Playing fast is a necessary evil on guitar?

[rpjazzguitar]

I was drawn to guitar because of folk and rock music.

I was drawn to jazz because my first teacher was a big band player.

But, it wasn't guitar that I was listening to when I became interested in jazz. Records were expensive, so I had very few. Mostly, I listened to Mort Fega and Symphony Sid on the radio. Mort played a lot of horn-based music, but also singers (Vaughn and Holiday are the ones I remember best), some big band. I don't remember a lot of guitar, but he probably played at least Wes and Kenny Burrell. I seem to remember hearing Take 5 on his program. He also played Lord Buckley, which I loved.

[Hep To The Jive]

In response I might add in reply to the thread, that there is a type of fast playing that doesn't sound fast.

I'm really thinking of players like Wes and Lester Young here, a legato way of phrasing and playing everything absolutely accurate in time, that sounds easy until you try to play it. Peter Bernstein has a similar quality.

Furthermore, the ability to run endless 8ths at tempo is certainly a technical accomplishment, but if you master this the onus is on you to do something interesting with it.

I can think of Pat Martino as the example of this. His playing has an ebb and flow and space within the continuous flow of notes that actually rather mesmerising. It's pretty alienating at first for many listeners, but you do get into it (or at least I did.)

There's an interesting (to me) relationship between double time and single time fast.... Being able to swap between double time and single time at slow tempos and half time and single time at fast tempos is an important skill allowing you more freedom.

Another thing is improving your 'rhythmic resolution' is learning to lock in up beats at high tempi and being able to nail the distinction between these and the various quarter and half note triplets.

As we edge up to somewhere around 280 this becomes very difficult and most players tend to end up playing much more on the beat.

At the moment I am working on this very hard because I am so bored to listening to myself reel off 8th note lines. This might be considered a high quality problem. That said my articulation is not as consistent as I would like it to be.

Actually, one of my favourite 'hot tempo' solos (not crazy fast, but quick) is this offering from Jim Hall. Technically the solo is easy, but the precision with which he nails the rhythms - there's a virtuosity in there. Reminds me of Louis. And Hall, not really a bop guy, harking back to a pre-Parker way of playing burning tempos.

So there's more than one way to do this.

Ultimately - it's all rhythm. You need to master the execution of rhythms at all tempos and hone your vocabulary of rhythmic phrases. That doesn't mean playing fast necessarily, but it does mean playing - and hearing time - with great precision.

As soon as you think of playing something 'fast' you are f**ked, quite frankly.

This Jim Hall solo I think is what I'm talking about. It's very notey, not blazing fast, like you said, doesn't have to be anyway, but he picks a lot of notes to create interest. He doesn't use a lot of half, or dotted half notes, if any, it wouldn't work on guitar, that's the thing! (I love the track btw, I think I'm gonna download the album if I can find- that's how I strive to sound in hot jazz/swing realm exactly!)

For contrast, here's 2 tracks I found featuring trumpet solos, and sax. Notice how many more slow notes those guys use, how more lush and relax it sounds. Especially Clifford Brown- try to transcribe the solo and play on guitar- I bet it won't work as is! Of course, he goes into fast mode later, just because he could...

Also, funny enough, if I had to play the tune at that tempo, it would be harder than Jim Hall's tempo, because it not fast enough to make 8th notes sound interesting, and not slow enough to go into double time... I would be struggling most likely.

[A. Kingstone]

Listening to some young hot shot sit in with him one night Jim Hall said:

"Don't just play something, sit there."

[Jonah]

This psychological idea is haunting me...

I think it's connected with time feel... not exactly musical timing but in genral time.

When we play music - imho - we get the most direct feeling of time flow... we sort of get in the time flow.

It's like in some critical situation... I had a car accident that took less than a second I believe but I remember how many actions I managed to make to think about... time really slowed down, almost stopped.

I would compare it with pixels, you see a smallest unit but then suddenly it is zoomed up and you find there are lots of smaller items in it - the scale is different the feel of proportion changes...

