Does learning jazz make your head hurt

[cosmic gumbo]

If it didn't hurt your head, would it still be jazz?

[GodinFan]

Where'd everybody go?

Back to the original question. When does it feel like it all comes together for you guys? When does the theory feel like second nature? When can someone just talk about it and you immediately understand what they're saying? When does learning stop being such a struggle?

When you learn tunes and begin to see how it all fits together.

I quit playing guitar for over 25 years, and came back to it about 4 years ago. In that time I've basically re-learned the instrument, started playing in a big band, started a local jazz jam and played guitar professionally in theatrical productions.

[paynow]

When you learn tunes and begin to see how it all fits together.

I quit playing guitar for over 25 years, and came back to it about 4 years ago. In that time I've basically re-learned the instrument, started playing in a big band, started a local jazz jam and played guitar professionally in theatrical productions.

+1. A great example of the practical application Mr. B speaks of.

[monk]

Five or six times a year for the last 35 years the guitar rags have published articles about how "modes are the secret to improvising like a pro" or some such nonsense.

The worst part is that most of these articles Say The Same Thing. Year in, year out, every two or three months, the same article reworded. Just like exercise magazines, every other month the same exercises promise to turn 97 pound weaklings into Olympic gods. How many times does does it take before someone grasps that a push-up is a push-up is a push-up?

Another music myth that has gained currency in the past 20 or so years is the one that promises "Learn Theory! Become A Monster Player!". Music theory explains how music works. That's it. Studying theory may help someone understand music better or what happened when Bach did this and Coltrane did that. But it won't do anything for your chops.

There is a name for people who study music theory: Music theorists. There is also a name for people who play music: Musicians. Sometimes a person is both, sometimes not. I will emphatically state that in 45 years of playing music, I've never stood at the bar on break discussing music theory with the other players.

To zig zag, the point it comes together is when you can sit down, either alone or with others, and play one, two, three or more hours of music. If you had learned one song a week for the past eight years, you would know and be able to play 416 songs! Think about that. If you had a gig where you played 40 songs a night, you could play for ten days before you had to repeat.

For the record, I can read music, I know scales, I have studied theory and even know a little about modes. I believe that these things can be extremely valuable tools. But nothing beats learning and playing songs. If someone spends all their time learning theory, they end up with a head full of rules. If someone spends all their time learning songs, they end up with a head full of music.

[GodinFan]

+1. A great example of the practical application Mr. B speaks of.

Nearly forgot to mention - my fretboard knowledge and guitar technique got a huge boost by studying online with Jimmy Bruno.

[JakeAcci]

If someone spends all their time learning theory, they end up with a head full of rules. If someone spends all their time learning songs, they end up with a head full of music.

Beautiful, I agree. It is just a balance.

[hot ford coupe]

Why is everyone talking so loud? I have a headache.

[zigzag]

Don't tell me that learning scales, modes, and theory has not help your playing.

[paynow]

Don't tell me that learning scales, modes, and theory has not help your playing.

No one said that. It's a balance.

[hot ford coupe]

Don't tell me that learning scales, modes, and theory has not help your playing.

Oh, I'd never say that. Modes, scales and theory have helped my playing immeasurably. I'm very happy with the material I've learned especially from this site and how much my playing has improved but I still have a headache. It's like taking vitamins. They taste like s^&*, they make my burps taste bad and they give me a stomache ache but oh what they do for my health.

[mr. beaumont]

Don't tell me that learning scales, modes, and theory has not help your playing.

Well, they've helped my thinking, my analysis...they give me possibilities of combinations, for when I practice...the actual playing? That's debatable...I'd say ear training and singing what I play (and playing what I sing) helped my actual playing a bunch more...

Nobody's suggesting you can't learn this stuff. But it sounds to me like you have fundamentals to work on....like that fretboard.

I also thimk you can go a long way into playing jazz--actual music--without touching anything heavier than chord building and major scale harmony.

And again, knowing a few things really well instead of a bunch of things halfway will always get you further...

[Rob MacKillop]

Very well said, my good man!

[GodinFan]

Don't tell me that learning scales, modes, and theory has not help your playing.

Learning the major scale in all keys did more for me than any mode ever did.

I've never felt it necessary to have internalized every scale and mode in existence before I started to make music.

And I do know my theory well. It helps me most when playing chord melody.

[mr. beaumont]

I think this thread brings up a few huge problems I see a lot of...

