As someone who never listened to this album (Which is what the audience of a review would ideally be). I would recommend you learn a bit of fundamentals of music composition if you are to critique music like this without sounding like a Christgau/Fantano wannabe who focuses more on the sound of his words than their content. Not at any point do I hear you critique the actual composition of the work. Closest you come is
>HTDC had these two notes which would play every so often and, coupled with the strings, it gave a very happy sound, almost like relief. But then there were these unsettling chords in the background that makes you uneasy.
So it clashes major melody with minor harmony is the best I can gather from that, why is this impressive? There are plenty of compositions which have more creative ideas than that. What makes this special from those?
> This album is life-changing, honestly. Worst track has got to be "Idioteque". I just hate those reverb-y chorus-y snares.
Oh, so you're not going to say why? I am just meant to hear that observation with absolutely no further elaboration beyond the basic gimmick of a single song?
The rest is just a blogpost, why even mention the context of which you listened an album in? Just talk about the fucking album, I don't give a shit and neither does anyone else.

You can use words like "This album placed me in another dimension" and other things like that, but it's about as descriptive as "It's good". This post is basically a "Holy shit" thread with a lot of filler added to it. I don't mind you trying to critique things, but it feels like it simply affirm people's enjoyment of the work than anything else and that isn't very good critique nor is it very interesting to read. It reeks of a kid listening to his dads records

>>127116408
>>127117180
You're a fucking retard, kill yourself

Anyways, OP, the actual reason is pretty simple to explain: Most modern performance practice in the west aims less to heighten the beauty of a piece of music but instead to be as accurate as possible to what the piece used to sound like, the issue is that most "historically informed" performances like this are for the majority, based on guesses and vague writings. This leads to performances that don't really sound good and barely anyone thinks sound good, but like because they are "historically accurate". This got worse and worse overtime and a lot of modern performances of even Beethoven and Mozart suffer from this. And it has absolutely raped Bach's work for almost a century now.

Here is a performance of Bach back in the early 20th century:
https://youtu.be/WehiJcwu0Ho

And here is one from the modern day
https://youtu.be/LHjbRMIIhuM

What was originally an orchestra is now a string quintet with a flutist and a harpsichordist. What was the "one voice per part" based on? Cock and balls. What is the lack of vibrato based on? Cock and balls. The only historically accurate part of this entire performance is the use of gut strings. It's a glorified gimmick that has infected most of the performances of Bach's music in the modern day. The worst part about these performances to me is that they often just sound unpleasant. Bach sounded fine when played like any other contemporary piece of music, you aren't missing anything by hearing Bach like that, the previous performance was simply playing Bach in the tradition that he was a part of, the latter is playing Bach as if he's a historical artifact, it's academic and soulless. And this philosophy seeps into most modern performances and is even getting to the romantic period.

>>127034811
You realize that melody is just going up and down the blues scale? There are only so many melodies you can make with that, even you just noodling around, you will likely come up with a melody that has already been used for a song. Blues is severely limited in terms of what melodies you can make and Yoko Kanno was basically doing a crash course in Jazz before doing the soundtrack, it is entirely likely that she just happened to find this melody, didn't know about Midtown and just made her own arrangement utilizing the conventions she picked up. Also possible she might have heard Midtown but forgot about it, but instinctively gravitated towards this melody while trying to come up with material for Bebop's soundtrack.

Not to mention that there is plenty of original material in her arrangement. Literally what the fuck is the issue? That she happened to use a similar 5 note melody? People who cry about musical plagiarism are the most retarded faggots I swear. Not to mention that the genre she is "plagiarizing" was built on the back of arranging existing melodies and building on them through arrangements and improvisation.

>>127034811
You realize that melody is just going up and down the blues scale? There are only so many melodies you can make with that, even you just noodling around, you will likely come up with a melody that has already been used for a song. Blues is severely limited in terms of what melodies you can make and Yoko Kanno was basically doing a crash course in Jazz before doing the soundtrack, it is entirely likely that she just happened to find this melody, didn't know about Midtown and just made her own arrangement utilizing the conventions she picked up. Also possible she might have heard Midtown but forgot about it, but instinctively gravitated towards this melody while trying to come up with material for Bebop's soundtrack.

Not to mention that there is plenty of original material in her arrangement. Literally what the fuck is the issue? That she happened to use a similar 5 note melody? People who cry about musical plagiarism are the most retarded faggots I swear.

>>126891960
Who is "we"? Can you get that elitist stick out of your ass for a moment? I am not acting like I am a massive fan of jazz and an authority of the genre. I simply hear a poor argument against jazz and I want to defend it out of intellectual honesty. I do not believe Bill Evans is unique for developing motifs, I just know him as someone who does out of the small bit of Jazz that I listened to. Being a retarded "muh sekrit club" faggot about music and actively arguing on the side of someone shitting on a genre you like because someone guilty of the crime of not being an encyclopedia on it is defending it is really gay and embarrassing. Critique the argument on it's own merit, not on
>Ackshyuwally, bill evans ish not the only one to develop motifs!
I never said this and this isn't part of my argument. Swap Bill Evans for anyone else who develops the head melody, I don't care. I just happened to be specifically familiar with Bill Evans because I like his music.
>>126892014
Nice argument. What exactly are you hoping to accomplish with this post? Are you specifically stating "Stalinist gulag" because you believe I am a communist? I like certain communist composers but I certainly am not one myself in any way

>>126827140
>>126830721
>>126831413
>>126823226
>zoomers like classical music
I wish this shit was true, if I genuinely had fellow zoomers to discuss this type of music with to any level of depth, I wouldn't be relying on a single general on 4chan for most of my classical music discussion.

It is true that most zoomers are leaning more towards the right politically, but when it comes to music taste they still on average stick to the same relativist framework that devalues the medium as a whole (The notion of there being no objective measures by which you can critique music and that you should treat lil pump in the exact same manner as you would treat Bruckner), and usually listen to pretty braindead slop. This isn't exclusive to zoomers though, I've seen equally bad taste from millennials and boomers. But there is no reason to pretend that zoomers magically broke free from a problem that's been plaguing the last 3 to 4 generations. For that to happen, there'd need to finally be a movement to think of music as a serious art again, as it is not and has not been thought of that way for over a century now. I've been in enough discord servers where the "music" channel is a barren wasteland of people going
>Guy 1: This song is good [link to some trap shit]
>Guy 2: They made this song too [link to some other trap shit]
>Guy 1: wow this is good
Just endless loops of this exact interaction, no deeper discussion had, no knowledge gained. Mainly because these people cannot define what makes the music they like "good", and any attempt at it is vehemently opposed because the music they like wouldn't fall under any reasonable catagory of "good". So the cycle remains. Sadly this even happens when the average person likes classical music, which leads to there being no discussion other than "I like this piece" and "I don't like this piece" there as well

To give a tldr for those with ADHD, if you cannot explain why you like a piece of music in clear descriptive words you are a FAG