Real improvisation

[kris]

I think a lot about it lately.
There are musicians who repeat their musical phrases. It is often the case that these phrases are repeated in different tunes.
But there are also brilliant musicians who are so creative that they create new phrases all the time.
What is this dependent on?

[Mick-7]

I think a lot about it lately.
There are musicians who repeat their musical phrases. It is often the case that these phrases are repeated in different tunes.
But there are also brilliant musicians who are so creative that they create new phrases all the time.
What is this dependent on?

Being able to instantly play what you hear and develop motifs.

See the Keith Jarrett technique described here: Playing the changes vs. playing over the key center

[Average Joe]

I'm sceptical of the idea that even those who seemingly create anew all the time doesn't have a set of stock phrases or devices. If there is a recognizable voice, there must be characteristics, and characteristics are the reproduction of traits across performances. I have a suspision it's just that their library is vast enough to seem endless to a mere mortal like me

[grahambop]

Jim Hall and John Abercrombie were big on developing motifs instead of relying too much on licks (I’ve been watching some of their lesson videos recently and they talk about this).

Also Sonny Rollins is often cited as using motivic development.

[kris]

Being able to instantly play what you hear and develop motifs.

See the Keith Jarrett technique described here: Playing the changes vs. playing over the key center

Dexter Gordon, Chet Baker,Miles Davis..etc...?

[kris]

I'm sceptical of the idea that even those who seemingly create anew all the time doesn't have a set of stock phrases or devices. If there is a recognizable voice, there must be characteristics, and characteristics are the reproduction of traits across performances. I have a suspision it's just that their library is vast enough to seem endless to a mere mortal like me

John Scofield?

[Average Joe]

John Scofield?

I'm not learned enough to be able to explicate Scofield's style, but he's a pretty good example of what I mean - He's remarkably recognizable, and the typical scofield solo sounds like a Scofield solo. We recognize it as such. It's not Metheny or whoever, it's him. For something to be recognizeable traits have to occur often enough to form a pattern we can recognize. Sure, there's his tone and time feel,but there's probablyalso something in his approach to soloing that's typical of his, and if it's typical, it's already not unconstrained improv.

And he does have licks - As far back as the Live album, there are proto Protocol riffs in there, to take one example. That thing creeps into a lot of solos at least into sometimes in the 90s

[ruger9]

I remember watching some video by a guy who claimed "improvisation doesn't exist", his premise was that improvisation is playing something you've never played before (which I disagree with), which he claims is impossible. Which is ridiculous: there's a FIRST time you play EVERYTHING, and it doesn't always happen in the "practice room".

To me, improvisation (talking about solos) is creating a piece of music (which is melody), within the confines of another piece of music. Even if you've played every phrase before, that doesn't mean it's not improvisation: because IMO improvisation encompasses the relationship: how the piece of music you are playing relates to the piece of music you are playing within... it's a "whole is greater than the sum of it's parts" thing.

[kris]

I'm not learned enough to be able to explicate Scofield's style, but he's a pretty good example of what I mean - He's remarkably recognizable, and the typical scofield solo sounds like a Scofield solo. We recognize it as such. It's not Metheny or whoever, it's him. For something to be recognizeable traits have to occur often enough to form a pattern we can recognize. Sure, there's his tone and time feel,but there's probablyalso something in his approach to soloing that's typical of his, and if it's typical, it's already not unconstrained improv.

And he does have licks - As far back as the Live album, there are proto Protocol riffs in there, to take one example. That thing creeps into a lot of solos at least into sometimes in the 90s.

But within his self-defined Scofield Space he appears to roam freely

I have most of the albums recorded by Scofield.
I think this is one of the most creative jazz guitarists.
He does not repeat his phrases, but he processes them creatively, which is why I listen to his guitar playing with interest.

[Jonah]

I always say that the 'true' improvization' is rather the matter of perception than intention, meaning that depending on the context (cultural background of the listener) exactly the same stuff can be percieved as improvised or pre-composed.

