>improvisation is about taking a musical idea (a snatch of
>melody,
>a series of chord progressions, a rhythmic idea) and playing
>it
>it back in a different way... building on it until it
>becomes something new.
>
>much like a rapper free styling a rhyme.


The type of improvisation that I am speaking of is not intellectual. It can't be defined as you have. It is the point where you no longer see or hear the instrument itself, but feel what it is expressing. You hear what it is conveying as opposed to how it sounds. The player and the instrument take a back seat to the music. It is done within the "boundaries" of the song but played in such a way where it is not bound to anything that can be put down on paper.

>
>It's not easy to improvise well,
>but you make it sound like magic, which is irritating.
>especially when you say blues is the only other genre that has
>it.
>
>Because other genres of music improvise too.
>Just as much, actually.
>But like jake said, it's on the micro level.
>Not the macro level, like jazz.
>

I think it can only irritate someone if they are bound by some definition they think is the correct one. Shrug. We are sharing ideas here. I am not trying to possess the music in my own framework, I am expressing to you how I feel and see it.

>
>
>I won't say I know more about jazz than you,
>but I suspect I know more about music.
>
>You might wanna just say that you like jazz and leave it at
>that.
>The jazz is magic line can get.... irritating? Cloying?
>
>Something that probably rubs (black) jazz heads the wrong way.
>
>

Yawn.