How important is to transcribe jazz solos?

[Christian Miller]

Appealing to a 1550s definition of the original Latin term to prove a point one way or another is irrelevant. Language is not static, it evolves over time, and it's actual use determines it's meaning far more then historical definitions or etymology.

Driving in reference to cars probably originated from literally driving animals to pull a cart, which of course is not how you operate a car. Pilot is probably a more precise word, but if you told a friend you were going for a drive and he corrected you to say you're going for a pilot, you probably wouldn't be friends much longer.

For better or worse, the common usage of transcribe amongst jazz musicians is learning a solo or line by ear, whether writing it down or not. That's what it means in this context.

We would all be better off using our time to do some transcribing (whether you write it down or not) than quibbling over definitions. But I guess what is the Internet for if not quibbling haha.

You won’t find me quibbling! I don’t actually give a shit about the ‘correct’ definition of transcribe.

But it is important to be clear in communication when you are trying to teach, or help someone.

The problem here is not that the jazz use of the term is different from the dictionary one (which would be fine) - it’s more that if one person - even a jazz musician- says ‘transcription’ it’s not a given that the other person knows exactly what they mean. See this thread for evidence.

It’s also a problem because for instance the answer to the OP question depends on what is meant by ‘transcribe.’ I can’t answer it unless I know more. When someone simply says ‘I transcribed x’, I find myself unsure as to - Did they write it down? Did they not? Did they arrange it for guitar from another instrument from a score (they might use the term that way if they were a classical musician)? Did they learn to play it or not?

So it’s a shit term.

The reason it bugs me is I think people use it because they think it’s a ‘correct’ or ‘technical’ term because it sounds more official. It’s not - it’s a highly ambiguous malapropism that simply sounds more official.

This ambiguity renders ‘transcribe’ more or less useless as a term. For a term to be useful, everyone in the discussion has to agree what it means, and they don’t. (There’s a lot of this in jazz haha.) you may think your definition term is the right one but it’s irrelevant unless everyone agrees, to that use, right? it just becomes a debate about semantics.

One could have course specify what they mean by it before they use it, which is kind of long winded, and there’s a tendency for people then to take umbrage if someone else’s definition is at odds with theirs, and so on and nauseam.

However, I say ‘I learned the Anthropology solo by ear’ or ‘I wrote down the anthropology solo by ear, here it is’, I would say that’s a lot clearer.

[ragman1]

Thanks for proving my point concisely

You won't get past me so easily :-)

transcribe

verb

transitive verb

1

a

: to make a written copy of

b

: to make a copy of (dictated or recorded matter) in longhand or on a machine (such as a typewriter)

c

: to paraphrase or summarize in writing

d

: write down, record

2

a

: to represent (speech sounds) by means of phonetic symbols

b

: translate sense 1a

c

: to transfer (data) from one recording form to another

d

: to record (as on magnetic tape) for later broadcast

3

: to make a musical transcription of

4

: to cause (DNA or RNA) to undergo genetic transcription

Transcribe Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

[jameslovestal]

You won’t find me quibbling! I don’t actually give a shit about the ‘correct’ definition of transcribe.

The problem here is not that the jazz use of the term is different from the dictionary one (which would be fine) - it’s more that if one person - even a jazz musician- says ‘transcription’ it’s not a given that the other person knows exactly what they mean. See this thread for evidence. I have this problem all the time.

So what someone simply says ‘I transcribed x’, I find myself unsure as to - Did they write it down? Did they not? Did they arrange it for guitar from another instrument from a score (they might use the term that way if they were a classical musician)? Did they learn to play it or not?

This renders ‘transcribe’ more or less useless as a term. For a term to be useful, everyone in the discussion has to agree what it means, and they don’t. (There’s a lot of this in jazz haha.) you may think your definition term is the right one but it’s irrelevant unless everyone agrees, to that use, right? it just becomes a debate about semantics.

One could have course specify what they mean by it before they use it, which is kind of long winded, and there’s a tendency for people then to take umbrage if someone else’s definition is at odds with theirs, and so on and nauseam.

However, I say ‘I learned the Anthropology solo by ear’ or ‘I wrote down the anthropology solo by ear, here it is’, I would say that’s a lot clearer.

Funny but I confused transcription with transcribe and your post here helped me see that. E.g. I learned the Anthropology head and sections of Raney's solo, by following a transcription, but I'm not capable of transcribing those.

Therefore, in my development using transcriptions has proved very useful. I assuming learning to transcribe would be useful but I just never got around to that.

[Christian Miller]

You won't get past me so easily :-)

transcribe

verb

transitive verb

1

a

: to make a written copy of

b

: to make a copy of (dictated or recorded matter) in longhand or on a machine (such as a typewriter)

c

: to paraphrase or summarize in writing

d

: write down, record

2

a

: to represent (speech sounds) by means of phonetic symbols

b

: translate sense 1a

c

: to transfer (data) from one recording form to another

d

: to record (as on magnetic tape) for later broadcast

3

: to make a musical transcription of

4

: to cause (DNA or RNA) to undergo genetic transcription

Transcribe Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

Ah argument by definitional tautology! Fine.

