-
I'm just beginning to learn (well, 3 years into it, which isn't much). Today, I was told by my current instructor that I have something valuable - an original, mint-condition 1978 Real Book, Fifth Edition. He said this might get some decent bids on ebay, except for the fact that it's illegal.
Is this true? Other than it's old, what would make it valuable?
-
03-21-2012 06:54 PM
-
Nothing, a lot of chord changes are wrong on that book. Sell it and invest the money on learning to hear chord changes so you can get them from records
-
Keep it and use it. Every jazz musician I know has one.
I doubt it's that valuable. I have the same one, except mine is well worn.
-
I agree. I have one also. I bought it new eons ago and it is well-used. I'm not selling it. I have newer versions that I now work out of, but my old one has sentimental value, so it's not for sale.
Originally Posted by fep
-
Well just to give a different opinion most pros I know don't have one. Most pros I know can learn a standard after hearing one chorus of it. Hearing chord changes and memorizing them quickly is an essential tool for a jazz msuician and real books don't really help you with that. And if you add the fact the book is actually giving you wrong chords in a lot of tunes...
I understand why people love real books, a lot of guys I play with use them unfortunatelly (I even refuse to play in jams where real books are used). But it's making you more harm than you think. You shouldn't even play standarts with a sheet music in front of you, you should always get them from records and memorize them imho - it's not that hard and it really pays off. Just my 2 cents
-
My "vintage" copy just self distructed from years of use and I threw it away and am using a PDF version.
-
Most chefs I've seen in restaurants don't refer to recipes either. And most professional musicians don't have a teacher. Most herpetologists don't exercise any unnecessary hesitation when handling a rattlesnake either. Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
Well just to give a different opinion most pros I know don't have one. Most pros I know can learn a standard after hearing one chorus of it.
Maybe people on different levels have different skills and need different things?
-
Yes of course, but if you use a real book all the time you'll never work on the two subjects mentioned: learning tunes by ear and memorizing them. I know some professional musicians who never let the real book go and cannot play by ear or memory and that's not a good thing. Even for amateur players I think it's a good idea to be able to learn tunes without fakebooks. And once you get to hear chord changes you'll just start to see how bad most fakebooks are (aebersolds and the new real books are quite better in this matter).
But I know most people disagree and will continue to use and love the real book, it's just easier
-
I agree jorgemg, yes. I don't use one now but it was a quantum shift when I got to the point that I internalized. Up to that point, my Real Book became full of comments, highlighted key areas, annotations about intervals, roman numerals, secondary dominant reference arrows, chord scale choices, reharmonizations, hip substitutions, references to pages with tunes of similar form etc... I guess my real book was the platform for my learning process and I never just left it at face value. There's as much of my own ink in mine as there is originally
. It don't get around much anymore, but in the time we were together, it was invaluable. And yeah, I do get your point, it's a good one.
Last edited by SearchForMeaning; 03-22-2012 at 09:00 AM.
-
Well, Jorge, I don't agree with you here. Ideally we should all be able to hear the changes just like that, but real life is not that way for many of us. Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
I understand why people love real books, a lot of guys I play with use them unfortunatelly (I even refuse to play in jams where real books are used). But it's making you more harm than you think. You shouldn't even play standarts with a sheet music in front of you, you should always get them from records and memorize them imho - it's not that hard and it really pays off. Just my 2 cents
First, not all have the ability to learn to recognize changes and melodies from scratch. A lot of us less talented people are helped a lot by the alternative graphic presentation the music notation and the chord symbols gives us. It's like being showed a pie diagram during an oral presentation of something. The same thing is explained using two senses (ears and eyes) instead of one which helps understanding.
Second, using fake books has actually helped me recognize changes when I later hear them in other songs. Most songs have the same "building blocks" and learning them in one song from a fake book has made it easier to hear in another song how it goes. This is the very point of for example Conrad Corks "Lego Brick" system (I don't know how well I like his renaming everything to something only those who has studied his system understand, but the basic idea is sound).