Same thing with music for me...

I am slow enough, not that I cannot play fast tempo scales... but naturally I hear music in wider spaces. And besides I have always been about harmonic hearing more... I mean when I hear 25 notes played fast - what I hear first of all is not a melodic countour but that it is... say 9th over Dm7... (of course I can hear melody too, but this is how my hearing works first... I move on harmonic motion a lot).
That always influenced my playing... as kid in classical guitar I was always good in moderate and slow pices where there is enough time and space to express harmonic connection... sometimes it was a problem for natural virtuoso guys they felt stuck, nervous...
In fast ppieces I noticed that I also tried to reduce virtuos passages - I mean trying to stress the harmonig content they brought (sometimes even where there was not so much of this content))) - that's probably also the reason that I instincltively tried to ignore embelishments unless they can be heard harmonically. I just did not feel them like a meaningful element of music.
All this often causes slowing down tempo, you focus too much on these details and tries to hear them through..
Of course it's not always good for the music.

In jazz where you often have relative freedom in making lines in this case you just take more time, more space... just because you do not need 25 notes to make a line that would express the musical idea you have... because this idea is harmonic.

I would say that harmonic hearing is a bit more static, it works more like you make a painting.. like you're a bit out of time and see a canvas and put colours on it in balance.

The players who hear better an intonative motivic material often have tendencies to play more notes... just because thsi kind of thinking is more linear.. more narative, the have to hook on the last motive and move on to the next.

Please note - this is generalization of course... motives and intonation are often connected with harmony, and on the contraty harmony is very general thing can be indivudualy expressed throu interesting melodic ideas.

So do not take it as if I sit and play arpeggios with resolutions only... it's much more complex. Recently I had to play on lute Kapsberger toccatas, one of my most favoutie lute music... he obviously was fast guy, used a lot of passages, virtousic lines, motive development... a bit neurotic... (in th spirit of time though) but still I hear all this stuff as a invividual embodiement of harmonic vehicle. And when I listen to virtuosic record of Paul O'Dette - I hear it's like all broken up, like he plays all these motives and lines irrespectively to harmonic movement behind it. And when I hear Hopkinson Smith - it all works very integral and coherent, surely because he hears and moves this harmonic basis first of all...
I do not want to say what it better now because in classical we have written piece and it uses certain language and in my opinion that implies some restriction for player that allows to say that this player understands this music better or worse.

But in jazz it is different to certain degree..

So primary I think it is based on this natural disposition

Probably one of the most distinctive example in jazz playing is Hawk and Prez... I love Prez, but with Hawk I had immediate affection and recognition, he spoke my language... his Body and Soul just brought me almost to tears - when I first heard I listend to it 30 times over and over again...
Same thing probably with Bird and Trane...

Even if I compare Bird's lines that are built strictly on harmony with long modal one-chord Trane's solos... I still hear that Bird's thinking is basically scalar and linear, and Trane is hooked to harmonic relations...


And in concern of speed: bBird sounds fast even when he plays slow, and of Trane I never thought as of fast player ever...

[christianm77]

Yeah there's a lot of rhythmic activity in the Hall solo.... Reminds me of the Tim Lerch vid someone posted elsewhere, using rhythmic motifs. You want to create rhythmic momentum in your playing at high tempos and truly play something that expresses the tempo in isolation rather than just floating over the top of a hard working section.

So, to this end I practice up tempo solo, without a click and record myself. (I also practice with a click, but I try to mix it up.)

One thing that helps me is the Hal Galper thing of feeling the tempo in half time. You are then playing rhythms in sixteenths. Also it helps relate it to a New Orleans feel which is always a good thing.

A classic example of this, take Louis on Dinah. The tempo is 280 bpm ish - the same tempo as Trane's Giant Steps.

Setting aside Louis' solo, the rhythm section feels much slower than this because of the 2 feel nature of it. The trick is to be able to feel this while the bassist is walking. Harder than it sounds.

