Larger-scale ideas

[phdmerrill]

Right now I've been working on control and discretion in my improvisation. In my last thread about organizing a solo, I touched on this, but I'm not sure I dug into the practical implications of what I was talking about. It's true, I want to have better organized solos, but this doesn't come about merely from having a general frame of thought: "Be organized. Follow the written melody. Keep your feet on the ground and don't fly off on an impulse."

Producing an organized-sounding solo is not a top-down process; you don't just tell yourself to do it and try your best. Nor do you pre-format your solo with a specific sequence of ideas. Like almost everything else in music, making your playing sound organized is a bottom-up process: you must use smaller concepts to formulate larger ones. You take what you know and apply it in a specific way. You learn by doing, instead of learning to do--if you catch my drift. Eventually, it will come naturally. But only after you've practiced it a thousand times.

Most of the lessons out there on YouTube or elsewhere are aimed towards the bottom end of musical conceptualization. It is no coincidence that most of the jargon we have as musicians are zeroed in on units that occupy very small spaces of music, within a few measures or less. They're called licks, lines, and phrases, which are made up of even smaller elements called arpeggios, intervals, triads, scales, modes, chromatics, pentatonics, etc, etc, etc. There is so much content to learn down at this bottom end of the musical process that many of us, including myself, get trapped and think--at least subconsciously--that the essence of music is all in these small building blocks. These build organized phrases. But they don't build an organized solo.

Isn't it strange, for all the words we have for this small stuff, we have relatively few for the larger structures in music? The best we can do is use terms like motivic development, themes, and passages, or point out trends in a descriptive way. Despite this, a mature improviser must think big terms, especially when enough of the small stuff has been mastered (although it's true, there is an inexhaustible amount of small stuff to learn and play with).

So after you are capable of creating organized music on the level of the phrase, you must start working on organization on the scope of a passage that is made up of a number of phrases, spanning up to eight measures, I'd say, depending on the tempo. The goal, at first, should be continuity. As an exercise, fill up four to eight bars with one big idea, without deviating. It should be a good test of discipline and versatility for players like me who have gotten too used to filling up solos with a lot of little ideas we've gotten comfortable with. One huge concept is simply being able to reiterate exactly what you've just played over the last couple of bars while making it harmonically compatible with the next changes of the chord progression (this shows whether you're really hearing what you're playing, or if you forget what you've played as soon as you've played it, plus its a great fretboard workout). Here is where repetition, recombination, modulation, call-and-response, rhythmic displacement, range and direction become important. Work on all of them as methodically as you would play a memorized lick or scale pattern, over a backing track.

Each of these above terms is a huge topic that merits a lot of focus and attention--more attention, in my opinion, than modes of the melodic minor or any such "bottom-end" topic. And each could be a thread of its own, so I won't discuss them in too much detail until later. But I'd like to know how all of you conceptualize these sorts of things, if at all. I realize a lot of great improvisers were very "free" in their playing and might not have been constrained by trying to maintain large-scale ideas, and probably played more by ear or intuition. But listening to strong melodic players like Grant Green or Bill Evans, I can't help but be certain that these players worked on these concepts very rigorously and methodically. The way I see it, you have to strike a balance between freedom and spontaneity on one side and organization and deliberation on the other. Tell me what you think.

[phdmerrill]

I really ought to whittle these down. When I get rolling, I can't stop! A crisp dollar bill to whoever reads the whole thing.

[Shadow of the Sun]

This is something I got from a book on composing music with 4 part harmony in the medieval style.

First, take a piece of blank sheet music. Now, staying on a single line, draw a contoured line, with complex curves. Up and down, bigger in some bits, less in the others, that looks like this:


Now, pick a scale or a simple chord progression, and try to improvise a line that fits the contour that you drew- once you get to the end, just start again. If you're using a chord progression, use chord-tones and appropriate passing tones, or even CST if that's how you look at it. And note that while you have to follow the contour, it doesn't have to be the same length- the first go round it could take, say, 4 bars, but the second it could take 6, whatever.

