Experienced rock guitarist needs some direction playing jazz

[cosmic gumbo]

Miles was playing with Parker at age 20...and most of Miles' peers - Rollins, McLean, etc., started out just as young. The ones that are meant to do it will find a way.

[fleaaaaaa]

There's actually no shame in being an "also ran" when playing jazz is for fun. It's more a hobby for me and I have no ambitious to become the world's greatest or most unique. It's all about enjoyment for me and I would guess even successful jazz players would say they do it because they enjoy it.

[jay126]

Princeplanet, you are making judgements on excellence when we just wanted a little guidance on where to start with jazz guitar. And tough love? Tough love isn't for forums because you come off sounding like a donkey.

I have studied jazz drums for years and played with great cats. I have taught many students and never once felt the need to inflate the art form into some insurmountable endeavor that is only attainable by certain godlike people. Also, when I was coming up through the ranks in Philadelphia every jazz mentor I had were the coolest people in the world. Tough love, maybe...but a whole lot of playing. Some very useful insight, some not so useful, time to move on.

[ColinO]

My 2 cents. Learn all the licks you possibly can. Get books full of great licks and learn the licks you like off the recordings you like. At the same time learn some songs you like and start working the licks into your playing. That gives you a better idea about how to make lines out of the notes you know that sound more like jazz.

[fep]

The two things I'm aware of that specifically address moving from a rock approach to a more jazz approach... they are written with the rock guitarist in mind.

Fumblefingers mentioned it above:

Amazon.com: An Introduction to Jazz Guitar Soloing BK/CD (9780634009709): Joe Elliott: Books

And:

Amazon.com: Don Mock: The Blues From Rock To Jazz: Don Mock: Movies & TV


There are a series of threads where some of us worked through the first half of the book 'An Introduction to Jazz Guitar Soloing, that is here:

https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/impro...ead-index.html

No magic pill, it's a long journey. It's fun though.

[pkirk]

Sure, that's all fine then. Let's encourage all crossovers from rock and blues to aim for jazz medocrity. Just sign up for Spoonfed Jazz for Dummies.com and sound like every other wedding band hack! The world of Jazz needs more pedestrians! That will help broaden it's appeal to the average listener and ensure the future for this great art form. Yay team! .....

OK, maybe a bit harsh (especially when coming from a journeyman such as myself ) - but I always feel these threads need at least one devil's advocate, it's just that the real cats who are qualified to kick all our asses around here are usually too polite and humble to tell it like it is ... A bit of "tough love" ain't a bad thing for the aspiring jazz player and seems to have been a common theme for many of the greats who came up in the competitive scene that propelled them to excel.

Look, I also get that we're not all necessarily aiming for "excellence" around here, but some might be, and surely they deserve better advice than the usual JB, Truefire etc solutions. Some of us even feel that "real" courses like the Berklee model etc are also too "cookie cutter" in churning out competent yet uninspiring players .

And then there are others that say the real "school" is all there in the history of recorded Jazz, and those who take the hard road and figure it out for themselves - using their own "taste" to guide all their own learning - will be the ones who add something unique to the art form. I'm with those guys, if you're gonna bother to learn Jazz, why be an "also ran" ?

Miles always said "Go down a different road", and we don't argue with Miles....

One thing I'd add is that without paying close attention to the history (i.e. listening a lot) one can't appreciate how high the standards are.

It is depressing, though: unlike a lot of rock, a modicum of talent and a bit of work just won't get you into the ballpark (although to be great at rock requires the same kind of talent/commitment it takes to be great at jazz). And I agree with princeplanet that poorly performed jazz has no appeal to the casual listener, despite being a lot of fun for the practitioner.

[Peter C]

"Playing outside" basics - this guy is a great, no BS player who hangs out here:

Bringing it back "inside" will, ultimately, depend on your own instinct as a player, IMO.

Playing a simple 12-bar Blues without bends and wails, as well-said above, is a great place to start. Play clean, slap on some heavy-ish strings - flatwounds even. Go crazy!