[goldenwave77]

[QUOTE=Jonah;735075]This psychological idea is haunting me...

I think it's connected with time feel... not exactly musical timing but in genral time.

It's like in some critical situation... I had a car accident that took less than a second I believe but I remember how many actions I managed to make to think about... time really slowed down, almost stopped.

Definitely agree with this. Had exact same experience when I was in a motorcycle accident...not even going fast (15 mph; 25 kmh) but from the time the bike went into the skid, until I hit the pavement, time just almost stopped. It was almost a relief when I finally hit.

But....I think we need to generalize this phenomenon. In the accident scenario, your natural adrenaline (?!) took over, and the immediate sensations are magnified in effect. In normal playing, I think, what we've poured into our minds, in the course of our training and practicing, will end up coming out. This has all sorts of implications for how we practice.


The players who hear better an intonative motivic material often have tendencies to play more notes... just because thsi kind of thinking is more linear.. more narative, the have to hook on the last motive and move on to the next.

Maybe, but consider Art Tatum. Nobody had a busier style, and yet it is often harmonic embellishment, substitution, etc. I wouldn't call him a particularly melodic improviser ...in fact some of what he does is not even jazz, in some senses. Nor was he a great small group player...he kind of had his thing, and it ended up taking over his playing, I think.

I think Hines, or Fats Waller, can be every bit as technical, but they are more melodic, because they are less "programmed", ahead of time, in how they play.

And Lester Young v. Hawkins...I find Prez a lot more melodic, and he plays half as many notes, whereas Hawk is often embellishment, of the harmony. I think Dexter Gordon, or Rollins at his best, are the best of both worlds. I esp. like Gordon's ability to play long lines, sometimes a whole chorus start to finish, woven together!

The old saying that "you are what you eat" I think, applies to musicians, as well. You can't take someone trained in solely a classical tradition, and expect them to play jazz well....at some point, they have to get the sound of jazz into their ears (and minds), and there are many great jazz players who had rigorous classical style training (Hines; Wynton M., Herbie H., Chick Corea, Kenny Burrell, Chuck Wayne).

But I don't think they did it without immersing themselves into this other "alternative" tradition.

Some observers of "school jazz" players say that their music sounds stilted, or unconvincing, and probably these players haven't spent enough time getting away from what they've spent years programming into their minds, and getting the other stuff--the jazz tradition, into their minds, and playing.

[grandstick01]

One name that I'm surprised not to see in this conversation is Allan Holdsworth. He has long stated that he is always looking to the saxophone for inspiration; as is evidenced by the long-running attempts at legato lines in his solos. His right hand technique came sometimes be nonexistent, with the left hand notes slurring in with very little attack.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Vladan]

... A classic example of this, take Louis on Dinah. The tempo is 280 bpm ish ...

How do we know it's 280 bpm and not 140 bpm?

[christianm77]

How do we know it's 280 bpm and not 140 bpm?

Ahahahahahahahahahhahahahha

Good question. Jazz is conventionally written out 4. That's it.

One difference between music with his type of rhythmic conception and straight western music is that you can understand it as having different time feels and related tempos superimposed.

So, feeling a fast rhythm changes as double time at 130 say, not so bad then.

[christianm77]

One name that I'm surprised not to see in this conversation is Allan Holdsworth. He has long stated that he is always looking to the saxophone for inspiration; as is evidenced by the long-running attempts at legato lines in his solos. His right hand technique came sometimes be nonexistent, with the left hand notes slurring in with very little attack.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well Allan plays very fast but also sustained like a sax. He's got it covered from both angles.

I'm not convinced about the use of that technique in straight up jazz though... can be a bit boneless rhythmically to my ears.

I think I tend to like players who mix up the picking and the slurs in a way that is dictated by phrasing in the jazz context. Obv Allan sounds amazing in his own music.

[Vladan]

...
Good question. Jazz is conventionally written out 4. That's it. ...
... you can understand it as having different time feels and related tempos superimposed...