Just focus on getting your improv to fit that contour- it doesn't matter what rhythm you're using or what range you're going at, a single octave with quarter notes is probably easiest when starting off, but just follow the contour.

Practice that, coming up with a new contour each time, beginning to vary the rhythms and ranges of it, and then see if you can do it based off of a contour in your head, not on the page.

Using this approach when you solo will give your solos an organized sound- while the individual notes will vary, the listener will be able to hear the phrases develop and notice the similarities between them.

[phdmerrill]

^ Great. I'll be sure to give it a try. This is the kind of practical technique I'm looking for. Range and contour--good things to keep in mind.

[Billnc]

I'm no expert. One thing I have noticed while practicing songs for gigs lately. I take a song and play it, on bass or guitar for about 1/2 an hour non stop. Walking line on bass, soloing on bass, comping on guitar and soloing on guitar. I will start to hear how my individual lines will develop through the changes

Now, the lines seem to become written after a while, so the improvisational aspect has gone, but I've developed a good coherent walking line, bass solo, comp and guitar solo. But... this is a practice session and I have gained at least some knowledge of what I am trying to accomplish on the gig.

[pauln]

Nice thoughts.

Made me think back to the way I learned to play the solos I heard. I listened to them and thought of the whole solo as having a profile, like a graph. There were definite peaks, sub-peaks, and places in between. I learned the peaks first - they were the most outstanding, dynamic, climactic emotional parts. Then the sub-peaks, then the phrases in between, then filling in the rest of as many notes as I could hear. I figured it out by ear.

As I look back, I see that this method of conceptualizing the solo tended to naturally focus development toward the strongest statements first - climactic peaks, then the supporting roles of the sub-peaks, then the subsequent support of the connecting phrases and notes. In essence, I learned an approximation of the solo as a whole from day one, adding in more detail throughout as I continued, building like a crystal or like a fractal, a space filling approach, until the whole thing had enough resolution and detail that it sounded like the original.

Somehow, I imagine there is a fundamental similarity between this way of learning a solo and the way the solo may have been conceived by the original player.

Now days I think this is rare. Almost every new student will use a complete and comprehensive serial layout of the solo (standard notation, tab, lesson video or teacher) in which they learn the first note, then the next, then assemble the first riff, the next, then build the first phrase, the next... in order note by note from the beginning until they reach the end.

This serial approach from beginning to end does seem to have its focus on the local objects at hand - the licks and riffs. It does not naturally emphasize the overall dynamic "profile" shape of the solo.

I will often hear a guitarist playing and think to myself, "He learned that by ear, figuring it out the way I would - peaks, then sub-peaks... filling down to the details". It seems to have a more relaxed and lyrical feel, and a stronger sense of the meaningfulness of the peaks... and I think it likely supports well the idea of improvising with a longer deeper grasp of the organization of a solo, more holistic, more organic...

[Shadow of the Sun]

Pauln: do you think that using a reverse of the approach that I stated in my post would be a good way of learning solos? Sitting there, working out the contour, and then working out how the notes fit too it?

[pauln]

Originally Posted by Shadow of the Sun

Pauln: do you think that using a reverse of the approach that I stated in my post would be a good way of learning solos? Sitting there, working out the contour, and then working out how the notes fit too it?

Yes, that was what I was pointing to; the thing I was especially interested in was the way the approach to the contour or profile was made in sucessive approximations with each having more resolution and detail.

[phdmerrill]

I was just working on Body and Soul and realized how demanding ballads can be for compelling you to use structure and discretion in your playing. You definitely can't get away with noodling around on ballads like you can on moderate or quick-tempoed tunes. They're just the challenge I need. Also keeps me honest about using expressive touch, which I am pretty weak on.

[JonnyPac]

Great OP. Great topic- and never discussed enough around here, IMO.

