords are 20th century ideas invented by jazz-pianists,
> arrangers and "classical composers" alike

...but of course (as I mentioned) I understand what you mean :-)
Debussy's harmonies (or actually "chords") are different to Bachs and
had large impact on jazz. But I still feel that "the core of jazz" has
more in common with "the core of baroque" than anything else.

> The greatest difference between classical music and jazz, however, is in
> my opinion simply the timing which is unbreakably related to jazz
> melodies and harmonies.

Fast bebop is almost even 8ths :-)

An even more fundamental difference is the irregular phrasing and
emphasis on lifts in jazz. This is something that you won't find too
much of in classical music.

> Try playing Bach with swing (the most horrible
> example which springs to mind is Jacque Louisier) or Chopin or even
> Debussy.

Oh no...

-- 
Atte
http://atte.dk   http://modlys.dk
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user