That was the main thing that distinguished jazz until the advent of "modern jazz" in the 50's and later. Ir had a strong beat, and you were supposed to dance to it! That's the jazz I love!
the mellow stuff. But I totally get what people mean here: the kind of jazz where every instrumentalist takes it in turn to do a crazy riff for several minutes is like fingernails on chalk to me.
I was thinking more of this type of jazz (Annael's comment below):
Quote
the kind of jazz where every instrumentalist takes it in turn to do a crazy riff for several minutes is like fingernails on chalk to me.
I need a melody and structure (yes, I'm a control freak) and when they just go off on a musical tangent that (to my ears) doesn't have structure, they lose me.
Thank goodness! I'd already blown the money on Pez. (Sorry, just feeling particularly silly. I don't think I've ever even had Pez. )
But yeah, like Elizabeth said, early jazz had a beat. And most all of it that I've ever heard is exuberant and fun, not pretentious and self-indulgent.
(This post was edited by zarabia on Jan 24 2015, 3:44am)
I think that your categories are rather interesting. I have differing opinions on each of the categories for which I voted. Blues or R&B - I like the blues, but not much R&B Country or Folk - I like folk a good bit, but not much country Jazz or Latin - I like Jazz, but Carlos Santana is as latin as I get. Pop or Rock - I love Rock & Roll, but I do not enjoy very much Pop.
Other Jazz guys didn't even like him...
[In reply to]
Can't Post
...they had similar criticism of his freeform style. Some loved him, some hated him. His '59 record, "The Shape of Jazz to Come" was groundbreaking, controversial, and legendary. I like it...sometimes more than others. Another interesting note, the body of his sax was plastic.
4 /
4%
(Sorry, just feeling particularly silly. I don't think I've ever even had Pez. 
) 
Why thank you
[