Third, professional musicians may not have the opportunity to hear the music before they play it. Often they have their part sent in advance and are expected to have it practiced well when they show up at the first rehersal. Lester Young has told about how annoyed he could be in his Basie days when somebody didn't know his part so the whole band would have to sit there for very long rehersals until that one musician got it right. The toughest guys, the studio musicians, do often not even get an opportunity to practice the part in advance. They are expected to sight read on the spot what is put before them on the music stand at the recording session.
Of course, I agree that many of the illegal fake books have wrong chords, though it is to a certain degree relative what the "correct" chords is. For example, what is the "correct" changes to "I got Rhythm"? Is it the way Gerschwin wrote it in 1930 or the reharmonized way the majority of jazz musicians have played the tune and it derivates since the bebop days.
-
I think Jorge's point is that you do a disservice to yourself if you rely on a fakebook to learn all your new tunes. You don't really learn tunes that way, you just kind of learn them, and you will not be able to recall them without a lead sheet as a crutch.
In my experience, the tunes that I'm able to play over the best, and the ones that I remember even after a year of not playing or listening to it, are the ones that I took the time to listen to extensively before I started to play on them. I wrote down the changes that I thought I heard, and did something of a harmonic analysis on them. I'm able to hear most of the standard harmonic devices now without having to write them down, but I did go through the process of training my ear to get there.
Jorge and I are not the only ones with this view. All the professional jazz musicians I know advocate the same thing: learn songs from recordings, not from fake books. It has nothing to do with innate talent, it has to do with training your ears. I found this article interesting: How to Completely Learn a Jazz Melody in 30 Minutes | jazzadvice.com
This is not to say the fake books don't have value...as you point out, they can be used to make your way through a tune on the bandstand if you've never heard the song before. But that's not the same thing as learning a tune.
-
I have done exactly what you said some years ago and it can be a great tool to learn harmony and to analyse stuff. I guess that's the good side of them Originally Posted by SearchForMeaning
I agree jorgemg, yes. I don't use one now but it was a quantum shift when I got to the point that I internalized. Up to that point, my Real Book became full of comments, highlighted key areas, annotations about intervals, roman numerals, secondary dominant reference arrows, chord scale choices, reharmonizations, hip substitutions, references to pages with tunes of similar form etc... I guess my real book was the platform for my learning process and I never just left it at face value. There's as much of my own ink in mine as there is originally . It don't get around much anymore, but in the time we were together, it was invaluable. And yeah, I do get your point, it's a good one.
-
Hi Oldane!
"First, not all have the ability to learn to recognize changes and melodies from scratch"
Like any other area of music what you have to do is practice. Unfortunatelly ear training is usually poorly taught by guys who have very intuitive ears. I assume your solos were not very good when you started playing jazz right? If you can learn to improvise you can learn to hear. Ear Training can be learned and developed to an insane point and it's too often negelected.
"Second, using fake books has actually helped me recognize changes when I later hear them in other songs. Most songs have the same "building blocks" and learning them in one song from a fake book has made it easier to hear in another song how it goes"
True, jazz standards have a set of formulas that are used a lot. My ears recognize them much faster then my eyes... (and the ability to recognize harmonic patterns with your eyes means you must know them in all tonalities which is not that easy)
"Third, professional musicians may not have the opportunity to hear the music before they play it. Often they have their part sent in advance and are expected to have it practiced well when they show up at the first rehersal. Lester Young has told about how annoyed he could be in his Basie days when somebody didn't know his part so the whole band would have to sit there for very long rehersals until that one musician got it right. The toughest guys, the studio musicians, do often not even get an opportunity to practice the part in advance. They are expected to sight read on the spot what is put before them on the music stand at the recording session"
I never said you shouldn't know to sight read chords and melodies. IT'S ESSENTIAL... developing your reading does not get in the way of developing your ear, you should practice both. And the real pros can grab a piece of paper and hear both chords and melodies in their head (if they have absolute pitch they will hear it in the right tonality if they don't they will choose a random C and hear it that way)
"Of course, I agree that many of the illegal fake books have wrong chords, though it is to a certain degree relative what the "correct" chords is. For example, what is the "correct" changes to "I got Rhythm"? Is it the way Gerschwin wrote it in 1930 or the reharmonized way the majority of jazz musicians have played the tune and it derivates since the bebop days."