Hypermeter is the longer forms within the composition. It's beyond one or two bars and a few strung together licks. Looking at 4, 8, 12, 16, 32, or other irregular bar groupings is a good way to plan solos. Contours are limited rages per section are good too. Textures or a system of tiers like chorus 1: single notes 2: octaves 3: chord-melody; or a gradient from vanilla to "outside" are some game-plans as it were.

Bill Evans and others were able to think in bigger groupings and manipulate them to fit their ideas. Moving the goal post (bar line and points of resolution) around a bit is nice (as long as you don't lose yourself!).

I have been practicing cutting my internal feel in half (as recommended by Hal Galper in a video). I go from 4/4 swing 1 2 3 4 | 1 2 3 4 to 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + and add accents where the line "needs" them to be, not forced on 2 and 4. It makes a significant improvement on "the longer arch" of my ideas.

Here is a somewhat relevant note I gave my new jazz-rock group a month or so ago. Some of they players came from a non-jazz background... It helped them a lot.

A HUGE part of the jazz improv tradition is knowing/internalizing hypermeter and song-forms. Hypermeter is more than one bar phrases that make up the whole; in fact it begins with the whole performance like so:

|SONG |

Then you divide it in to a few general chunks (some of variable length):
| INTRO/HEAD | SOLOS | HEAD/OUTRO |

or more specifically:
| INTRO/HEAD | PIANO SOLO | GUITAR SOLO | SAX SOLO | Trade 4's | HEAD/OUTRO |

Then next up is Choruses (not like pop verse/chorus). A chorus is one run through the complete song form. Such as A part + A part + B part (bridge) + A part = AABA form = a chorus. There are many forms out there, but most a based on groupings of 4 bars like 4 bars, 8 bars, 12 bars, 16 bars, 24 bars, 32 bars and such. Any deviations from these phrase lengths are considered unusual; it is safe to assume that these will be in place on a given tune- no matter what contemporary genre. Having your brain go CLICK every 8 bars is an invaluable tool. About 7 bars in, you might want to look/listen carefully to see if the group is moving towards a new section, soloist/instrument change, etc. Solos usually occur over X amount of complete choruses; it is in poor taste to play a fractional chorus for a solo- it will almost always disrupt the flow and ears' expectations, and there will have to be a recovery period to get the soloists and form back in order.
Several choruses per solo or solo over vamp in 8 or 16 bar groupings is a good system. Always give a heads up (visually or musically) when finishing solos. Comping or returning to the groove riff is good way to get out and pass the soloist role/begin out-head.

It is often important for the whole band to emphasize the song forms and hypermeter. Dynamic variations and shifting textures is a great way to define the song forms. "Loud and louder" seems kind of "young" as a dynamic plan- I personally would like to hear a significant variety of volumes and textures with each song (even if they are groove-based without big changes within the form). "Illumination" [one of our original ballads] is especially nice the way we build each solo from quiet with space to full-on 4/4 swing. We should use similar tactics on every tune; because each solo will take several minutes and a great many measures, the main soloists will not blow their loads in the first 15 seconds- we will extent our ideas over a longer arch and hopefully work towards a climax of sorts. It is crucial for the rhythm section (bass, drums, comping instruments) to display a high sensitivity toward the soloist and melodic head statements. We must make each part/soloist sound supported by the accompaniment while adding interest and personal touches to the music. I want the full spectrum from a tasty whisper of implied complexity to a meaningful crescendo of overtly stated parts. Let's "forget the notes" and move toward group expressions. We can create further technical complexities and emotion by looking at the bigger picture and understanding the why of the supporting parts.

[phdmerrill]

Good input, Jonny. A lot of good stuff to think about and put to work.

[JonnyPac]

I just finished Galper's Forward Motion. His ideas on beat ONE being the END note (a release beat) instead of the beginning of the bar- is kind of monumental- obvious from a critical listening standpoint, but psychologically backwards from most assumptions about written notation. Everything is a pick-up!

[JonnyPac]

I try to address a lot of the ideas here. Check it out! New video lessons and accompanying text examples:

http://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/getti...ong-forms.html