Jazz isn't a religious order; take from it as much as you need to "convince" yourself. That may take a whole lifetime - who knows? I think allusions to excellence need to be accompanied by a link to one's own playing: "This is what I mean".

[pkirk]

Jazz isn't a religious order; take from it as much as you need to "convince" yourself. That may take a whole lifetime - who knows? I think allusions to excellence need to be accompanied by a link to one's own playing: "This is what I mean".

I agree with your first sentence. In case the last refers to me, my clips are easily found on this forum, and you'll hear rank mediocrity if you listen, despite the fact that I've been playing jazz guitar quite seriously for 35 years.

[richb2]

And I agree with princeplanet that poorly performed jazz has no appeal to the casual listener, despite being a lot of fun for the practitioner.

can't disagree more. First I don't know what poorly performed jazz is. I could post lots of popular, often played smooth jazz tunes up here that the majority of this forum would totally disagree with as having any "jazz value", but the majority of Amercian's don't agree with. In the 80's I went to see Cecil Taylor play at the Village Vanguard. Was it poorly performed? Who knows? The take on what is is poorly performed and what is not is a value judgement.

I think it comes down to two kinds of people up here. Those who have made jazz guitar their life and those whose life is something else and dabble. Neither is wrong!

[richb2]

And I agree with princeplanet that poorly performed jazz has no appeal to the casual listener, despite being a lot of fun for the practitioner.

can't disagree more. First I don't know what poorly performed jazz is. I could post lots of popular, often played smooth jazz tunes up here that the majority of this forum would totally disagree with as having any "jazz value", but the majority of Amercian's don't agree with. In the 80's I went to see Cecil Taylor play at the Village Vanguard. Was it poorly performed? Who knows? The take on what is is poorly performed and what is not is a value judgement.

I think it comes down to two kinds of people up here. Those who have made jazz guitar their life and those whose life is something else and dabble. Neither is wrong! The economic consequences of that choice is something that we could discuss up here and I am sure that would really bring out the fireworks, but this is a basic question of "how do I get started?".

[fep]

The world of Jazz needs more pedestrians! That will help broaden it's appeal to the average listener and ensure the future for this great art form. Yay team! .....

Jazz musicians = the jazz audience.

The music is important not the individual performer. In my opinion there are very few important performers. If any one of the bottom 99.99% of jazz performers quit playing, there would be no impact on the jazz world. The vast majority of the pros and pedestrians are not important to the whole. In this way the pedestrians and the pros are on even footing, of no importance (except for the top 0.01% or so).

[Peter C]

I agree with your first sentence. In case the last refers to me, my clips are easily found on this forum, and you'll hear rank mediocrity if you listen, despite the fact that I've been playing jazz guitar quite seriously for 35 years.

No, Mr Kirk, I don't believe I was referring to you specifically. Anyway, your post gave me the opportunity to check out your playing and I'm glad I did That's some superb comping on "02 B Love". Nice solo, too.

[pkirk]

No, Mr Kirk, I don't believe I was referring to you specifically. Anyway, your post gave me the opportunity to check out your playing and I'm glad I did That's some superb comping on "02 B Love". Nice solo, too.

thanks I appreciate the compliment. But I hate my playing for the most part, because I work hard but it still is only a pale imitation of my heroes.

Anyway to get back on the OP's question, he asked about playing over changes, i.e. improvising over harmonic progressions. Stated abstractly, there isn't a universal answer. Jazz provided one answer for blues and then the great american songbook tunes, which them morphed into more complicated harmony with coltrane, golson, shorter, etc, and so the language and history is tied in with playing over changes in the jazz context. Some players can come at it from their own place (eg. holdsworth) that is almost completely idioyncratic,

but learning to play changes in Jazz doesn't translate easily to other contexts, beyond the "strong fundamentals" part of it. When I listen to the good rock shredders, they are "making changes" according to the harmonies they use, but I don't think that studying jazz helped/would have helped. There are obvious things that help, i.e. pay attention to the movements of the 3rds and 7ths in the progression, but do do stuff that doesn't sound artificial requires a lot of work.