Well that just proves I am right. To most standards there are usually several changes... ususally just small variations. A lot of the pros will play different changes on a new chorus and no paper will save you... Blues and Rhythm Changes are different because they have MILLIONS of variations and you have to HEAR them on the spot. How can a fakebook show you so many different paths? You always have to hear... if you are comping and youm are reaching say a V7 chord you have to hear to soloist - is he playing straight mixolydian or altered or diminished dominant? Very different sounds and you will clash with the soloist if you don't hear it...
But I wasn't talking about "changing the changes". I was talking about "wrong changes". Just go check "Four" on the Real Book 1 and go hear any Miles version...
-
Just another note: don't hear intervals between notes, hear intervals related to a tonal center (being the tonality or the current chord). Let's say you're in C and hear a prhase D E G - don't hear a major second and a minor third! Hear 2 3 5. It's much faster
-
Now, I don't rely on fake books only to learn new songs. But then I didn't say that either. Of course listening to records - if they exist - is an extremely useful part of learning new material, and I do that too. I didn't deny the importance of ear training either. I said that fake books and other written music can be a big help, where Jorge said one should stay away from them. I also said that in some circumstances, written music is a necessity. Originally Posted by FatJeff
I have learned many, many tunes from lead sheets, and I have certainly been able to recall them afterwards from memory without the lead sheet. I don't quite get the subtle difference between learning songs and "kind of learning" them. But maybe I just "kind of know" the songs. If so, let it be so - it has worked for me for 40 years.
I think our different opinions reflects the fact that different people percieve in different ways, so they also learn in different ways. You and Jorge obviously percieve differently from me. I can, so to speak, "hear" the sound of the song when studying the lead sheet and can internalize it that way - "translate" the visual to the aural. You seem to find this more difficult - since you say one can't memorize a tune from a lead sheet - while you find it a lot easier than me to get the grasp of a tune just by hearing it one or two times.
-
Oldane don't you usually notice significant differences from the lead sheets and the CD versions? I usually do. And I didn't deny the need for written music, it's essential! But if you are learning standards I really think the "ear" route is the best one - you can practice sight reading in other ways. I feel the same way about transcription, do it yourself - if you use someone else's sheet you're missing the most importan step, your're basically reading... these days I even learn bebop melodies by ear and I have to lear a lot of new tunes every week on the conservatory.
But hey it's just my opinion
-
I don't have any trouble memorizing songs from reading them. I have to run through them a few times but I have to run through listening to a recording a few time too.
Songs in the fake books are a quick sketch of the material. If you look you'll find errors but it's not like we play songs the same way every time anyway. You can play a song your whole life and if you're still working on growing as a musician you'll play it differently than you did 2 years ago.
This is yet another situation where it isn't an either/or thing. Learn what you can from listening to the original recording and from written material (fake book and others) and from any other resource you can find. You're not going to do any damage by running through all resources available. You'll just get a bigger picture.
-
I agree with all that except; Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
Most pros seldom use a Real Book, yes. But you're saying they actually don't have one?
I've seen many pros carry one, they might not use it on the entire gig, or sometimes they might use it for just one song. But it's tucked away in their gig bag just in case someone calls a song they've never heard. A guitarist in a bass, drums, guitar trio has to hold down the harmony and melody, that's pretty hard to do if you're unfamiliar with a tune or if you've never heard it.
-
Hi fep - a gig or a jam are different things. If you talk about an actual gig is the responsability of the leader to provide lead sheets to all band members and it's supposed to be right... And you usually have a setlist of tunes etc... So usually you don't have "susprise tunes"
If you're talking about a jam session where any tune can be called it varies (here in Lisbon). On the really good jams there's usally one real book because of bass players - if they don't know the tunes no one plays so... but if you're a bass player and you never learn tunes sooner or later someone will take the real book from you. All the other players MUST play by memory... usually people talk for 2 or 3 minutes to get a song they all know. Let's say you go to a jam and someone calls "I'll be seeing you" and everyone knows the tune but you - you're supposed to know it the next time you come in. And you're supposed to know the changes played on the records not the ones on the real book. And as I said most pros I know it they are in a jam and someone calls a tune they don't know (which is hard by the way) they will ask for someone play one chorus of the changes. It's all it takes to learn the tune for them...