1. For the most part, Jazz guitar education, particularly for those new to jazz but not to the guitar, blows. There's few teachers out there who are really good jazz players who are taking on students brand new to jazz. And there's a lot of teachers out there teaching jazz who can't play it for nothing.

2. The internet has too much information, and too many folks try to learn by themselves via this wealth of info. This leads folks to believe in things that aren't true--often concerning theory and scales...Compounding this problem is the fact that yes--good jazz players know this stuff...but nobody ever bothers to ask the next question--"WHEN did you learn this stuff?" Therefore people walk around with the idea in their head that there's years and years of theory one must learn FIRST to play jazz LATER.

3. Many people trying to learn jazz don't seem to actually like jazz. They don't listen to much of it, and take on jazz as a "challenge" or because it will "really help my _______ playing to learn some jazz and theory and stuff."

No it won't. The only reason to play jazz is because you love jazz.


This is not directed at zigzag or the OP or anyone else here...it's just some observations I've made over the last few years...

That's why I love jazzguitar.be's collective personnel. We seem to be good at cutting through bullshit here.

[zigzag]

Sorry to have hijacked this thread, but I appreciate the responses. I will definitely spend more time concentrating on the fretboard and just playing for fun. Sometimes I need to be kicked in the head. Learning the fretboard is something I knew that I needed to do, but because it isn't as much fun, I've kinda avoided it.

Edit: Just read Mr. b's last post, and I have this comment on that. In my case I think the issue is more that I am so limited by my own aptitude, ability, and brain circuitry. What I may not fully appreciate is that all of those limitations may not be a bad thing because the reality is that they shape my own style/tone (which I am not entirely happy with). My mistake may be in thinking that if I know what Kenny Burrell knows, maybe I can play like Kenny Burrell. What I want from my instructor is the tools to be able to reach my full potential. There is no doubt in my mind that he can do that, but he can't do it for me.

[paynow]

The only reason to play jazz is because you love jazz.

That's the crux. And it still doesn't mean you will be good at it. I love golf and I'll never be Tiger Woods, no matter how much time I spend on the driving range or the golf course.

Your internet comment speaks volumes. Bad teaching by non-players. It's more about "look at me!"

[mr. beaumont]

Sorry to have hijacked this thread, but I appreciate the responses. I will definitely spend more time concentrating on the fretboard and just playing for fun. Sometimes I need to be kicked in the head. Learning the fretboard is something I knew that I needed to do, but because it isn't as much fun, I've kinda avoided it.

You can make it fun if you kill a few birds with one stone...

Since you should be learning chords all over as well, write out the notes in a few chords and then hunt for every possible place you can find them...

Arranging a tune for chord-melody is great for this...and you have a product when done...again, always, always, always make it practical...

[Solo Flight]

My two cents: to me, a large part of the problem is that jazz education was turned into a theory-based, left-brain activity when it became a “legitimate” course of study at universities in the 1960s. This was by necessity as colleges were not about to establish jazz departments and pay faculty to sit around with students and play records and then have the students play what they heard, which is how jazz was learned before it was taught at colleges. Sadly, this approach has mushroomed with the internet and the promise of jazz mastery through the magic pill of the latest book/method.

You can study all the theory you want, but if your brain has to first translate the scale/mode theory into notes on your instrument every time you want to improvise, you’ll always be frustrated. Sure, music theory is helpful in seeing how everything fits together but improvisational music is an aural activity and you need to establish the direct link between your ears/brain and your fingers – without going through theory to get there.

Put away the theory books and put on some CD’s and play along with the masters. Then find a jam session and play with others. Not saying you shouldn’t know your fretboard, arpeggios, etc. but you can’t really learn to play jazz through theory and exercises.

[Buster Loaf]

At some point the artist must leave the design phase behind and just get the damn product out there. Use what you know and meet the deadline. Decide what you want to be paid (money, attention, fellowship, endless groovy bliss, etc) and sell to it.

[monk]

Don't tell me that learning scales, modes, and theory has not help your playing.

Learning scales helped my finger dexterity the same as it does for pianists, horn and string players. Modes messed me up until I understood that they work best for modal tunes and that they are a cumbersome way to try to play over standard changes. Theory has helped me understand music intellectually but did nothing physically for my playing.

Learning tunes and learning solos from records has done more for my playing than anything. No one will call a musician for a gig because he or she knows a lot of theory, they call someone who can play their butt off. And more often than not they call someone who is a good accompanist.

[wizard3739]

--

Five or six times a year for the last 35 years the guitar rags have published articles about how "modes are the secret to improvising like a pro" or some such nonsense.