Paradoxically, I think I do understand it ...
It comes out of "writting convention", so you get conventionally written charts, but not play as written, because such is "Jazz convention".

Then when leader counts 1234, part of the band takes it as being counted in 1/4s, but they treat written lengths as being 1/2 of what's written, while the other part treats it as counted in 1/2s, so they play twice as fast to match real tempo and play the legths as written.
Of course, there are the third and the 4th part of the band, they can not decide how fast to play, so they play 4 over 6 in real tempo, or 3 over 2 in counted tempo. Together, they swing.

Then you have improviser expected to follow changes, only he can't know which changes to follow, because the band does not play them as written, but is expected to accomodate to what he plays ...

See, I got it all right, only it is not as I wrote above.

VladanMovies BlogSpot

[Groyniad]

great thread!i've always adored armstrong playing Dinah - it just feels catastrophically hip and swinging to me - its the kind of thing i can't play with other people around because i find it so exhilarating and i don't know how to react when people just keep talking etc. or don't notice that musical madness is going on etc.i want to say that fast tempos are crucial to jazz because they make it impossible for you to 'compose' your solo - at fast tempos, at the best times, ideas get pulled out of you - you play them in a state of a kind of shock because you know you didn't 'come up with' them, but that they just somehow flew out of youin my view you can only really learn how to get yourself out of the way enough to get things pulled out of you by playing fast. then the challenge is to keep yourself from trying to control the whole process at medium and slower tempos. so that's the opposite picture than most people have - on which you have to start by playing slow and then gradually speed up.

[princeplanet]

....
One thing that helps me is the Hal Galper thing of feeling the tempo in half time. You are then playing rhythms in sixteenths....

I do this a bit, but over the years I realised that 16th note lines don't have to behave like sped up 8th note lines. With an 8th note line, I don't know about you, but I'm hitting chord tones (including specific tensions and / or specific altered tones) on every down beat. Not all the time, maybe 75-80% of the time, when I'm not then it's intentional, i.e., b3 on downbeat followed by nat 3rd etc...

But with a 16th note line, I was sounding a little boring hitting chord tones every other note, and realised (way later than I should have!) that it is more important to land important tones on the first of every group of 4 notes, in much the same way that with triplets the first of every 3 is the important "target" note.

This is yet another thing I had to work out for myself, I never really read it anywhere. Anyone else relate to this?

[christianm77]

I do this a bit, but over the years I realised that 16th note lines don't have to behave like sped up 8th note lines. With an 8th note line, I don't know about you, but I'm hitting chord tones (including specific tensions and / or specific altered tones) on every down beat. Not all the time, maybe 75-80% of the time, when I'm not then it's intentional, i.e., b3 on downbeat followed by nat 3rd etc...

But with a 16th note line, I was sounding a little boring hitting chord tones every other note, and realised (way later than I should have!) that it is more important to land important tones on the first of every group of 4 notes, in much the same way that with triplets the first of every 3 is the important "target" note.

This is yet another thing I had to work out for myself, I never really read it anywhere. Anyone else relate to this?

How does this relate to when you play an up tune? Do you do the same thing?

BTW I practiced what you describe for 8th note lines too a while back (2011) - the Hal Galper thing is - aim to resolve onto a chord tone on the beat. As Hal thinks of swing being in 2/4 (at least for faster tempos) this ends up with your lines grouped in 16ths. However each group is played as a pick up into the beat - targetting the note you described as the last note in a set of sixteenths starting on the 2nd 16th and ending up on the beat (if that makes any sense - just get the book if you don't have it, it's easier.)

A lot of water under the bridge since - different ways of practicing improv, but I think this idea had a good effect.

I have no idea what I do with the placement of chord tones ATM to be honest. The important thing is I know where they are and I play interesting rhythm phrases. Often the chord tones are on the pushes. I see this in bop lines.

[Groyniad]

parker has chord tones on 1 and 3 with striking consistency - no?