Actually I don’t care.

The important are you always clear on how everyone is using this word? Because I sure as fuck am not 90% of the time.

I don’t care how much some smart arse defines it at me, it doesn’t change anything lol.

[ragman1]

Your problem is that you assume everybody else is dumb. Naturally 'writing it down' is the usual meaning of the word but that's not the only way to benefit from others' solos. You can just borrow licks. You can, if you can be bothered, literally memorise entire solos, etc.

It doesn't mean that the solo or part-solo is written down in notation but, personally, being an English speaker, I wouldn't use the word 'transcribe' for something memorised. It's bad grammar and is actually nonsense.

[Christian Miller]

Funny but I confused transcription with transcribe and your post here helped me see that. E.g. I learned the Anthropology head and sections of Raney's solo, by following a transcription, but I'm not capable of transcribing those.

Therefore, in my development using transcriptions has proved very useful. I assuming learning to transcribe would be useful but I just never got around to that.

that’s exactly the sort of thing I mean.

[James W]

A better name by far is ‘ear learning’ which is clear.

‘Dictation’ is a bit better…. If you want to avoid the Latin (or the connotation? I’m ok with being dictated to by Wes or Bird haha) an arguably better way of putting it still is ‘writing down by ear’ - albeit that’s a little longer. But again, very clear.

If I had to guess, ‘transcription’ probably started being used because some jazz musicians wanted their learning process to sound more academic and official - part of the move into the colleges. We are all familiar with the way language gets used in institutions and how it moves away from everyday use. As we don’t exist in academia I think we can reasonably stick to simple words?

These are the terms I try to use myself to avoid confusion. Others might say transcription, and will continue to do so, but I avoid the term myself and I think describing the activity concisely in plain English is usually possible.

I'd say 'ear learning' just doesn't sound idiomatic. 'Hey everyone, I've been ear-learning this Wes solo' ... said no one, ever.
'Writing down by ear' is more precise but a mouthful and not very elegant. And it's not Bird or Wes doing the dictating, it's you and me etc.
I realise there is more than one meaning of transcription but I wouldn't consider the word flowery or un-plain. It's a simple word, one with albeit more than one meaning - which can be gauged from context most the time I'd say, anyway.

[ragman1]

Ah argument by definitional tautology! Fine.

Actually I don’t care.

The important are you always clear on how everyone is using this word? Because I sure as fuck am not 90% of the time.

I don’t care how much some smart arse defines it at me, it doesn’t change anything lol.

Your other problem is when you get caught out you behave like a three year-old.

[Christian Miller]

[QUOTE=ragman1;1282398]Your problem is that you assume everybody else is dumb. [/QUOTE.]

everyone says that when I’m making a good point haha.

I just know when people are arguing past what I’m saying for whatever reason.

a better assumption is that people don’t always read what I’m saying very carefully. Which is fair enough…

Natrually 'writing it down' is the usual meaning of the word but that's not the only way to benefit from others' solos. You can just borrow licks. You can, if you can be bothered, literally memorise entire solos, etc.

It doesn't mean that the solo or part-solo is written down in notation but, personally, being an English speaker, I wouldn't use the word 'transcribe' for something memorised. It's bad grammar and is actually nonsense.

Well perhaps it’s me being thick, but I’m not always clear on what people mean by this term.

I don’t think it’s just me, as people do seem to use it differently whatever in the real world.

I try to be clear myself and it’s best to avoid using the term imo.

[ragman1]

using transcriptions has proved very useful. I assuming learning to transcribe would be useful but I just never got around to that.

Transcriptions are what other people have transcribed. They're not two different things.

[jameslovestal]

Your other problem is when you get caught out you behave like a three year-old.

CM helps me advance, musically. You are just annoying.

[BreckerFan]

When someone simply says ‘I transcribed x’, I find myself unsure as to - Did they write it down? Did they not? Did they arrange it for guitar from another instrument from a score (they might use the term that way if they were a classical musician)? Did they learn to play it or not?

I think in common usage in a jazz context, the key element is learning by ear. If someone says they transcribed a solo, in a jazz context, I would take that element as certain (which is of course funny because that is not etymologically what the word means, but that's how it's used). I don't think it's use is necessarily any more specific than that, but that doesn't mean it's a useless term. If you want to add specificity, you can say written transcription or that you transcribed and learned a solo on your instrument. So there's some ambiguity, but there's always some ambiguity with language. If I tell someone that I play guitar, that could mean anything from bach to (heaven forbid) wonderwall. The problem is when someone comes along and says "well actually you didn't transcribe because you didn't write it down." The term simply isn't used that strictly.

[pamosmusic]

Your other problem is when you get caught out you behave like a three year-old.

I think if you find yourself on an Internet forum, consulting the dictionary in order to dunk on dudes in a conversation about the meaning of the word “transcribe” in the context of the jazz tradition, you’ve strayed somewhere.

Truth be told, I’ve been following this whole conversation pretty closely because it’s (mostly) interesting, and I’m not even sure what you think you’re calling out.

[pamosmusic]

Well perhaps it’s me being thick, but I’m not always clear on what people mean by this term.

I don’t think it’s just me, as people do seem to use it differently whatever in the real world.

I try to be clear myself and it’s best to avoid using the term imo.

This is maybe a function of the jazz world being broader than just the more intense, more exclusive circles. When I talk to my hardcore jazz nerd friends, I know how they’re using the word. They mean learning a solo or large part of a solo or group of lines or whatever. It’s serious aural study of a musician or piece of music, rendered on the instrument. I don’t ask if they’re writing it down or not because it’s neither here nor there.

But if you’re interacting with folks who didn’t study super formally or move through one of those bigger jazz markets, then it’s easy to see how the term could be confusing. And it certainly is sometimes.

[cmajor9]

So can the argument in this thread be solved (in practical terms) by restating it to: “How important is it to learn jazz solos by ear?”, in which case I would say “it can be pretty useful” and others can agree or disagree.

[ragman1]

I think if you find yourself on an Internet forum, consulting the dictionary in order to dunk on dudes in a conversation about the meaning of the word “transcribe” in the context of the jazz tradition, you’ve strayed somewhere.

Truth be told, I’ve been following this whole conversation pretty closely because it’s (mostly) interesting, and I’m not even sure what you think you’re calling out.

Peter, I don't think I have a small mind. I'm not just using a dictionary to win an argument or dunk on others, that's too stupid and pedantic. But if we're to use words then they should be clear in their meaning, don't you think?

Someone used the expression 'transcribe by ear' in another post. I understand that but it wasn't really what we were discussing at the time. There are plenty of jazz sites where they talk about transcribing as a learning tool and they all, as far as I'm aware, mean committing a recorded solo to notation, TAB, or some other means of ready access.

I don't think I've ever seen it used as memorising. Obviously one can work a solo out on a guitar note by note and then what? Presumably repeat it again and again so that it is effectively memorised? It means that.

So it seems to me that if one is going to use the word it must have some kind of general meaning. If not, then it should be made extremely clear as to what that other meaning is otherwise it'll lead to confusion, which it already appears to be doing. That's all my point.

[Christian Miller]

I think in common usage in a jazz context, the key element is learning by ear. If someone says they transcribed a solo, in a jazz context, I would take that element as certain (which is of course funny because that is not etymologically what the word means, but that's how it's used). I don't think it's use is necessarily any more specific than that, but that doesn't mean it's a useless term. If you want to add specificity, you can say written transcription or that you transcribed and learned a solo on your instrument. So there's some ambiguity, but there's always some ambiguity with language. If I tell someone that I play guitar, that could mean anything from bach to (heaven forbid) wonderwall. The problem is when someone comes along and says "well actually you didn't transcribe because you didn't write it down." The term simply isn't used that strictly.

So, I get a student and we often have a convo something like

‘So at one point I transcribed Wes’s solo on four on Six from Smokin at the Half Note’
‘Fantastic, did you learn the whole thing?’
’no just a few choruses before he goes into octaves.’
‘Fantastic, did you write it down?’
’no I just learned to play it, although I’m not sure I could now.’
‘Did you work on any of the language or licks from it?’
’not really’
’could you sing one of the lines now? Or play one? Anything stick in your memory?’
’there was this one line…’

and so on.

I mean it’s all pretty normal, it’s not like I become purple faced with John Cleese style rage anytime anyone mentions the T word, and otoh you always need to discuss things a little further in lessons, but it does seem to me that the word isn’t doing much to assist communication...

I mean the fact that whether I answer the OP yes, no or maybe depends on which definition of transcription is meant is kind of highlighting the issue I think.

[ragman1]

it does seem to me that the word isn’t doing much to assist communication...

Absolutely, but that's not the fault of the word, is it? It's the usage by the communicators that's the problem.

[Christian Miller]

Absolutely, but that's not the fault of the word, is it? It's the usage by the communicators that's the problem.

I could spend time defining terms or I could simply say what I mean in English.

EDIT: to put it a little technically there is no actual normative use of the term.

Even the various dictionary definitions you cited kind of reflect that - the musical one is just circular.

[Christian Miller]

To which you say ‘that’d be a first’ ;-)

[ragman1]

No, I wouldn't. I'd say that's exactly what I think I have been doing.

[pamosmusic]

There are plenty of jazz sites where they talk about transcribing as a learning tool and they all, as far as I'm aware, mean committing a recorded solo to notation, TAB, or some other means of ready access.

I don't think I've ever seen it used as memorising.

You might not have seen it, but it’s common usage.

Jazz musicians use the term the way Brecker says they do. I’m not really sure how to argue that, other than just to say it.

[ragman1]

I assume you mean Brecker the poster here, not Michael Brecker. You'll have to wait till I've read his posts because I haven't yet.

[pamosmusic]

I assume you mean Brecker the poster here, not Michael Brecker. You'll have to wait till I've read his posts because I haven't yet.

Yeah that sounds right.

[BreckerFan]

I assume you mean Brecker the poster here, not Michael Brecker. You'll have to wait till I've read his posts because I haven't yet.

Don't confuse me with Michael Brecker. It's not even remotely fair to him haha