OF COURSE - you'd think it won't need to be said, but in this day and age... - "the High IQ Take" title is completely ironic. I'm writing this here before the trolls come ;-)
I appreciate your way of getting to the point of the issue. There is too much elitist crap in the music world, from bluegrass to baroque. Embrace the music you love at whatever level makes you happy. Peace.
I dont like most jazz but learning the basics of it is the best way to learn guitar theory. Genre is irrelevent when it comes to theory. I am getting into blues and country and still play hard rock and metal. The jazz shell voicings and extentions was like the key to the door for me. 7th chords just add a whole new depth to what youre playing. You dont have to play them but knowing when you can is going to make you a much better musician. Theory is going to make you a much better musician. You can take more advanced levels of lessons when the teacher can talk to you and you understand what they are saying. Genre is an unnecessary boundary. That being said if you can play jazz, you can play anything.
Anyone who can formulate an intelligent question on a topic can almost certainly understand the answer to that question. Tommaso, thank you so much for stating your case so directly. Intelligence has nothing to do with our ability to appreciate music of any kind. And the concept that some kinds of music are inherently intelligent or unintelligent really chaps my hide. Yes, some jazz and classical music are more complex than a 2-chord punk tune, but I think it's easier to put on some Vivaldi and turn your brain off than to put on a Ramones album and understand it.
The OG jazz masters (for the most part) were not college grads. There was an apprentice system with the jazz scene that taught them how to play jazz which doesn’t exist now. Reading was not necessary. It is the art of sound. Written music only assists in communication. Jazz musicians don’t read music while performing. Many aspects of performance in jazz is chosen by each player within the context of the form of the tune.
Good point well made, my brother in Partimento. It is important to realise there’s not much going on my head when listening to jazz except ‘hurr durrrr saxophone goes brrrrrr.’ Tbf this may not extrapolate to a general principle, because others are certainly better at music, but I think it’s always a visceral connection.
Jazz can't be any more difficult to understand than some works by Milton Babbitt. And I love listening to some of those pieces for the very fact that there's something going on and I have no idea what it is.
I read an interesting academic paper recently that reported many species of primates prefer to dance to salsa than to metal. I prefer 19th century waltzes although I have trouble with the tricky 3/4 time.
I think the issue is a matter of vocabulary rather than IQ. With food or pop music, most people have the vocabulary to specify why they like or dislike it, and they can discuss it intelligently. But Jazz has a bit of a different vocabulary. It isn't hard to learn. Once you know about stuff like ii-V's or progressions or chord substitutions, then you can discuss why you like a certain piece. All you need to do is read some liner notes or google a few topics, and then you can talk about Jazz with some intent.
Yes, I am. How I wish I was smarter than I naturally am. I like some jazz tunes but I don't listen to it as an exclusive genre, in the same way that there are a few country tunes that I like. For me, there is good music of whatever style and there is bad music, but that's still subjective and only my taste and opinion. 👍😎
Higher intelligence is not required to enjoy any art form. Great art is emotional and there is no correlation between intelligence and ability to feel emotion. Understanding the mechanics of an art form is a different matter. As a professional musician and music educator with almost 40 years of experience, I can confidently tell you that understanding jazz harmony requires more than average intelligence.
why? Intelligence isn't low in all things but when you in most things. So could you not be able understand jazz harmony but be very poor at math and understanding what you read in books.
Should you learn jazz to become a better musician? Even if I don't resonate with it very much since jazz musicians can play pop/rock but pop/rock musicians can't play jazz?
Not all jazz musicians can play pop/rock lol. Usually they overplay. Also repetoire. I wouldn’t book me to play a top 40 covers gig. Don’t sell your skills short.
Really? Could you elaborate pls? I have seen that most of the session players/hired guns are jazz musicians. Am I missing something? And how difficult can it be to learn 40 pop songs if you can play stella by starlight and blue in green in 12 keys and improvise over them? I'm just trying to understand, because there's this stigma in my music school that jazz musicians can do stuff that pop/rock musicians can't, so I'm checking how much truth is in there.
