Why isn't Ear Training pushed more in Jazz Instructional books and DVDs?

[AlsoRan]

We have had several of our good forum members through the years stress Ear Training as being a part of successfully being able to play good Jazz. It seems to me that this idea is not pushed very much in Jazz Pedagogy, at least in the published books and DVD instruction arena. Why do you suppose this is so?

As I seek to improve, I am wondering if this would be worthwhile.

[jordanklemons]

I'm just about to wrap up a masters in jazz studies and can tell you that ear training was a massive part of my studies. I had multiple teachers all who stressed the ear. Each with very unique different approaches and methods. But all intensely focused on improving the ear.

One of my teachers even went so far as to say that if your ear is improving, you as a musician are improving. If you're ear is not improving.... well...

[cosmic gumbo]

Maybe the traditional method of jazz ear training would affect the sale of books and dvds, so they don't want to mention it because they need the loot due to lack of jazz gigs,, cuz everyone hates jazz, 'cept jazz musicians.

Nothing beats spending hours listening to jazz tunes, trying to learn the changes, melodies and solos by ear. That's the road tested old school method of ear training.

Many of us read fairly well, but I'm betting most of us that play with others and gig, regardless of genre, learned most of our gigging repertoire by listening to tunes and working them out by ear.

[JensL]

We have had several of our good forum members through the years stress Ear Training as being a part of successfully being able to play good Jazz. It seems to me that this idea is not pushed very much in Jazz Pedagogy, at least in the published books and DVD instruction arena. Why do you suppose this is so?

As I seek to improve, I am wondering if this would be worthwhile.

I think that ear training is already a huge part of jazz education today already if you are talking conservatory/university stuff, just as Jordan said.

I doubt if books and DVD's ever really reflected how the "real" education was since they are made to sell and attract attention, and most of us are not that inclined to buy DVD's and books on it.

Ironically maybe, but I have the impression that almost none of the people who studied jazz at a school spent much time with books or DVD's? I think I can count the material I checked out a lot on one hand in that category (and one of them is actually a heavy metal dvd )

If you want to improve your ears then go for it! I have spent a huge amount of hours on it and it really pays off! I spent my time with an ear training program, transcribing and singing from sheet music (the last one is really useful for strengthening your ability to hear notes relative to a tonal center)

Jens

[sjl]

If a DVD seller says to a student: "Boy, all you have to do for playing jazz is to buy some records and play what you hear on them", then the selling is over.
They don't want students to use their ears, they want to sell their magic formulas who will make you play jazz in a month.
No book in the world can tell you what notes to play, great education material teach you structure and colors you can choose, but you have to paint that canvas.

[AlsoRan]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

I am putting it on the agenda.

[fep]

Ear training is an interesting beast in that it is easy for the lucky few, really hard for many, and impossible for some. I'm sure anyone who has attended a Community College Ear Training 1 class has witnessed this.

Formalized ear training is also quite the grind for those of us that have to work hard to see any improvement. And to have those improvements translate to the instrument and ones playing from formalized school training is another big leap.

I took the four semesters of college ear training and got to where I could transcribe/notate 4 part Bach Chorales in a classroom test... and yes that is without the aid of an instrument or even singing the parts back to oneself. Even still I didn't see much of this skill transfer to improving my guitar playing.

I believe in the old school way. That is, transcribe from recordings, learn a ton of tunes, play a lot for years and years.

The real useful ear development, at least for me, was when I could hear chord progressions. I might hear a bit of a chord progression and realize that these chords are the same as say, 'Love me Tender'. At that point I already know the progression without picking up the guitar, and I'm 100% sure I'm right. This kind of skill is very different than being able to sing intervals, or being able to sing the modes. And it's so much more useful and organic. And, it's the same with melodies.

I'm not saying I'm that great at the chord progression recognition as a lot of the time I'm not recognizing the progression. But I do sometimes and realize that is what I want to be able to do.

[JensL]

Ear training is an interesting beast in that it is easy for the lucky few, really hard for many, and impossible for some. I'm sure anyone who has attended a Community College Ear Training 1 class has witnessed this.

Formalized ear training is also quite the grind for those of us that have to work hard to see any improvement. And to have those improvements translate to the instrument and ones playing from formalized school training is another big leap.