We have an intuitive 'gut feeling' of what is improvized. Part of it is conventional but part is always very personal.

An example from classical: baroque toccatas and preludes , we often say/hear them as 'a kind of improvized' music, why? Not only becasue we could read in the book that it was a common practice of the day, but also because we recognize something in the texture, harmonic and melodic structure... something that gives a feeling of spontaneous choice.
But at the same time an elaborated fugue seems pre-composed to us, though in reality it could improvized too. at the end of the day it does not matter what was 'in reality' because I really do not see how to separate improvization and using pre-composed material from point of view of the performer.

Also the perception can be very individual: Chopin is often mentioned as an improvizer (and he really was) but I actually find his music (with all his rubatos and free melodic lines) very much determined. You cannot change anything there without changing the whole piece and normally in the improvizational music you can.

I would say that one of the most characteristic conventional sign of improvization is the feeling that some things are arbitrary, a bit accidental and can be actually substituted with something similar... normally when we perceive a great work of art we have strong feeling that everything is 100% on its place.
In the improvization there is always 'a weak point'... but it is also a part of its charm.

You mention

But there are also brilliant musicians who are so creative that they create new phrases all the time.

But what is a new phrase? How do you perceive a novelty in this case? One note different is a new phrase? One note longer is a new phrase?

[kris]

I remember watching some video by a guy who claimed "improvisation doesn't exist", his premise was that improvisation is playing something you've never played before (which I disagree with), which he claims is impossible. Which is ridiculous: there's a FIRST time you play EVERYTHING, and it doesn't always happen in the "practice room".

To me, improvisation (talking about solos) is creating a piece of music (which is melody), within the confines of another piece of music. Even if you've played every phrase before, that doesn't mean it's not improvisation: because IMO improvisation encompasses the relationship: how the piece of music you are playing relates to the piece of music you are playing within... it's a "whole is greater than the sum of it's parts" thing.

Jazz is more complicated music.
Jazz requires a refreshing time, feeling and the use of appropriate notes.
The ability to creatively build instrumental solos.

[Average Joe]

I have most of the albums recorded by Scofield.
I think this is one of the most creative jazz guitarists.
He does not repeat his phrases, but he processes them creatively, which is why I listen to his guitar playing with interest.

I'll fight you over which of us is the greater Sco fan
I agree about his creativity, and I plain love his playing. But I definitely hear phrases pop up. And I would never expect anything else from any player.
Processing them creatively, sure, but what is the yardstick? Did Parker process his creatively in your opinion? Parker sure had quite well defined pet phrases, and yet they always come out fresh to my ears.

[pamosmusic]

I guess I’m not super interested in how much of an individuals idea generation is spontaneous or what that means. In jazz the more compelling spontaneity is in group interaction.

It’s like if I’m dealing with a speaker, it’s not super interesting to me if someone is improvising a great speech. First of all any good speaker has an idea of what they want to say, some great speakers can make written words sound spontaneous and organic, less gifted speakers can make spontaneity sound meandering. So beyond a matter of trivia, I don’t really care if they’re speaking off the cuff or not. But when they’re in conversation with another person, it’s incredibly obvious if they’re in the moment or not.

We’ve all been in conversation with someone who knows where they want the conversation to go before they start talking—regardless of what you’re interested in talking about. It’s not a fun experience and it’s VERY easy to tell.

[Mark Kleinhaut]

I consider myself a far left leaning improviser and I’ve documented the spontaneous compositional output extensively with videos. (You have them here in the forum with regularity). Everything I’ve ever played is a recombination of things I’ve already played along with gradual evolutionary introduction of some new bits and bobs I discovered along the way. It’s all cumulative with very little that’s “new”. The thing that changes (and where all the work and focus lies) is just on the flow of how it comes together. That aspect, the flow, is the only thing “improvised”, so it’s not at all about what I play but how I play it. And even there, i see the well worn paths of prior forays in all directions. Nothing is really new.