@@Theprogressivemusician sure. And there’s truth to that. Jazz musicians have tended historically to be better readers, more flexible in their approach and be more used to playing in non-rock ensembles such as big bands, so those skills marked them out as useful in a world were rock players most often lacked those attributes. But that’s not necessarily a skill set unique to jazz players, that’s just learning music really; and you can’t take any jazz musician and expect them to perform well as a session player, you have to understand the music you are playing and how the parts work etc. They need to gain experience in that world. Also the ground has shifted - reading is less important now for example. The day of the live room/red light reading sessions has passed. Lukather was at the tail end of that in the 80s and today most work from home studios. Jazz is jazz, otoh, if you love it great. You may learn to love it of course, but I don’t think it’s ever worth persisting with something that feels like a chore. Actually a lot of session guys today seem to be from a Gospel background. Those guys have chops!
@@JazzGuitarScrapbook Thanks a lot for your reply! That clears up a lot. I'm studying at a popular music school currently and actually we do everything that good musicians do(ear training, theory/harmony, arranging/composing, playing in ensembles, playing and writing lead sheets) but we don't necessarily play jazz. So am I on the right track already and should dig and learn/play music that I love? I'm more into art rock/progressive rock from the 70s and Debussy, Stravinsky and Bartok, also Steve Reich, Philip Glass etc. but never found jazz so interesting apart from some tunes here and there.
@@Theprogressivemusician it can’t hurt to explore genres. I started with Brecker and ended up at Louis Armstrong haha. But what don’t like is this feeling of jazz being a technical study. It’s real music. Otoh I understand people feel jazz players have a lot of knowledge and rays what they are interested in acquiring, and fair enough. But I don’t think that’s about jazz, more like the skills you need to play in no guitar focussed areas of music. As a teacher myself I have to meet people half way. I have students who like the prog stuff more than bop and we can agree on Holdsworth maybe haha. What I’m saying is expand your horizons and skills, but follow your heart. Maybe I’m an old romantic…”find what you love and let it kill you” and all of that…
whether you get jazz or not has nothing to do with intelligence. There is a lot of good music that just doesn't appeal to me. That doesn't say anything about my intelligence or even music knowledge. In fact, the more I learn about music and music theory, the less impressed I am by some bands. I still love Pink Floyd for example, but I am much less impressed by their music now that I understand what they are actually doing.
Jazz became conservatory bourgeois music, almost completely separated from its original context. I love Jazz (and Classical) and respect conservatories, but the street edge is largely gone.
I think the "high IQ" take comes from the fact that a lot of Jazz players have more formal training, can read music etc. But you dont have to do all that to "get" Jazz I suppose. Even though more formal training probably really helps understanding the dense harmony of Jazz etc
@@christopherheckman7957 yeah. Its all there. But especially the harmony in Jazz with all the voice leading, chord alterations etc is quite a bit easier to understand if you have at least a good one on one teacher. The internet can only do so much
OF COURSE - you'd think it won't need to be said, but in this day and age... - "the High IQ Take" title is completely ironic. I'm writing this here before the trolls come ;-)
I appreciate your way of getting to the point of the issue. There is too much elitist crap in the music world, from bluegrass to baroque. Embrace the music you love at whatever level makes you happy. Peace.
"If it sounds good it is good." -Miles Davis
I don’t know exactly what kind of music Tomaso enjoys. But I’m sure he is very intelligent
I enjoy nearly all kinds of music. You can find great musicians in nearly any style.