I took the four semesters of college ear training and got to where I could transcribe/notate 4 part Bach Chorales in a classroom test... and yes that is without the aid of an instrument or even singing the parts back to oneself. Even still I didn't see much of this skill transfer to improving my guitar playing.

I believe in the old school way. That is, transcribe from recordings, learn a ton of tunes, play a lot for years and years.

The real useful ear development, at least for me, was when I could hear chord progressions. I might hear a bit of a chord progression and realize that these chords are the same as say, 'Love me Tender'. At that point I already know the progression without picking up the guitar, and I'm 100% sure I'm right. This kind of skill is very different than being able to sing intervals, or being able to sing the modes. And it's so much more useful and organic. And, it's the same with melodies.

I'm not saying I'm that great at the chord progression recognition as a lot of the time I'm not recognizing the progression. But I do sometimes and realize that is what I want to be able to do.

I don't know how old you are and when you did ear training, but around here it has progressed quite a bit from what you described and is much closer to what you need. I suspect it is one of the areas where there has been the most development in how to teach it more effeciently in the last 20 years?

What they teach at the conservatory here now is much better than what I was taught 10-15 years ago.

Jens

[vladmartino]

Ear Training is everything. I disregarded that notion for years . I am self taught and went down all the wrong paths you can think of - trying to play faster pre-learned lines and licks. Trying to memorize all the shapes. I turned the whole music process into navigation exercise on the fretboard. All these riches of aural perception of melody and music were around me but i chased another half memorized sequence etc...It stopped for me in a dramatic sudden fashion, one day my brain said no more calculating you are done. Play what you hear or do not play at all. The music is aural art i think sometimes we forget about it. For me any new concept has to be heard and digested in my melodic perception of things.
If i hear it i play if i don't i wont. That does not mean that i am not learning something new. I do it everyday. What it means is that at this moment what gets reproduced is my inner vision of the tune and not just regorgitated fingerings of some fancy concept i cannot hear yet. Its actually kind of humbling i stopped playing fast, i cannot hear fast yet so why would i want to throw up another fast repetiotious pattern. My playing got filled with lots whole and half notes because thats where i am right now. So to conclude ear is everything. Hearing is everything. Jazz was concieved as aural perception based art. Again just my humble opinion.

[christianm77]

I can't comment not having personal experience - but it seems jazz courses vary widely.

I think most good jazz educators are aware of the importance of learning tunes and solos by ear, but there doesn't seem to be a worked out pedagogy like there is in classical so perhaps some are a little unsure of how to assess it, or teach it in a formal environment?

I do know a little bit about the classical way of learning ear training,

I remember being told years and years ago that interval training is a waste of time (well not totally, but mostly) by a really good trained sight singer, and the right way to sight sing was by using solfege and pitch memory. I wish I'd listened and worked on that. If the aim is to transcribe melodies right away by ear, the classical pedagogy (based on solfege) seems very effective...

It's not very sexy though... I think jazz musicians kind of like the idea of having some sort of secret knowledge that is specific to them, and there is an argument that there is specialised jazz ear training. But when it comes to hearing the melodies of standards it's no different from any other tonal music, and until I can do this in a foolproof way, I think I will ignore the more specialised jazz applications - modes, upper structures and so on.

Plus my wife, who is classical, has no trouble playing bebop lines by ear, so *shrugs.*

Of course, I'm talking about pitch ear training - there's rhythmic too...

EDIT: I would be interested in knowing about the ear training musicians in this thread have received at college... Is it different substantially from what I'm talking about?

[christianm77]

I'm just about to wrap up a masters in jazz studies and can tell you that ear training was a massive part of my studies. I had multiple teachers all who stressed the ear. Each with very unique different approaches and methods. But all intensely focused on improving the ear.

One of my teachers even went so far as to say that if your ear is improving, you as a musician are improving. If you're ear is not improving.... well...

That's a great bit of advice.