[docbop]

Jazz isn't a religious order; take from it as much as you need to "convince" yourself. That may take a whole lifetime - who knows? I think allusions to excellence need to be accompanied by a link to one's own playing: "This is what I mean".

Jazz is a religion for some.....
johncoltraneaoc

[Reg]

jumping in late, sorry, but I am a jazz musician, and teacher.

Playing styles of music is generally about what your using for the basic reference. Most music... has common practice major/minor functional harmony as the basic reference. These are general guidelines for what and why the music you play or compose does what it does. Why what you hear sounds right... there are some subjective choices, but it's a very mechanical plug and play collection of options. It's not that magic, your performances might be... but the music, the magic is generally from lack of knowledge or lack of skill sets... musicianship.

One of the differences when playing jazz is the addition of different organizational guidelines... for the what and why etc...
which creates different possibilities for what the music is... and what the music may do or become.

So the basic references, what your playing or composing starts from... can be different.

Generally with jazz, (most music), you begin with a reference... create relationships and develop those relationships.

One of the differences with jazz is there are generally a few sets of guidelines, which control the what and why of the music... and they're usually going on simultaneously.

Why jazz generally takes so long to get together is from the general approach to learning to play jazz. Most usually learn from the masters, transcribe, copy, memorize etc... trial and error approach, after enough time you generally memorize enough material to develop a basic "Reference"... that reference or collection of memorized knowledge becomes your set of guidelines for performance and composition. Most don't get there... just too much work and time. But it is a great road and generally very enjoyable.

The other problem from this approach... you don't really understand the guidelines, you have a few rule of thumbs, bits and pieces... etc..

The other aspect of performing jazz, you need to have your technical skills together. On guitar this means being able to play anything... anywhere on the neck... anytime... with out watching and being able to hear what your playing.

I've posted many times what I personally believe one needs to understand and be able to perform to play jazz... here's the simplified list again,

Modal concepts
Modal interchange
Melodic Minor
Blue Note relationships

and of course, maj/min functional harmony guidelines, you won't be able to understand the previous four without the basic starting reference.

[fleaaaaaa]

There's some interesting posts. .. there's also aspects that seems to be useful in putting people off jazz. I think it's probably ok to not know everything or be an absolute master when you begin to play jazz. I would even wager that people can play jazz without knowing the four concepts in the above post. .. nobody begins with all the knowledge they may need. .. yet beginners do play jazz.

[GuyBoden]

jumping in late, sorry, but I am a jazz musician, and teacher.

Playing styles of music is generally about what your using for the basic reference. Most music... has common practice major/minor functional harmony as the basic reference. These are general guidelines for what and why the music you play or compose does what it does. Why what you hear sounds right... there are some subjective choices, but it's a very mechanical plug and play collection of options. It's not that magic, your performances might be... but the music, the magic is generally from lack of knowledge or lack of skill sets... musicianship.

One of the differences when playing jazz is the addition of different organizational guidelines... for the what and why etc...
which creates different possibilities for what the music is... and what the music may do or become.

So the basic references, what your playing or composing starts from... can be different.

Generally with jazz, (most music), you begin with a reference... create relationships and develop those relationships.

One of the differences with jazz is there are generally a few sets of guidelines, which control the what and why of the music... and they're usually going on simultaneously.

Why jazz generally takes so long to get together is from the general approach to learning to play jazz. Most usually learn from the masters, transcribe, copy, memorize etc... trial and error approach, after enough time you generally memorize enough material to develop a basic "Reference"... that reference or collection of memorized knowledge becomes your set of guidelines for performance and composition. Most don't get there... just too much work and time. But it is a great road and generally very enjoyable.