[pamosmusic]

I consider myself a far left leaning improviser and I’ve documented the spontaneous compositional output extensively with videos. (You have them here in the forum with regularity). Everything I’ve ever played is a recombination of things I’ve already played along with gradual evolutionary introduction of some new bits and bobs I discovered along the way. It’s all cumulative with very little that’s “new”. The thing that changes (and where all the work and focus lies) is just on the flow of how it comes together. That aspect, the flow, is the only thing “improvised”, so it’s not at all about what I play but how I play it. And even there, i see the well worn paths of prior forays in all directions. Nothing is really new.

That sounds right. I’m probably quite a licks player but we have a different standard for spontaneity in music that doesn’t make a lot of sense.

Like someone who’s extremely fluent should be constantly inventing.

But thinking about language again — of course you learn and say things you’ve never said before. BUT — that’s usually recombining simple words and phrases and using them to illustrate interesting and original thoughts. Honestly I’ve spent a lot of time as a writer and you learn pretty quickly that the thing you think needs to be said isn’t actually all that original, then you have to learn to not particularly care.

And on a related note, it’s not that often that fluent speakers pick up new words and less often that they start using them in conversation. The new words we actually use are almost always utilitarian — a word for that thing in your car that keeps breaking, a term for the thing you went to the doctor for last week, what it’s called when you chop onions that way. Not to mention we don’t just stumble on them — we encounter them somewhere, often from reading, but more often because someone else said them and we were listening.

I would also say that for most people a conversation partner’s vocabulary is the least interesting part of talking to them.

[ruger9]

Nothing is really new.

Ah- EXCEPT: as you stated, the flow of how it comes together. I think this is a great perspective/explanation.

You could also say, in this regard, "you never play the same thing twice" (unless of course, that's what you are actually trying to accomplish.)

[Al Haig]

But there are also brilliant musicians who are so creative that they create new phrases all the time. What is this dependent on?

The approach of playing jazz with all spontaneously created material is just having command of the building blocks of music. Take your harmonic concept and add rhythm, phrasing, and development.

[Tal_175]

John Scofield?

It's hard to talk about a player's phrasing without concrete examples. Mature improvisers make generic phrases sound new. I just googled "John Scofield transcriptions". Clicked on the first result (it was Autumn Leaves).
I posted below the first two occurrences of the ii-V-I to G major in his solo. I can't imagine a more cliche jazz idiom than to play #9-b9-1-7 into the third of the next chord. Guess what I found in both of these ii-V-I's?
The idiom (or trope as some call them) is played over D7alt (F, Eb, D, C -> B). It starts with the same (very idiomatic) trill in both cases. In the first instance there is a bar line shift. Gmaj line starts on the beat three of D7. In the second occurrence, the line resolves on the beat I of Gmaj7. The exact same phrase placed on different beats. The other phrases are also fairly standard outline ideas.

[mr. beaumont]

Repetition isn't necessarily a bad thing...in fact, if we think of improvisation as spontaneous composition, some repetition, be it melodically or rhythmically, is an important element in creating unity.

[AllanAllen]

Repetition can make excellent improvisation.

[Jonah]

It's hard to talk about a player's phrasing without concrete examples. Mature improvisers make generic phrases sound new. I just googled "John Scofield transcriptions". Clicked on the first result (it was Autumn Leaves).
I posted below the first two occurrences of the ii-V-I to G major in his solo. I can't imagine a more cliche jazz idiom than to play #9-b9-1-7 into the third of the next chord. Guess what I found in both of these ii-V-I's?
The idiom (or trope as some call them) is played over D7alt (F, Eb, D, C -> B). It starts with the same (very idiomatic) trill in both cases. In the first instance there is a bar line shift. Gmaj line starts on the beat three of D7. In the second occurrence, the line resolves on the beat I of Gmaj7. The same identical phrase placed on different beats. The other phrases are also fairly standard outline ideas.