[TH]

There's nothing sexy about knowing where you are and having an awareness of notes around you. So there's a temptation to defer that hard earned skill for the immediate ability to play an impressive movement of the hands. In the mindset of musical athletics. There is a pedagogical bias towards concrete impressive skill sets. But ear training is a hard earned long range skill of navigating space. Students don't realize how important it is, don't know how to ask for it and teachers won't risk the lack of interest when students want something they can practice for proficiency. And who looks for a teacher to teach them something they feel they should know anyway?That's why it doesn't get taught. This speaks volumes for players who say "I can't get out of this playing rut of running the same lines". Ear training is the basis for awareness of options. David

[henryrobinett]

I don't know. I think the mechanics are at least as important. I think a lot of people I know, students, have what I consider the wrong idea. They think that if they just had a great ear they wouldn't have to know all of the other stuff. I never spent an inordinate time with ear training. But by learning songs and solos and whatnot, I've developed quite a good one. But part of it is knowing where to go because of understanding the mechanics. I don't know if that makes any sense. I also knew a fair number of people who had perfect pitch who were not very good players because of this, I think. I've also known some phenomenal players who had perfect pitch. Most of the guys I know had great relative.

But I can generally pick up a guitar and hit the pitch I'm looking for immediately. But I'd have a harder time just telling you what that pitch was without referencing a guitar in my hands. But looking at or knowing the chord changes I know when I'm singing or playing in my head whether that notes the third, 9th, 13, 11th, etc. So it helps me predict where I', going. But for me it's the process of looking at the mental picture of the fretboard. What came first, the chicken or the egg? I mean, I've written complete sings alone without a guitar, just manuscript paper and a pencil, in cafes, so I guess I have a pretty good ear.

So for me, I see a lot of guys looking for that proverbial short cut by developing "perfect pitch." I've played with guys who had great ears, but were lost of they didn't know the song. Painful hearing them hunt to try and guess the changes of an original. Of course yes, a good developed ear is crucial.

[christianm77]

And who looks for a teacher to teach them something they feel they should know anyway?That's why it doesn't get taught. This speaks volumes for players who say "I can't get out of this playing rut of running the same lines". Ear training is the basis for awareness of options. David

This stopped me from learning how to get better for years. In the case of sight singing I wasn't very good. I just expected to turn up and sing through things and get better. But I never improved the engine of my musicianship - and I assumed the really good sight singers would always be better than me because of their choir school backgrounds, and felt stupid because of it.

You can always learn a skill.

[TH]

Well the whole of ear training and what it involves parallels the other kinesthetic and memory ones. I still train my ear regularly as my own vocabulary grows. At the place I am now, I'm confronting issues of atonality and polytonal phrasing. Being able to perceive intervallic relationships from several tonal references did not come naturally. This allows me to go in and out of a given harmonic framework. I still study Modus and the global awareness is extremely useful.
Henry, I get your point. A lot of people get this from experience. I do think like harmonic education, training the ear is constant. For me anyway.
David

[christianm77]

I don't know. I think the mechanics are at least as important. I think a lot of people I know, students, have what I consider the wrong idea. They think that if they just had a great ear they wouldn't have to know all of the other stuff. I never spent an inordinate time with ear training. But by learning songs and solos and whatnot, I've developed quite a good one. But part of it is knowing where to go because of understanding the mechanics. I don't know if that makes any sense. I also knew a fair number of people who had perfect pitch who were not very good players because of this, I think. I've also known some phenomenal players who had perfect pitch. Most of the guys I know had great relative.

But I can generally pick up a guitar and hit the pitch I'm looking for immediately. But I'd have a harder time just telling you what that pitch was without referencing a guitar in my hands. But looking at or knowing the chord changes I know when I'm singing or playing in my head whether that notes the third, 9th, 13, 11th, etc. So it helps me predict where I', going. But for me it's the process of looking at the mental picture of the fretboard. What came first, the chicken or the egg? I mean, I've written complete sings alone without a guitar, just manuscript paper and a pencil, in cafes, so I guess I have a pretty good ear.

So for me, I see a lot of guys looking for that proverbial short cut by developing "perfect pitch." I've played with guys who had great ears, but were lost of they didn't know the song. Painful hearing them hunt to try and guess the changes of an original. Of course yes, a good developed ear is crucial.

Whether or not one has perfect pitch has no bearing on whether one is a good player. For my part, I don't really care about not having perfect pitch anyway, it's not terribly important to my day to day life as a jazzer. Maybe if I had to play atonal music on cello, or something...

Incidentally - I attended an interesting masterclass with Wayne Krantz last year where he basically said he felt that his study of theory over the years was all a massive hunt for a short cut, and from now on he was trying to play only by ear.

I have to say when I spend a bit of time sight singing, working out melodies by ear and so on, when I come to play I'm much more connected to the lines I play... Great thing to warm up with, along with a bit of rhythm work.