The other problem from this approach... you don't really understand the guidelines, you have a few rule of thumbs, bits and pieces... etc..

The other aspect of performing jazz, you need to have your technical skills together. On guitar this means being able to play anything... anywhere on the neck... anytime... with out watching and being able to hear what your playing.

I've posted many times what I personally believe one needs to understand and be able to perform to play jazz... here's the simplified list again,

Modal concepts
Modal interchange
Melodic Minor
Blue Note relationships

and of course, maj/min functional harmony guidelines, you won't be able to understand the previous four without the basic starting reference.

Good Post.

[Reg]

There's some interesting posts. .. there's also aspects that seems to be useful in putting people off jazz. I think it's probably ok to not know everything or be an absolute master when you begin to play jazz. I would even wager that people can play jazz without knowing the four concepts in the above post. .. nobody begins with all the knowledge they may need. .. yet beginners do play jazz.

That's also an interesting point... so as usual this generally leads to what is playing jazz yada yada. Talk about putting people off...

I personally believe most aren't even aware of what they're playing, but generally like or believe what they choose to play or hear is in the right direction with respect to playing in a jazz style.

And yes no one will ever know everything, but with respect to playing in a jazz style... there is lots of common practice which does reflect something. I choose to try and understand and verbally breakdown what that common practice reflects.... and really understanding the basic four concepts I mentioned above... is not very complicated.

I've watched for years as many players search for magical tricks, licks, methods etc... to develop jazz musicianship, generally hitting walls or going in circles, there are reasons.

What would you give as advice for learning to perform in a jazz style, maybe not what someone else said or someone's book etc... personal advice.

I apologize for being somewhat forward with my remarks and skipping the BS... I do and have played professionally for years and can generally back up what I BS about, I'm not selling anything and just don't have that much extra time, so again I apologize for being rude...

Reg

[ColinO]

Reg. I have seen your posts for a little while and I think that you have both a tremendous understanding of the theory of playing jazz and are obviously able to actually back that up by playing at an extremely high level. You combine that with an understanding that the theory has to actually make music and an understanding of what it means to play in a jazz style that most people don't even pay any attention to.

I don't understand why you have not written a book (or books) at this point. There are many less talented and less knowledgeable guitar players who have.

I am requesting in this post that you find some way to put your knowledge and experience into print. You need to find a writing partner in order to put your encyclopedic knowledge in a form that is comprehensible but you need to get it out there somehow and soon.

[fleaaaaaa]

Hey Reg,

I didn't think you were rude at all, I just think when someone comes around and says they want to play jazz and they have experience in say rock that it could be tough when so many options suddenly becoming available to them. So many suggestions, how do they chose what they should be doing first? I also think that when someone comes to play jazz from a rock background and someone says "you now need to know a list of things including - naming every note in every chord (that you may not have even played yet), everything about modes, all your arpeggios etc".

So where did I start with all of this jazz stuff when I came onto these boards and saw similar things? Well I put it all off for about a year and eventually took the plummet and ordered Robert Conti's stuff and now I am guess that a lot of people will say I'm not learning jazz the right way either. It's a way that is working for me and bringing me a lot of joy though. I am picking up my guitar everyday and playing music and I guess right now I am firmly in the "imitator" category but I am enjoying the sounds I make come out of my fingers and my friends/family are enjoying it too. It's made me happy to do this stuff everyday and I know I will most likely somewhere down the road pick up all the theory, arpeggios, modes, spelling chords but I somehow feel when people answer on these forums that they can kill someones curiosity by throwing the "jazz book" at them. Does that make sense?

[Reg]

Thanks Collin... really kind words. I'll try.

Hey fleaaaa... sure it makes total sense. And It sounds really cool what your doing and enjoying, anyway i can help... just ask etc...

The other side of your approach... is what our society is producing as jazz guitarist and jazz in general.