The worst part is that most of these articles Say The Same Thing. Year in, year out, every two or three months, the same article reworded. Just like exercise magazines, every other month the same exercises promise to turn 97 pound weaklings into Olympic gods. How many times does does it take before someone grasps that a push-up is a push-up is a push-up?

Another music myth that has gained currency in the past 20 or so years is the one that promises "Learn Theory! Become A Monster Player!". Music theory explains how music works. That's it. Studying theory may help someone understand music better or what happened when Bach did this and Coltrane did that. But it won't do anything for your chops.

There is a name for people who study music theory: Music theorists. There is also a name for people who play music: Musicians. Sometimes a person is both, sometimes not. I will emphatically state that in 45 years of playing music, I've never stood at the bar on break discussing music theory with the other players.

To zig zag, the point it comes together is when you can sit down, either alone or with others, and play one, two, three or more hours of music. If you had learned one song a week for the past eight years, you would know and be able to play 416 songs! Think about that. If you had a gig where you played 40 songs a night, you could play for ten days before you had to repeat.

For the record, I can read music, I know scales, I have studied theory and even know a little about modes. I believe that these things can be extremely valuable tools. But nothing beats learning and playing songs. If someone spends all their time learning theory, they end up with a head full of rules. If someone spends all their time learning songs, they end up with a head full of music.

I totally agree, nothing beats learning and playing songs. I guess I would add listening and transcribing to the above quote.

wiz

[monk]

zigzag, I'm going to comment on some of the things you've said in your posts in hopes that some of your issues can be resolved.

I am just wondering at what point does it all come together. I've been learning theory for about the last 8 years. Now, granted, I ain't no Einstein, but I'm no dummy, either. It still doesn't come easily for me, and I'm not talking about the playing, I'm talking about the theory and applying it. As Mr. B said, just knowing how to build chords and understanding diatonic harmony can take you a long way. As I said in my post, theory explains how music works. It's not something you apply consciously to make music. Actually, I like the sound of my improvising, but I just play what comes out, and I know I could be much more if I was able to apply the ideas realized through what I'm learning. The learning is frustratingly slow. (I have an excellent instructor who is very patient.) Who has also made a good deal of money from you over the past eight years. Not to cast any aspersions toward your teacher but, speaking as a guitar teacher myself, the first job of a teacher is to get the student to a point where the student no longer needs the the teacher. I've had many students over the years who get to a point where they can take what they've learned and run with it. Sometimes, a year or two later, they come back to work on more advanced things.

Over the last eight years, I've learned chord structure, sight reading, major/minor scales, major/minor pentatonic and blues scales, and melodic minor scales. I've learned modes of the major and melodic minor scales, and I am now learning how to apply that knowledge.

I'm also learning songs- chords and leads and some chord melodies- mostly jazz, some rock. When I learn a song, I'll record it. First the rhythm part, then the lead part. I will always play the head, then improvise over the chord changes. I'll record multiple lead tracks, select the ones I like, and boom, I'm done. I think if I had a better understanding of how to apply and to use modes I could add more interesting options to my improvisation. Since modes are generated from the diatonic scale, they are completely inside. The spice comes from using the notes that are outside the scale. While I improvise I'm thinking arpeggiated chords and scales. Some of it sounds really good, some not so good. It's funny that that often I don't realize how good something sounds until I play it back.

Yeah, that's true. Autumn Leaves was one of the first songs I learned. I've improvised over those chord changes for hours. I can play scales over that song forwards and backwards, vertically, horizontally, upside down, and diagonally. Soloing IS NOT playing scales up and down over chord changes. This is the best argument in the world for learning solos off recordings. In fact, I may be shortchanging my abilities. Where I have problems is in two areas: understanding theory and having a feel for the potential exploratory options in interpreting a song.

Maybe my problem is that I just don't like my tone. Could it be that I just have no talent for guitar?

I get that if I want to play D Dorian that I can play a C major scale resolving to D. I get that a Dorian scale has a b3 and a b7. So what? Do I just have to practice hearing modes until I realize what I can do with them?

And suppose I spend years learning inversions. Where am I really?

In the end, does all this mean that I just have to play (period) to get to where I what to be? As mentioned before, learning songs and solos gets you to where you want to be qucker than anything.

BTW, I'm 59 years old. I've been a serious listener to all kinds of music for 50 years. Dabbled in guitar for 47. Been a serious player for about 17. Been a student for about 8.

Where'd everybody go?