I dont like most jazz but learning the basics of it is the best way to learn guitar theory. Genre is irrelevent when it comes to theory. I am getting into blues and country and still play hard rock and metal. The jazz shell voicings and extentions was like the key to the door for me. 7th chords just add a whole new depth to what youre playing. You dont have to play them but knowing when you can is going to make you a much better musician. Theory is going to make you a much better musician. You can take more advanced levels of lessons when the teacher can talk to you and you understand what they are saying. Genre is an unnecessary boundary. That being said if you can play jazz, you can play anything.
Anyone who can formulate an intelligent question on a topic can almost certainly understand the answer to that question. Tommaso, thank you so much for stating your case so directly. Intelligence has nothing to do with our ability to appreciate music of any kind. And the concept that some kinds of music are inherently intelligent or unintelligent really chaps my hide.
Yes, some jazz and classical music are more complex than a 2-chord punk tune, but I think it's easier to put on some Vivaldi and turn your brain off than to put on a Ramones album and understand it.
Oh well said sir.
The OG jazz masters (for the most part) were not college grads. There was an apprentice system with the jazz scene that taught them how to play jazz which doesn’t exist now. Reading was not necessary. It is the art of sound. Written music only assists in communication. Jazz musicians don’t read music while performing. Many aspects of performance in jazz is chosen by each player within the context of the form of the tune.
Playing entirely by ear in a musical language all its own is a wonderful gift. You described it well.
Thank you so much for this video ❤❤ if you like it you gravitate towards it
The link between chemistry and punk is drugs
Right answers here
Good point well made, my brother in Partimento. It is important to realise there’s not much going on my head when listening to jazz except ‘hurr durrrr saxophone goes brrrrrr.’ Tbf this may not extrapolate to a general principle, because others are certainly better at music, but I think it’s always a visceral connection.
One day you and I should talk about Partimento on guitar.
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar I’d love to!
I'm traveling at the moment, but I'll send you a message in a few weeks.
Jazz can't be any more difficult to understand than some works by Milton Babbitt. And I love listening to some of those pieces for the very fact that there's something going on and I have no idea what it is.
I read an interesting academic paper recently that reported many species of primates prefer to dance to salsa than to metal. I prefer 19th century waltzes although I have trouble with the tricky 3/4 time.
I think the issue is a matter of vocabulary rather than IQ. With food or pop music, most people have the vocabulary to specify why they like or dislike it, and they can discuss it intelligently. But Jazz has a bit of a different vocabulary. It isn't hard to learn. Once you know about stuff like ii-V's or progressions or chord substitutions, then you can discuss why you like a certain piece. All you need to do is read some liner notes or google a few topics, and then you can talk about Jazz with some intent.
Could you make some more videos about jazz theory? You know, tritone substitutions, modulations, reharmonizing, standards etc_?
Hey, im a chemist! I listen to all music. I have noticed through, I qm listening to more jazz as I am older, lol.
I clean the house to jazz. As well as driving. Jazz and like styles become more interesting to listen to over time.
I don't need to be a skydiving expert to look at a tangled parachute in a tree and know something went wrong
In this analogy, what is Jazz? The parachute, the tree, or the thing that went wrong?
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar the onlooker
Yes, I am.
How I wish I was smarter than I naturally am.
I like some jazz tunes but I don't listen to it as an exclusive genre, in the same way that there are a few country tunes that I like.
For me, there is good music of whatever style and there is bad music, but that's still subjective and only my taste and opinion.
👍😎
After thirty years I have come to the conclusion that I am too dumb for all music
You and me alike :)
Higher intelligence is not required to enjoy any art form. Great art is emotional and there is no correlation between intelligence and ability to feel emotion. Understanding the mechanics of an art form is a different matter. As a professional musician and music educator with almost 40 years of experience, I can confidently tell you that understanding jazz harmony requires more than average intelligence.
why? Intelligence isn't low in all things but when you in most things. So could you not be able understand jazz harmony but be very poor at math and understanding what you read in books.
Should you learn jazz to become a better musician? Even if I don't resonate with it very much since jazz musicians can play pop/rock but pop/rock musicians can't play jazz?