[ecj]

Based on what you already know, here's my advice:

1) Learn your basic shell voicings (some people call them drop2 or other names) for the maj7, dom7, min7, and min7b5 chord types with the root note on the 6th, 5th, and 4th strings. Learn to play these chords while comping in different basic rhythm patterns like 4-on-the-floor, Charleston, bossa, funky
2) Learn your basic arpeggio fingerings for the same chord types in the same positions.
3) Start developing some basic licks that use only those arpeggios to outline standard jazz chord progressions like ii-V-I (major and minor), I-vi-ii-V (major and minor), iii-VI-ii-V, iv-bVII-iii-VI-ii-V, etc.
4) Start adding in some passing tones and enclosures.
5) Learn your diminished chords and arpeggios and start working those in.
6) Keep learning new harmonic patterns.

And, the whole time you're doing that, start learning licks off of records and putting them over those patterns, too.

[pkirk]

can't disagree more. First I don't know what poorly performed jazz is. I could post lots of popular, often played smooth jazz tunes up here that the majority of this forum would totally disagree with as having any "jazz value", but the majority of Amercian's don't agree with. In the 80's I went to see Cecil Taylor play at the Village Vanguard. Was it poorly performed? Who knows? The take on what is is poorly performed and what is not is a value judgement.

I'm not talking about smooth jazz, or polarizing figures like Cecil taylor, but I mean the many jazz combos/duos/trios playing standards in restaurants and bars and local jazz festivals outside big cities, whose members don't swing, noodle through overplayed tunes like autumn leaves and blue bossa and so what without knowing any language (but lots of scales!), off-pitch singers butchering summertime and sweet georgia brown and insisting on scatting, etc.usually with a strong "I'm an artist" pose. I'm certainly overly critical about this aspect of the jazz world, but I don;t see any indication that casual audiences like it either, and yet it is the most common exposure non-jazz people have to jazz. We complain a lot on this forum about how lame blues bands have so many gigs, but I thick the answer is not so surprising: it is infinitely easier to do a competent stevie ray vaughn imitation (as great as he was) than a competent Charlie parker imitation, and audiences can tell. Almost any reasonably mature music fan responds well to high quality jazz.

Speaking of Cecil, I was just hipped to a really interesting Coltrane album "coltrane time" with Cecil taylor, kenny dorham, chuck israels, and louis hayes.
Cecil really pushes what would have been a fairly casual blowing date.

[Tom Painter]

Jazz isn't a religious order

Maybe, maybe not...but it certainly is the Olympics of Music.

[wolflen]

stevehollx..

if you have read through all these posts..you are most likely burning your guitar now...good god

your main question-that still seems not to be addressed..how do you play outside--get the "jazz flavor" of the artists you mentioned - in your playing

you admit you use triads as a "goto" and don't use extensions (7 9 11 13)

ok..given that info..that would be a place to begin..now to encourage you..(in less than 12years)

im NOT going to explain the whys of this..just show you an example of the sound your looking for

the following chords..G7 Bb7 Db7 E7..play the following 6 notes -slowly- on top of each chord

the notes are: G B D A C# E -- note the sound/feel of the run over each chord (also note-these are two triads strung together G and A)

when you feel comfortable with the run..play the chords as if in a progression..increase speed slowly

change the starting point of the run-start on the D note etc

learn the chord extensions G9 Bb9 / 13 etc..now play the run over these chords..mix the chords up G9 Bb13 Db7 etc

but still use the same run

when you have developed a moderate tempo with this stuff..try and incorporate it in your playing..start with a blues that you know well..

even this simple exercise will take time to "gel" in your playing..but you can now hear the beginning of playing out with out lots of "scale/mode/theory" study..but that will come at a certain point should you want to delve deeper into jazz..its a lifelong journey..enjoy it at every level you enter

now as you study "jazz" you will find many ways to play "over" a chord..many times we overthink our playing..you will find your own voice in time..find players that are advanced in jazz and play with them..you will learn a lot that way..

there are a lot of great folks on this forum..that share their knowledge and advice..