[destinytot]

Airegin @9m30 - playing fast, but Sean never seemed to move a muscle (to tap/pat etc).

PS Mr Rosenwinkel takes the first solo on the following track, Confirmation

[christianm77]

parker has chord tones on 1 and 3 with striking consistency - no?

I haven't looked into that. I will tho.

[ColinO]

Fast isn't evil...it's AWESOME.

[christianm77]

Fast isn't evil...it's AWESOME.

I don't understand why the two things are mutually exclusive?

[princeplanet]

How does this relate to when you play an up tune? Do you do the same thing?

BTW I practiced what you describe for 8th note lines too a while back (2011) - the Hal Galper thing is - aim to resolve onto a chord tone on the beat. As Hal thinks of swing being in 2/4 (at least for faster tempos) this ends up with your lines grouped in 16ths. However each group is played as a pick up into the beat - targetting the note you described as the last note in a set of sixteenths starting on the 2nd 16th and ending up on the beat (if that makes any sense - just get the book if you don't have it, it's easier.)

A lot of water under the bridge since - different ways of practicing improv, but I think this idea had a good effect.

I have no idea what I do with the placement of chord tones ATM to be honest. The important thing is I know where they are and I play interesting rhythm phrases. Often the chord tones are on the pushes. I see this in bop lines.

Well, my double tempo 8ths are being influenced by my 16th lines in that I'm looser about the 3rd note in each group of 4 having to be a chord tone. Depends on how fast the chords are moving. With the Forward Motion thing I think you mean hearing 16th as " e-and-ah-2-e-and-ah-3-e-and-ah-4-e-and-ah 1 etc" type of thing? I think that's how I learned to hear it anyway.

Your comment about not being so aware of where your chord tones are could be either because you've trained yourself the good habits for long enough they just come out right, or you have the confidence to follow melodic instinct to get from A to B. Of course a novice should, I think, stick to landing chord tones for a long time before he begins to "hear" ways to diverge, after all, that's what most developed players do, they diverge from landing strictly chord tones, but in a cool or beautiful (i.e. controlled) way.

I think that Gronyiad's observation that Parker hit chord tones predominately on 1 and 3 has some truth. One reason may be because Bird liked to get mileage out of his lines by playing them either up a min 3rd or up a TT. If your lines do clearly hit chord tones on the down beats, then they can sound neater when used in transposed applications (e.g. turning a Dom7/9 line into an alt line by shifting up 3 or 6 semitones).

[christianm77]

Well, my double tempo 8ths are being influenced by my 16th lines in that I'm looser about the 3rd note in each group of 4 having to be a chord tone. Depends on how fast the chords are moving. With the Forward Motion thing I think you mean hearing 16th as " e-and-ah-2-e-and-ah-3-e-and-ah-4-e-and-ah 1 etc" type of thing? I think that's how I learned to hear it anyway.

Your comment about not being so aware of where your chord tones are could be either because you've trained yourself the good habits for long enough they just come out right, or you have the confidence to follow melodic instinct to get from A to B. Of course a novice should, I think, stick to landing chord tones for a long time before he begins to "hear" ways to diverge, after all, that's what most developed players do, they diverge from landing strictly chord tones, but in a cool or beautiful (i.e. controlled) way.

I think that Gronyiad's observation that Parker hit chord tones predominately on 1 and 3 has some truth. One reason may be because Bird liked to get mileage out of his lines by playing them either up a min 3rd or up a TT. If your lines do clearly hit chord tones on the down beats, then they can sound neater when used in transposed applications (e.g. turning a Dom7/9 line into an alt line by shifting up 3 or 6 semitones).

Yeah I'm think I'm now at the stage where I can be critical about my lines but I'm not micromanaging the pitch choices quite so much.

I still go back to practicing chord tones through tunes though, and scales. I think it's important to have a total command of the raw fundamentals at any level, and of course there are often tunes that have some type of novel harmony.