This is partly what I wrote about.
Cliches or idiomas are a part of improvizational language within the style.
In jazz 'licks' or 'phrase' are really essential but the real individuality is in how one uses them altogether in context as an integral statement.

If you go to Vienna classical period for example you can listen sometimes to a whole exposition and it is quite often difficult to guess who the composer is even with such individuals as Mozart or Haydn... because with language is very idiomatic and the real personal approach shows up when you go into development sections.

With jazz it is more difficult because it is much more in the moment... so he can play something to fill in then drop then suddenly he picks up an idea and you also get caught with that and follow and you forget those 'occasional' cases because it is a part of the genre Something works out something mot and it is ok. Jazz players can totally change the directions during playing, start all over again etc.

In concern of integrity f the solos I think Wes is the greatest example. But I think Wes also thought in terms of the whole form. It seems to me it was important for him to keep this feeling of integrity and frustrating when he lost it and had to pick up again during solo. So I believe he could even conciously concentrate more on the form moments how things get connected in general.

But for many players it is not an issue, especially now when it is very loose about time and space..
Many players use some cliches to play into the tune like they try to fumble the path..... then drop and try something else and all within one solo. It became much more like there is no beginning and no end.

[Tal_175]

Repetition can make excellent improvisation.

I think you are talking about riff based melodies and motivic development. If I am understanding correctly the OP is talking about the use of vocabulary in improvisation. These are very different notions of repetition.

[pamosmusic]

It's hard to talk about a player's phrasing without concrete examples. Mature improvisers make generic phrases sound new. I just googled "John Scofield transcriptions". Clicked on the first result (it was Autumn Leaves).
I posted below the first two occurrences of the ii-V-I to G major in his solo. I can't imagine a more cliche jazz idiom than to play #9-b9-1-7 into the third of the next chord. Guess what I found in both of these ii-V-I's?
The idiom (or trope as some call them) is played over D7alt (F, Eb, D, C -> B). It starts with the same (very idiomatic) trill in both cases. In the first instance there is a bar line shift. Gmaj line starts on the beat three of D7. In the second occurrence, the line resolves on the beat I of Gmaj7. The exact same phrase placed on different beats. The other phrases are also fairly standard outline ideas.

Nice. Yeah this phrase could have been played by basically anyone at all, but of course it doesn't sound like that in context. Sounds like Sco.

It's alternately fun and disappointing and fun again to transcribe one of your favorites and find out how simple and "uninteresting" the vocabulary is on the page. The alchemy is somewhere else.

I've been obsessed with Clifford Brown on September Song for basically my whole adult life, and when I transcribed it I was like ... what? he's not even playing the changes ... it's just blues licks. Which I should've been able to hear by listening to it, but noooo ... something that hip just had to also be fancy and innovative.

[AllanAllen]

I think you are talking about riff based melodies and motivic development. If I am understanding correctly the OP is talking about the use of vocabulary in improvisation. These are very different notions of repetition.

Riffs and motifs can't be vocabulary? I'll admit, when you guys get into all the minutia of verbally defining music, I get twisted up. The link I posted, he takes a part of the head, composed by Sonny Rollins, and creates an entire improvisation off it. I thought this is exactly what we are supposed to do when we learn jazz vocabulary.

[Jonah]

I've been obsessed with Clifford Brown on September Song for basically my whole adult life, and when I transcribed it I was like ... what? he's not even playing the changes ... it's just blues licks. Which I should've been able to hear by listening to it, but noooo ... something that hip just had to also be fancy and innovative.

When I was a teenager I heard The Ballad Medley on Charlie Parker's All-Star session and I was obsessed with Flip Phillips solo on Isn't It Romantic... much later I transcribed it and it was almost all basic arpeggios.