[henryrobinett]

Yeah, well what I'm trying to say is a a certain point you only play by ear, I guess like Krantz says. I don't know. It's that chicken or egg thing. For me, my only reference, I didn't come to it only by ear. But understanding and mapping went hard in hand. l have no idea how you can play sounds like E/C Eb7+11b13 to G/Ab, for example and improvise sight reading and get the right sounds by ear alone. It's just not going to happen.

[henryrobinett]

Like a lot of guys here, especially college students, I play a lot of original jazz. I play with a great player and composer Jacam Manricks. His first CD had Ben Monder. His 2nd had Adam Rogers. So I have my hands full. His music is very complex. He just picks up a chart and we play it. Or I bring charts of my own. His music reminds me of Donny McCaslin, one of my current favs. I don't know how you'd sight read this stuff and improvise some of those changes and poly chords by ear alone. You have to do it the old school way. Send me a demo.

[christianm77]

Yeah, well what I'm trying to say is a a certain point you only play by ear, I guess like Krantz says. I don't know. It's that chicken or egg thing. For me, my only reference, I didn't come to it only by ear. But understanding and mapping went hard in hand. l have no idea how you can play sounds like E/C Eb7+11b13 to G/Ab, for example and improvise sight reading and get the right sounds by ear alone. It's just not going to happen.

Wayne talked about Brecker doing exactly this. He would ignore the changes on the more complex charts and play by ear alone.

If the harmony is so chromatic and complex, perhaps the best thing you can do is play a really clear melody - it might be that this best done by ear.

I play relatively little complex contemporary harmony myself, and the harmony I write, while not ii-V, is based heavily in tonality, so this is not something that affects me too much ATM. I have little to contribute from my own experiences other than to say it is currently in my practice schedule to open a real book at random and sing the arpeggios of whatever chord progression I find there.

The thing I struggle with most ATM is the second octave US stuff - outlining triads on a non functional tune vocally is OK...

Eventually I want to be able to listen to a random jazz tune - any era - and cop the changes by ear.

This is something that may take a while ;-) Good fun anyway, would recommend....

[henryrobinett]

Wayne talked about Brecker doing exactly this. He would ignore the changes on the more complex charts and play by ear alone.

If the harmony is so chromatic and complex, perhaps the best thing you can do is play a really clear melody - it might be that this best done by ear.

I play relatively little complex contemporary harmony myself, and the harmony I write, while not ii-V, is based heavily in tonality, so this is not something that affects me too much ATM. I have little to contribute from my own experiences other than to say it is currently in my practice schedule to open a real book at random and sing the arpeggios of whatever chord progression I find there.

The thing I struggle with most ATM is the second octave US stuff - outlining triads on a non functional tune vocally is OK...

Eventually I want to be able to listen to a random jazz tune - any era - and cop the changes by ear.

This is something that may take a while ;-) Good fun anyway, would recommend....

Yeah, I mean, OK. But Brecker's ear and mind were so developed, that's kind of what I'm talking about. He could just see an interval in a chord symbol and Trane out, I'm sure. For me? I like to know what I'm doing. If there's a sharp 5 and a b9 in that major chord that's going by, I want to be able to grab it and hear it at the same time. If I'm trying to hear it its already gone.

FOR ME - I don't want to just respond to the bed of changes being supplied, like I'm jamming to canned recordings. But I want to be able to MAKE the changes and perhaps force the guys to change. That's why I practice everyday, playing the changes without accompaniment. I'm hearing them, but I'm also MAKING them. Ear + knowledge.

[fumblefingers]

We have had several of our good forum members through the years stress Ear Training as being a part of successfully being able to play good Jazz. It seems to me that this idea is not pushed very much in Jazz Pedagogy, at least in the published books and DVD instruction arena. Why do you suppose this is so?

As I seek to improve, I am wondering if this would be worthwhile.

i think that you're compartmentalizing a bit. your OP title says "jazz studies" but your detailed question is about jazz books and DVDs.

if you buy a book devoted to instrumental instruction then you get instrumental instruction, if you buy a book devoted to ear training and/or sight singing then you get a book about that.


and if you look at a competitive "jazz studies" curriculum in the USA, you may also see several semesters of ear training/aural skills.