On the bad jams usually you have 5 guys on a stand reading a real book... that's not a jam sesison to me
-
One of the most interesting threads in a long time. I play in a weekly house band, am a very poor reader, and often get called to solo on the second run through the form. If I haven't grasped the changes by ear, I'm dead ( and yes, I die at least twice a week...). The pianist and band leader can turn ANY chart into something playable, is a great improviser, and knows all the intros etc. One week, a singer called Body & Soul..head arrangement.The rest of us knew it, but the leader said no. Why?- no chart!
I asked him afterwards about it, and it turns out he can't play at all without dots.
-
Yes, indeed. And I also notice that various recorded versions are different from each other. If we are talking about the standards, there are hundreds if not thousands of different recorded versions. Some of them stay pretty close to the fake books, others depart farther from them. Some of the fake books have made a virtue of reflecting a well known classic jazz recording of that particular standard ("As recorded by NN") or a general consensus by a majority of jazz people - rather than the composers original Broadway musical score. Other fake books - especially among the more obscure and illegal - are crap, reflecting neither and I have a few on the book shelf that I never use for that reason. But however useful a fake book may be for me, it's just a starting point, because after all jazz is about how WE want the music to be (and, to be frank, for me also what my technical limitations will allow me to do Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
)
Like I wrote above, I too find listening extremely important and I do have quite a recording collection, both old vinyl and CDs. It just that I don't find the (good) fake books inhibiting but rather a help. Often, when I have been listening and have been puzzled by a tricky line, I have listened a couple of times more with the score in hand and have been able to say "Ah, that's how it goes." - and have then sat down and played it. Other times it has been the other way around. I have learned the tune from the score and have then bought a record with a musician I like in order to hear how it "really" sounds like.
If anything, I use written scores more now than when I was younger. As you can guess, I'm around 60 years old now, so I can't rule out that it's "Alzheimer light" creeping in on me here, but my own subjective feeling is that it helps me get a better grasp of the music than I had when I was younger.
One thing i DO know, is that I, perception wise, am visually oriented. Besides music, I'm interested in photography, and if I may say so myself, I have been able to trip the shutter on my cameras in "the decisive moment" (to quote Henri Cartier-Bresson) and have been able to compose my pictures intuitively when I shoot them. I do crop now and then in postprocessing, but that's because I didn't bring a long enough lens (long lenses are heavy and bulky!). I have so to speak been able to previsualize the finished result, when I shoot the picture. This may explain my good use of those written scores. Here I also "previsualize" - just aurally.
BTW, when we lived in Copenhagen many years ago, I often went to jazz concerts to photograph the musicians playing (and of course also to listen to the music). I have pictures of many famous musicians who are no longer among us as well as other less known musicians. My goal was to make the pictures reflect the personality of the musician and the music - and my love for the music. This photographic pairing of the visual with the aural has been very gratifying for me and I believe that playing jazz myself has helped me take better pictures of the musicians.
-
I have 3 "fake books" from the 70's....before the real books came out...
I will dig them out and find the numbers..as they were numbered them..if I remember them as 9....25.....7...
In storage for some time now...
time on the instrument..pierre
-
I'd like to meet these players who "rely on a fakebook."
Anybody who spends more than a week learning jazz knows a fakebook is a suggestion, not a law, and knows their ears are their best resource.
-
I'm not sure who you'e quoting, I can't find anyone who said that in this thread. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
All I said was every jazz musician that I know has one. Do you have one?
-
I have:
Spaces Volumes I, II and III
Real Book Vol 1 (From 1980)
Real Book Volume 2 (heavy fusion and guitar stuff)
Real Book Volume 2 revised (standards)
Sher Publishing:
Real Books 1,2 and 3
World Greatest Fake Book
Standards RB
Herb Wong "Real Book" (big waste)
Charlie Parker Omnibook
T.Monk Fake Book
And there are still tunes I can't find in these books
They come in handy but I can safely say that just about EVERY tune needs to have something tweaked either in the chords or melody.
The worst part is that most guys have gotten used to playing the wrong changes (like in Footprints or Four) You always have to confirm what's what on some of the charts before playing.
Reply With Quote
Rialto Archtop Guitars UK
Yesterday, 07:04 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos