How important is to transcribe jazz solos?

[BreckerFan]

I look Mr. B's comment literally as it relates to LEAST (especially since he put that in caps): Clearly being able to play a transcription 'at tempo' is of value but one doesn't learn how to do that (well) from the transcription. As you note, one learns to do that by either playing along with 'the record' or recording oneself and comparing that to a recording.

Yeah I don't think it's the least important thing. Without reopening the what does transcription mean debate (which I am steadfastly no longer commenting on haha), I think the notation part is actually the least important. I think you get more practical value from memorizing a solo and being able to play it at tempo than notating it, though I think you get a lot of value out of notating it as well.

[mr. beaumont]

I actually disagree with that. I'll air my biases and say I post my transcriptions haha, but I think there's a lot to be gained by at least trying to play transcriptions along with the record up to speed. The most obvious benefits are practicing rhythm, time feel, articulation, etc, all the important components of phrasing. Especially if you record yourself and listen back, the process can really highlight the "easy" things you might be missing in your playing. Also, if you do a whole solo, you get a feel for the overall arc of it.

I think one other thing that's sometimes missed is that as much benefit as you can get mining ideas from transcribing, you also ideally want to be able to execute those ideas at speed in a real musical setting. Obviously if you're just playing someone else's solo you aren't using them in actual improvisation, but I think just being able to execute them at tempo can help clear some subconscious road blocks to having them come out in your playing.

Not to say you have to do everything up to speed. I've done a couple Brecker solos and a McCoy solo that may just be permanently beyond my technical ability, though I still try and work on them. But I also would've said the same thing about a couple Adam Rogers solos I did that I actually, after 6 months to a year of practice, managed to record relatively clean takes of. Challenging yourself like that can be a great way to grow.

Oh, I agree. Certain things just work at a certain tempo. In your second paragraph, we're getting at the same idea--

What I'm saying is even if you never get the whole solo down at tempo and play through it without a mistake, the process of what that all taught you was immensely more important than just that end product.

[BreckerFan]

Oh, I agree. Certain things just work at a certain tempo. In your second paragraph, we're getting at the same idea--

What I'm saying is even if you never get the whole solo down at tempo and play through it without a mistake, the process of what that all taught you was immensely more important than just that end product.

Yeah agreed, your painting analogy is a good one.

[Christian Miller]

Different activities teach you different things

[jameslovestal]

Yeah I don't think it's the least important thing. Without reopening the what does transcription mean debate (which I am steadfastly no longer commenting on haha), I think the notation part is actually the least important. I think you get more practical value from memorizing a solo and being able to play it at tempo than notating it, though I think you get a lot of value out of notating it as well.

I said I get practical value from following a transcription a pro has notated. While I can transcribe (do notation), I only do that for my own solos.

Thus, I believe we agree. As how all this relates to the original question: Being able to play from a transcription is more important than being able to notate (more important in that it is a better use of one's time).

[pamosmusic]

Thus, I believe we agree. As how all this relates to the original question: Being able to play from a transcription is more important than being able to notate (more important in that it is a better use of one's time).

I think actually this is a bit different. Playing from a transcription is important, but part of that is the figuring it out by ear. Whether it’s written or not, a big part of the value is the focused listening and ear work that comes from working it out by ear.

If you’re really honest with yourself about learning a solo from, say, the Omnibook then you’re still getting repeated listenings and all that good stuff. But the working out lines by ear is the purest version of all that stuff.

[Litterick]

In art school, we were encouraged to try and copy the masters...my garage is full of half-assed Impressionist painting copies. But I'd never show them to anybody

That would not happen today. Imitation is not part of the curriculum of art schools. Does it survive in jazz schools?

[pamosmusic]

That would not happen today. Imitation is not part of the curriculum of art schools. Does it survive in jazz schools?

Big time.

Lots of knocks against jazz school and teachers in general on this forum, but actually the idea of pulling language and really transcribing and stuff is a pretty big part of institutional learning in a way it isn’t for the more amorphous online analogs.

EDIT: not saying you in particular are knocking university jazz programs by asking. Just a general vibe that pops up from time to time.

[AllanAllen]

You can’t make poetry if you have to invent the alphabet and language first. Just grab what you can from those who came before you and make art.

[jameslovestal]

I think actually this is a bit different. Playing from a transcription is important, but part of that is the figuring it out by ear. Whether it’s written or not, a big part of the value is the focused listening and ear work that comes from working it out by ear.

If you’re really honest with yourself about learning a solo from, say, the Omnibook then you’re still getting repeated listenings and all that good stuff. But the working out lines by ear is the purest version of all that stuff.

Note that I was just comparing which two things are a better use of one's time: using a transcription notated by a pro, verses creating a transcription (I.e., doing the notation oneself).

If you read my comments above, combining the using of a transcription with figuring out, by ear, is what I have found works best for me. Note that in most cases I just go by-ear. I only use a transcription for difficult\complex fast paced melodies and solo passages (e.g. bebop ones).

As others have said all different 'methods' add value. But given time restraints most of us have to prioritize.

[pamosmusic]

You can’t make poetry if you have to invent the alphabet and language first. Just grab what you can from those who came before you and make art.

This is an interesting analogy. Poets actually do rather a lot of imitation—copying lines, memorizing and reciting, writing in the style of, etc.

Maybe the better comparison isn’t inventing language, but approaching old work with fresh eyes and ears.

I recently set out to read all of Shakespeare’s plays (No, I didn’t finish). I had an old Oxford Complete with zero footnotes whatsoever that I’d bought for $10 at The Strand. So I’d read the plays first. It was a chore and I’d read the same passage a few times to get it, maybe read the same scene twice now and again, but mostly I got it, and came away with a lot of thoughts about what Shakespeare really MEANT. After I read them, I’d go through and read Bloom and Auden to see what they thought. Usually their thoughts were much deeper and better rooted in history and scholarship, but I came away knowing what they thought *and* what I felt and thought.

My dad is an English teacher and he’s obsessed with Shakespeare (the reason I went to read all the plays) and I’d talk to him about the plays afterward and we’d actually be able to argue and think about them, which was a lot of fun. With Macbeth, in particular, we came away with diametrically opposed opinions about what Shakespeare was saying about time and shit. And I’m convinced we’re both right because poetry can be that ambiguous and he was that good.

ANYWAY — this is all to say that when you hack away at a difficult tune on your own, you end up with your own understanding of what’s going on, and then any analysis or whatever you might get later is gravy. Maybe most important, you come away pretty confident that your analysis is valid. Like, one of several interpretations. So I think there’s a lot of value to that.

On the other hand, it takes a lot of time. Ask me how many big transcription projects I’ve tackled since my son was born. (The answer is zero.)

Note: is anyone really surprised I’m an enormous nerd about all of my interests, and not just music?

Note note: I really bet you regret mentioning poetry now.

[jameslovestal]

ANYWAY — this is all to say that when you hack away at a difficult tune on your own, you end up with your own understanding of what’s going on, and then any analysis or whatever you might get later is gravy. Maybe most important, you come away pretty confident that your analysis is valid. Like, one of several interpretations. So I think there’s a lot of value to that.

On the other hand, it takes a lot of time. Ask me how many big transcription projects I’ve tackled since my son was born. (The answer is zero.)

One needs to be careful when they 'hack away', to avoid developing bad habits that can take years to break.

[pamosmusic]

One needs to be careful when they 'hack away', to avoid developing bad habits that can take years to break.

Hmm. Fair. But how do you know the pro doesn’t have bad habits of his or her own?

The Omnibook, for example has a bit of a spotty reputation.

But yes. I get it. You can only get what you can get. I actually went back into my old binders last night because of this thread and pulled out my transcription of Jim Hall on Stella and made LOTS of corrections. I also feel like I’m seeing so much more in it now. Flipside is that I got loads out of it at the time, even with the couple spots I really had a hard time hearing.

[pamosmusic]

On further thought, I also like the poetry analogy because it doesn’t have to be the complete works of Shakespeare or Hopkins or The Wasteland or whatever. Per Jeff’s point, you could also sit down and meditate on the Red Wheelbarrow for a week and it would be just as valid and productive.

Ive been having a hard time sitting down to read for maybe a year and I’m finally working the habit back up and actually it’s been by just setting a goal of one poem a day. Mary Oliver at the moment. Just as important as anything else I suppose.

[kris]

Funny discussion.
I'm going on vacation.

[Litterick]

Big time.

Lots of knocks against jazz school and teachers in general on this forum, but actually the idea of pulling language and really transcribing and stuff is a pretty big part of institutional learning in a way it isn’t for the more amorphous online analogs.

EDIT: not saying you in particular are knocking university jazz programs by asking. Just a general vibe that pops up from time to time.

No, I was not knocking anything. I was asking a question. I am rather taken aback that you should respond in this way.

[Christian Miller]

Hmm. Fair. But how do you know the pro doesn’t have bad habits of his or her own?

The Omnibook, for example has a bit of a spotty reputation.

Yeah, quite a few errors in the Omnibook. I have to deprogram myself a bit from the heads I learned from it years back. Tbf to Aebersold, he did transcribe a LOT of notes so I suppose the odds aren’t that bad, but he’s only human.

[Christian Miller]

But yes. I get it. You can only get what you can get. I actually went back into my old binders last night because of this thread and pulled out my transcription of Jim Hall on Stella and made LOTS of corrections. I also feel like I’m seeing so much more in it now. Flipside is that I got loads out of it at the time, even with the couple spots I really had a hard time hearing.

Thats a nice point - I have the same effect. It isn’t about making a perfect transcription, it’s about the process, learning to hear more. My sense of rhythm and detail gets more precisely particularly, but pitches too. I still make mistakes… one key difference is I’m aware I make mistakes haha

Mind you most of my written down solos have ended down the back of a filing cabinet or used as drawing paper for my kids or something. Every so often when tidying I’ll pull one out that I’d completely forgotten. Tbh I don’t have time to revisit them these days… these days any written transcription projects I do are more limited in ambition than four choruses of Adam Rogers or whatever… but the product of the exercise was never important to me I guess. I filed all my compositions.

I’ve also forgotten how to play all the ones that I learned. I figure they all ended up as part of my playing. But it also shows that I learned them kinaesthetically and not aurally. I might forget to play the solo, but if I learned it aurally, I’ll always remember how it goes and relearning how to play it is much easier.

But that also goes to show something - solos are not repertoire unless you make them so. I remember heads because of course I practice them all the time… and play them on gigs. Some people have solos learned so well they can quote them at the drop of a hat don’t they?

[ragman1]

This has become rather nice now, some more elevating aspects of the mind. Mary Oliver has written some good stuff. She said there are only three things - loving what is mortal, holding it when it counts, and then letting it go when the time comes. I'll go for that.

I've never objected to learning from other peoples' solos, quite the contrary. I only objected to the the word transcribe being used for not writing things down. It's a complete contradiction. The word, and other words akin to it, like scribe, scribble, inscribe, prescribe, script, prescription, inscription, etc, all come from scribere, to write.

But I suppose, at a stretch, it could be used to mean writing something in the mind by ear, i.e. learning it. But it doesn't really mean that. They ought to use a different word to mean that.

[Christian Miller]

On further thought, I also like the poetry analogy because it doesn’t have to be the complete works of Shakespeare or Hopkins or The Wasteland or whatever. Per Jeff’s point, you could also sit down and meditate on the Red Wheelbarrow for a week and it would be just as valid and productive.

Ive been having a hard time sitting down to read for maybe a year and I’m finally working the habit back up and actually it’s been by just setting a goal of one poem a day. Mary Oliver at the moment. Just as important as anything else I suppose.

Auden line that I always think of regarding transcribing ‘the words of a dead man are modified in the guts of the living’ (in memoriam WB Yeats)

Auden was never a favourite of mine - I certainly prefer Yeats - (‘mad Ireland hurt you to poetry’, really Auden???) but that line stayed with me for some reason

i haven’t read Mary Oliver. It’ll be nice when the kids let me read books again haha

[Jimmy blue note]

I have a student who came to me after playing many years. He had his share of transcriptions (written out) under his belt. He came to me because it bothered him that he couldn't play more than a half chorus before having no idea of where to go, or at least in a way that wasn't something that wasn't merely a quote from another solo. He knew those solos he'd learned were someone else's and he had no idea of how he, a mere mortal, could ever create something like an original solo. He said each time he soloed at a gig, it would be a collage of other solos, to the point where he could and would literally play the same patched together solo and couldn't imagine how to play/think otherwise.
I asked him why and how he came to transcribe in the first place. "My teachers all told me to." and how did you choose the solos you did? "They assigned them."
I asked him if he could describe to me some of the ways Dexter Gordon's music might be different from Paul Desmond's. He took out his notebook and said "could you give me those names again? Should I listen to a specific recording?"
I was taken aback.
Why, I asked, do you want to play this music?
He thought for a while "What do you mean, why do I want to play this music? Because I love Kurt, and Julian, and Sco. That's what I want to do."

I wondered. Where is the love for the music? The history? The story? The connection with your own self as a part of that history?
Where is the love?

And I wonder. What is the difference between the notes and the music?

[pamosmusic]

No, I was not knocking anything. I was asking a question. I am rather taken aback that you should respond in this way.

Man you even quoted the spot where I said I wasn’t talking about you in particular.

[pamosmusic]

Auden line that I always think of regarding transcribing ‘the words of a dead man are modified in the guts of the living’ (in memoriam WB Yeats)

Auden was never a favourite of mine - I certainly prefer Yeats - (‘mad Ireland hurt you to poetry’, really Auden???) but that line stayed with me for some reason

i haven’t read Mary Oliver. It’ll be nice when the kids let me read books again haha

I tried a good bit of Auden but never got into him. But while he was in New York he gave a class on Shakespeare where he had the class read the whole bit and gave lectures each week on all the plays. They were reassembled later and compiled into a book and they’re awesome.

For example, the entire lecture for Merry Wives of Windsor is a single sentence where he says it’s terrible and the only good thing about it is that it inspired Verdi. And he proceeds to spend the rest of the class playing a record of Falstaff.

[Christian Miller]

I have a student who came to me after playing many years. He had his share of transcriptions (written out) under his belt. He came to me because it bothered him that he couldn't play more than a half chorus before having no idea of where to go, or at least in a way that wasn't something that wasn't merely a quote from another solo. He knew those solos he'd learned were someone else's and he had no idea of how he, a mere mortal, could ever create something like an original solo. He said each time he soloed at a gig, it would be a collage of other solos, to the point where he could and would literally play the same patched together solo and couldn't imagine how to play/think otherwise.
I asked him why and how he came to transcribe in the first place. "My teachers all told me to." and how did you choose the solos you did? "They assigned them."
I asked him if he could describe to me some of the ways Dexter Gordon's music might be different from Paul Desmond's. He took out his notebook and said "could you give me those names again? Should I listen to a specific recording?"
I was taken aback.
Why, I asked, do you want to play this music?
He thought for a while "What do you mean, why do I want to play this music? Because I love Kurt, and Julian, and Sco. That's what I want to do."

I wondered. Where is the love for the music? The history? The story? The connection with your own self as a part of that history?
Where is the love?

And I wonder. What is the difference between the notes and the music?

wow.

well I feel a little bit of the devils advocate kicking in… perhaps it’s ok to be interested in contemporary players and an interest in the history might kick in later. I can scarcely expect someone turned on by Kurt’s music to be interested in crackly old Hot Fives and Sevens ‘78s. I certainly wasn’t when I got interested in jazz.

But there is a qualitative difference I think. If your student is past their early years of study, there is something that doesn’t seem to be connecting. A lot of it does seem to be about the playing, technique, the difficulty of the music and the conceptual cleverness; not so much the music itself. Perhaps that’s unfair. I have students who can play Holdsworth and Adam Rogers solos note for note, but I do wonder where it’s all headed. They don’t gig. Ah well, if it makes them happy.

A friend of mine - a terrific jazz guitarist - described it as the ‘E-sports approach to music’.

To me, your last paragraph is key… there’s only so much that can be written down. Which is another reason I object to the T word haha.

and this is true of the modern guys your student mentioned as well as Dexter and Desmond…! Jules, Kurt and Sco, they have a SOUND. I was listening to Sco with Steve Swallow yesterday and it struck me how simple and inside a lot of their note choices are, and how it still sounds utterly unlike any other players. Don’t think you can teach that.

[pamosmusic]

I’ve also forgotten how to play all the ones that I learned. I figure they all ended up as part of my playing. But it also shows that I learned them kinaesthetically and not aurally. I might forget to play the solo, but if I learned it aurally, I’ll always remember how it goes and relearning how to play it is much easier.

Me too. The only one I can still play is a Charlie Christian one that I teach with a lot. And I guess the Stella that I start working on again yesterday.