Jazz for aficionados

"moment" = comment . Sorry.

Frogman, I appreciate your very informative post. I never approached music from an academic point of view, it has always been from an emotional, or resonant stance; meaning if the music is in harmony with my inner vibes we, (me and the music) go into a state of "resonance" . Enigma affects me in that fashion.

The music we like is a composite of who we are, that includes all of our various lives before we reached our present state of awareness; in other words, I might have been one of the Knights of the Round table in one of my previous incarnations; that would most certainly explain my affinity for Enigma.


Enjoy the music.

Folks on this thread do seem to listen to music as if they were music critics, instead of music lovers.

Cheers

I'm with you Rok; I listen to music for enjoyment, not to break it down like dissecting a frog in biology (pun unintended). Them super "aficionados" got all over me about Enigma, but failed to comment on "Swinging For Benny" which is a real Gem, and I know they probably hadn't heard it before because no one has posted it before. Here it is one mo time.


            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rnw2FQUckE


Can you dig it.


         

****Folks on this thread do seem to listen to music as if they were music critics, instead of music lovers.****

Nonsense! And if I weren’t in such a good mood today I probably would have said "bulls++t!" We’ve been here so many times before that it’s ridiculous. Let’s take a closer look at this assertion and hopefully put it to rest once and for all (unlikely)....shall we?:

The main problem with that assertion is that the implication is that when there is any critical analysis there is less love for the music; that the "critic" is somehow automatically LESS of a music lover and that the listener who won’t or is incapable of being analytical is somehow a more "pure" lover of the music and is more in touch with or receptive to the emotional content in music; a ridiculous and self-serving stance.  I would ask the "music lovers" here to please point out what it is they bring to the table of discussion or simple sharing of music that separates them from the supposed "critics" here. Let’s see, by way of quotes from prior posts or new commentary, what it is, exactly, that points to any advantage or any sort of "higher ground" in the areas of appreciation or love for any music by a choice or inability to be analytical. The point is, as has been pointed out many times before, that analysis ADDS to appreciation and can, if anything, fuel deeper love for the music. Now, conversely, kindly explain and point out what has been written here by those who add some degree of analysis to the "appreciation mix" that suggests that they love music any less.

I hope that the parallels between this "argument" and the old-jazz vs. new-jazz debate does not go unnoticed. It should also be pointed out, Rok, that I haven’t seen very much "music loving" from you lately by way of music sharing, but plenty of "criticism". I also don’t see any criticism by those who do analyze of those who choose not too, or can’t. Why the other way around? Hmmm....ironic, no?

Edit: to suggest that pointing out a very interesting aspect of a music is to "approach music from an academic standpoint" as opposed to "the emotional" and to equate this to "dissecting a frog" is unfair and condescending.  In my universe it would merit at least a "isn't that interesting" or  "Hmmm, let's see, I wonder what Medieval music is like?".  Oh, well; to each his own.