[christianm77]

Yeah, I mean, OK. But Brecker's ear and mind were so developed, that's kind of what I'm talking about. He could just see an interval in a chord symbol and Trane out, I'm sure. For me? I like to know what I'm doing. If there's a sharp 5 and a b9 in that major chord that's going by, I want to be able to grab it and hear it at the same time. If I'm trying to hear it its already gone.

FOR ME - I don't want to just respond to the bed of changes being supplied, like I'm jamming to canned recordings. But I want to be able to MAKE the changes and perhaps force the guys to change. That's why I practice everyday, playing the changes without accompaniment. I'm hearing them, but I'm also MAKING them. Ear + knowledge.

Well who knows what was going on in Brecker's head. But the man himself said that he plyed this stuff totally by ear, and this is what turned Wayne onto the possibility of playing music this way himself. It's pretty deep, and scary.

I can't think and play my best musically at the same time, personally. Actually IMO very few people sound great when reading unfamiliar changes (harmonic stuff or modal vamps doesn't count :-)) because they are having to think - an experienced and knowledgeable player might sound good, but not at their best for this reason. I suppose Brecker's ear approach is the only solution to this problem.

Obviously the more you play one particular composer's music, the more you hear their harmony...

In practice, musicians go for a compromise, and do whatever they can to get through the gig. In practice (as in practising) you can target certain skills and develop them.

[AlsoRan]

i think that you're compartmentalizing a bit. your OP title says "jazz studies" but your detailed question is about jazz books and DVDs.

if you buy a book devoted to instrumental instruction then you get instrumental instruction, if you buy a book devoted to ear training and/or sight singing then you get a book about that.


and if you look at a competitive "jazz studies" curriculum in the USA, you may also see several semesters of ear training/aural skills.

Well put. I changed the title to be more precise. I hope this doesn't throw everyone for a loop.

Its really interesting hearing advanced players weighing in. I wonder if, as some alluded, we aren't inadvertently already doing a form of ear training when we listen intently to recordings and in our every day efforts to play the changes on different songs?

[Irez87]

Ah... this thread is like a trip to the spa...

I thought I was alone in my ear training journal...

It was a little lonely there for a bit...

Glad that many people get the primacy of ear training... but I did promise

Two things:

1. I'd rather play with a musician who have developed their ears to superhuman status then a musician who has developed their chops to superhuman status. I've played with both, and although chops are important and I still work on my own, playing with a guy who just has one gear and plays doubletime all the time is... let's just say... it can get old and annoying just as fast as his or her chops.

2. Developing your ear allows you to play with the band. This is huge. There is no feeling in the world like playing in that moment, I mean really digging in with the band. Getting your thang going, reaching into that sonic atmosphere that the band created and pulling out melodic lines. It's ineffable. At that point, I don't care if I spell out the changes to every chord. I am playing in a band...mmm

I just played a jam session tonight, in front of a live audience (third time). I told a trombone player before we played the tune that I wanted to do something different.

ME you know that Bob Brookmeyer thing with Jim Hall, those duet things?

TROMBONE like trading 4's without the drummer?

ME Nah, man. Like playing off each other, finishing each other's lines and interweaving.

TROMBONE sounds cool.

Lemme just say, we never met before. I gave up my solo space to do a duet with this guy. It was beautiful. I love doing this type of thing because it forces me out of my comfort zone. Do I still make mistakes? Yes. Is it more fun than a tradition solo? HELL YES, IMHO But you need to train your ear to allow it to be fun. If the session goes on youtube, I promise to share it

My own two pents

[Irez87]

l have no idea how you can play sounds like E/C Eb7+11b13 to G/Ab, for example and improvise sight reading and get the right sounds by ear alone. It's just not going to happen.

Henry, you gave me the courage to rant about other issues I had here on the forum. So if you are interested, you actually CAN learn how to play those sounds. You can go as far as hearing the voicings in the orchestra or piano that are creating those harmonies. The sky is the limit. You just gotta go beyond traditional ear training to get there. It's just a matter of do you want to put in the time studying that at the expense of the other stuff you are doing musically.

What you speak of is my goal. Every day I am getting closer to being able to do that. But... most of my practice time is devoted to ear training. That's my conscious choice. It's not for everyone and that's okay. But that's what moves me.

One person's impossible is another person's opportunity to prove something... or such...

I will continue to journal this journey for those of you that are interested. For the rest, music is about finding your own way. Do what moves you, and I will do the same