Not all jazz musicians can play pop/rock lol. Usually they overplay. Also repetoire. I wouldn’t book me to play a top 40 covers gig. Don’t sell your skills short.
Really? Could you elaborate pls? I have seen that most of the session players/hired guns are jazz musicians. Am I missing something? And how difficult can it be to learn 40 pop songs if you can play stella by starlight and blue in green in 12 keys and improvise over them? I'm just trying to understand, because there's this stigma in my music school that jazz musicians can do stuff that pop/rock musicians can't, so I'm checking how much truth is in there.
@@Theprogressivemusician sure. And there’s truth to that. Jazz musicians have tended historically to be better readers, more flexible in their approach and be more used to playing in non-rock ensembles such as big bands, so those skills marked them out as useful in a world were rock players most often lacked those attributes.
But that’s not necessarily a skill set unique to jazz players, that’s just learning music really; and you can’t take any jazz musician and expect them to perform well as a session player, you have to understand the music you are playing and how the parts work etc. They need to gain experience in that world.
Also the ground has shifted - reading is less important now for example. The day of the live room/red light reading sessions has passed. Lukather was at the tail end of that in the 80s and today most work from home studios.
Jazz is jazz, otoh, if you love it great. You may learn to love it of course, but I don’t think it’s ever worth persisting with something that feels like a chore.
Actually a lot of session guys today seem to be from a Gospel background. Those guys have chops!
@@JazzGuitarScrapbook Thanks a lot for your reply! That clears up a lot. I'm studying at a popular music school currently and actually we do everything that good musicians do(ear training, theory/harmony, arranging/composing, playing in ensembles, playing and writing lead sheets) but we don't necessarily play jazz. So am I on the right track already and should dig and learn/play music that I love? I'm more into art rock/progressive rock from the 70s and Debussy, Stravinsky and Bartok, also Steve Reich, Philip Glass etc. but never found jazz so interesting apart from some tunes here and there.
@@Theprogressivemusician it can’t hurt to explore genres. I started with Brecker and ended up at Louis Armstrong haha. But what don’t like is this feeling of jazz being a technical study. It’s real music. Otoh I understand people feel jazz players have a lot of knowledge and rays what they are interested in acquiring, and fair enough. But I don’t think that’s about jazz, more like the skills you need to play in no guitar focussed areas of music. As a teacher myself I have to meet people half way. I have students who like the prog stuff more than bop and we can agree on Holdsworth maybe haha. What I’m saying is expand your horizons and skills, but follow your heart. Maybe I’m an old romantic…”find what you love and let it kill you” and all of that…
whether you get jazz or not has nothing to do with intelligence. There is a lot of good music that just doesn't appeal to me. That doesn't say anything about my intelligence or even music knowledge. In fact, the more I learn about music and music theory, the less impressed I am by some bands. I still love Pink Floyd for example, but I am much less impressed by their music now that I understand what they are actually doing.
Am I too dumb for Jazz?
Yeah man.
Meee ? yes
If i had two brains it would only make me twice a dumb. lol
Jazz became conservatory bourgeois music, almost completely separated from its original context. I love Jazz (and Classical) and respect conservatories, but the street edge is largely gone.
Bro, I'm too dumb for punk.
I think the "high IQ" take comes from the fact that a lot of Jazz players have more formal training, can read music etc. But you dont have to do all that to "get" Jazz I suppose. Even though more formal training probably really helps understanding the dense harmony of Jazz etc
There is a lot of jazz theory out there. Not as much as "classical" music theory, but there's quite a bit.
@@christopherheckman7957 yeah. Its all there. But especially the harmony in Jazz with all the voice leading, chord alterations etc is quite a bit easier to understand if you have at least a good one on one teacher. The internet can only do so much
Music say a lot about people. People who like Bad Bunny, are stupid.
Does he think jazz composers have high iqs?