Back to the original question. When does it feel like it all comes together for you guys? When does the theory feel like second nature? When can someone just talk about it and you immediately understand what they're saying? I've been lucky enough to know and play with some heavyweights in my life and never, ever once did we talk about theory on a gig. When does learning stop being such a struggle?

Sorry to have hijacked this thread, but I appreciate the responses. I will definitely spend more time concentrating on the fretboard and just playing for fun. Sometimes I need to be kicked in the head. Learning the fretboard is something I knew that I needed to do, but because it isn't as much fun, I've kinda avoided it.

Edit: Just read Mr. b's last post, and I have this comment on that. In my case I think the issue is more that I am so limited by my own aptitude, ability, and brain circuitry. What I may not fully appreciate is that all of those limitations may not be a bad thing because the reality is that they shape my own style/tone (which I am not entirely happy with). Too many people get caught up in chasing "their own style" instead of simply getting on with playing music. A personal style is a synthesis of one's influences. In other words, the players you copy. The greatest players have always copied their predecessors. When things from one player are combined with things from five others and filtered through personal taste and experience a "style" emerges. My mistake may be in thinking that if I know what Kenny Burrell knows, maybe I can play like Kenny Burrell. What I want from my instructor is the tools to be able to reach my full potential. There is no doubt in my mind that he can do that, but he can't do it for me.

[zigzag]

Whoa, monk. That was cool. Thanks for taking the time to respond in that way.

I gotta make a few comments, though. First off, I have a wonderful instructor, a great musician, a great guitar player, and a great teacher with a very broad musical background. He is an exceptional talent IMO, and we share very similar tastes in music. He knows where I want to go and I think he is doing a good job trying to get me there. We move at a slower pace because I am slower to pick this stuff up (not as mentally nimble as I was 25-50 years ago), plus I only get to practice one hour a day during the week. But when I have an assignment, he makes sure that I am comfortable with it before we move on. I also want to move faster than we do because there is so much more I want to learn.

I really believe that I could practice better. Like I said to mr. b, there are probably things my teacher should make sure I know before we move on, not that he hasn't tried to teach those things. It's just that I haven't looked at certain aspects of what he is trying to teach me the right way. For example, when a person learns scales, it is probably best not only to be able to name each note in the scale, but also name the interval (and as mr. b said, be able to sing the notes). I have concentrated more on learning the pattern instead of the intervals and note names, and now it's biting me on the butt.

Modes... Modes are a hard thing to grasp for someone just being exposed to the concept and trying to apply that knowledge. My instructor is using this time learning melodic minor to get more into expanding my understanding of theory and modes.

What a student needs to do is to try to understand all of it holistically instead of by rote fragments. I'm thinking that once all of the loose ends are tied in and it comes together holistically, that's when the headaches go away.

[zigzag]

It makes sense that if I want to play like Kenny Burrell, I have to copy Kenny Burrell. But, I'm sure it helps to be able to explain it.

[monk]

zigzag,
I'm very happy for you that you have a teacher with whom you have connected in a deep way. As I stated in my earlier post, it was not my intent to cast any aspersions toward the man, his methods or his ethics. However, I do firmly believe that after eight years you should be playing jazz on a competent intermediate level.

I've had two students who came to me as beginners with just a few months playing experience who professed the desire to become skilled enough to pass the audition for their respective high school jazz bands. I am pleased to say that both of them won the guitar chairs in their bands and one of them was the first time a freshman ever made the guitar chair in the history of the school's jazz program. This was accomplished in 18 months.

Another of my former students graduated from Berklee and now works as a producer and two others have graduated from the jazz program that Jerry Coker founded at the University of Tennessee. In each case, we worked on playing first. Everything else came afterward.

Howard Roberts used to get all tore up about people who, as he put it, "took the hard road". He felt that people who slaved at theory and such were dooming themselves to years of being a beginner. He and all the other teachers I've mentioned at GIT believed that the quickest way to the "good stuff" was to learn songs and internalize solos and get out and play.

In regard to your comment on Kenny Burrell, why do you think it helps to explain it? And who do you want to explain it to? Seriously, people want to hear you play, not talk about it.

As Mr. Beaumont mentioned in one of his posts here, nobody ever asks WHEN did so and so study theory. Most of the time the answer is years after they started playing. John Coltrane had been a working musician for years before he began a serious study of theory. Lee Konitz played for 21 years before becoming a student of Lenny Tristano.

Zigzag, if you take anything from these exchanges, let it be that the most important thing is playing. Being able to play music. That's the brass ring.

Regards,
monk