True. Music is relatively easy to perform and create (forgetting whether it is Eleanor Rigby or not). But even though there are many that can, let's not diminish the very often seemingly miraculous feat of those that can perfectly perform a piece they've never heard just by reading it, often while they perform it, even though perfectly reading English out loud is a similar exercise. As many people can't read music as can read literature, and I've never heard of music literacy ruining a musician's career. But it is a good thing music is so easy for the curious and determined, because though many have learned it in their later years, learning to read music gets more and more difficult the older one is, but music itself never gets more difficult. Now, Gold Records, OTOH, I seriously doubt are easy to do, even if it was very likely easy for the artist, they had no way of knowing beforehand even if they so claimed.
That is the wonderful thing about music. It is actually pretty easy/simple but quite often those simple things move our soul.
When we attempt to intellectualize this we forget that part.
Sure, but even though we consider Jazz anything that sounds jazzy, i.e. using Major 7ths or flat 5s, because Jazz and Classical are so individually encompassing, literally every other genre of music is also Jazz and Classical, any sound that can be made with an instrument fits in Jazz and Classical, i.e. it can be interpreted using the modes and forms of Jazz or Classical without changing how it sounds. It just isn't very useful to approach or interpret, say, a folk song from the perspective of Jazz, nor the sound a guitar makes when smashed to pieces, but technically, everything is either Jazz or Classical or both.
Why come from a perspective of x or y? It’s music. It isn’t jazz or classical.
It’s music.
Humans like to do 2 things: make stuff and categorize stuff.
