Looks like Jaco didn't improvise the Donna Lee solo?

[pamosmusic]

Here's a little secret: solos played at 220+ bps (more or less) are never improvised, no one can make lines up at that speed - vary them a bit, sure, but the architecture has been composed.

well that's not correct at all

[Mick-7]

well that's not correct at all

How is it not correct? Who have you heard play original lines (lines they haven't played before) on tunes at a very high tempo? (pick a speed, 220 bpm and up?). You're relying primarily on muscle memory when you play at high tempos so by definition you're playing phrases you've played before. At certain tempos you only have time to react (play memorized phrases) rather than respond (spontaneously improvise ) to what you're hearing.

[equenda]

Here's a little secret: solos played at 220+ bps (more or less) are never improvised, no one can make lines up at that speed - vary them a bit, sure, but the architecture has been composed.

Yes. I agree. Maybe the "220 bpm" number can be different for some players. A beginner/average player can be in trouble playing NEW melodic lines at lower BPMs and other player with A LOT of talent and experience can really improvise even on faster tempos.
How can anyone believe that a jazz musician can create TRULY NEW melodic lines after improvising on the same tune for more than thirty years and thousands of concerts? I don't think so.
Ettore

[JazzPadd]

This is such an interesting discussion. I've read, here and there, that some of the greats composed and repeated solos. Many of you make cogent arguments for and against that.

It strikes me that without recording, this might not matter as much. In other words, once we aim to record something for posterity, the market or for some other reason, there's a shift toward perfection and preservation. I'm basing this on something that the author of the classic book "Urban Blues" once said in a lecture I attended by him the 1980s. He spent a lot of time with some of the blues greats in the 1960s, and noticed a tendency in some of them. He later wrote a book about polka, and he was also an avid jazz musician.

Using the examples of T-Bone Walker in blues and Walt Solek in polka, his idea was that vital musics have a blend of Dionysian and Apollonian modalities. In a Dionysian mode, there is wild abandon, in the moment, for the love and fun of it, the urge to merge with others, mistakes be damned; it's the mood and joy, and the connection in the moment that matters, and in the right time and place the audience can become part of this, too.

On the other hand, the Apollonian modality is seeking perfection, transcendence, driven to create less for the joy of creation as much as the satisfaction of preservation, almost like a solemn quest for immortality. He gave the example of T-Bone Walker, who was known for his wild stage shows, but also for being super serious in the studio. He also noted this in polka with Walt Solek, the purity of tradition versus the joy of the moment.

So I began wondering if something like this is at play in jazz. Personally, I'm more than a little suspicious of rigid dichotomies, but in the light of this conversation, I think there's something to reflect on here, for what it's worth. Perhaps all of us have our Dionysian and Apollonian sides, though maybe not to the same degree as each other or among one another. I know some of us might be dismissive of academic theorizing on music, and will offer counter arguments and evidence to the contrary, so I'll stop and just leave it at that.

But let me add one other point, based purely on my own experiences as an avid amateur jazz musician. When I play a tune on stage, usually in jam sessions, I feel like I'm in that Dionysian mode, feeling the joy of interaction with others, focusing on the feeling in the moment, taking more chances, even letting the time drift, giving in to the moment with the group groove, knowing that once the tune is over it's gone, into the past. There is no posterity, it is what it was and we move on to something else. But I've also done quite a bit of recording in the past, enough to know the feeling, and I felt the need to rehearse and perfect the part before hitting record, and then sticking to a metronomic click track. Ultimately, after a long hiatus from music, I came to see this purely personal feeling as a hindrance to my creativity, so I gave up recording and focused on just enjoying playing jazz in the moment with others. Of course, there are patterns and repeated themes in improvisation, but I was never able to compose or play anyone's solo verbatim. I know, not enough shedding, but I came to realize that's not what I want from playing music.

Back to the point about Jaco composing a solo--and apparently an exemplary one--and following our takes on that, one point that I agree with from the "Urban Blues" author, or at least I have a hunch that it might apply, is that vital musics may indeed need both, perfection for posterity and abandonment to the moment. I'm not suggesting that they are mutually exclusive; it's just another way to think about the topic of this discussion.

[James W]

Here's a little secret: solos played at 220+ bps (more or less) are never improvised, no one can make lines up at that speed - vary them a bit, sure, but the architecture has been composed.

Coltrane played 'Impressions' mostly above that tempo loads of times and we know from recordings that no two performances were the same.

Sure he had vocabulary, licks and phrases but these are constantly varied and recombined - especially cellular ideas and motives.

So it seems to me that your assertion that no one improvises at or above 220 BPM reveals a misunderstanding about what jazz improvisation is. It's not - or at least not mostly - about inventing vocab on the fly.

[CliffR]

Three different Charlie Parker takes on Dexterity. Apparently the first two recorded on the same day, the third shortly afterwards. There are similarities, for sure, but each solo is quite distinct.

[sully75]

Yeah I think that's demonstrably false. People are able to "improvise" at very fast tempos. Improvising meaning spontaneous organization of previously conceived ideas.

In thinking about this for a bit, it feels a lot like language.

If someone is giving a speech, it's reasonable to assume that they will write it down and potentially read it word for word in front of you. They could be a magnificent orator and speechwriter and that could be powerful. There is no assumption made that they will improvise. They could improvise, and plenty of famous orators did I think, but there is no assumption that they will. And that might be reflected in something like an arrangement from the Ellington band, where parts are written out, solos may or may not be improvised and each performance may or may not be slightly or largely different but there's not a specific expectation that they are.

But if I was to have a conversation with someone I find fascinating, my assumption is that they are reacting to my questions and my thoughts and that the thing they are telling me is something that reflects what they think inside but to a degree is a new composition of those thoughts and reflects the time we are in, the place, and our conversation. I'm not expecting that their thoughts are entirely new or that the things they are saying are the first time they've ever said them, but my expectation is that they are not just giving the same answers in the same order regardless of anything else. I also imagine that they are using the basic building blocks of language, so they are using words and phrases they have used before because....well that's how human language works.

Thus, regarding this solo, it being a solo in the jazz idiom, my expectation is that Jaco was using ideas, concepts, lines and licks that he had used previously and had worked out over the tune before. I was not expecting that he was composing a rote solo and performing it, as a speech. I was not expecting he was using the same ideas in the same order.

It's still a powerful musical statement but I feel pretty ok saying it's a bit disappointing in that regard and that I don't think the expectation that it was "improvised" is out of line.

[Christian Miller]

There nothing wrong with refining a solo and all the greats did it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sully75]

There nothing wrong with refining a solo and all the greats did it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you have a lot of examples of people in the modern era playing effectively the same solo several years apart? I honestly don't think this happens all that much.

In particular on a bebop tune?

[pamosmusic]

How is it not correct? Who have you heard play original lines (lines they haven't played before) on tunes at a very high tempo? (pick a speed, 220 bpm and up?).

Literally everyone good.

If the contention is that “at high tempos people play more licks and chunked vocabulary” or whatever, then sure. That’s obviously true.

But you’re saying that at 220 no one is really improvising and that’s nonsense.

220 is not that fast. Most professionals would call that a bright swing or medium up.

I don’t know … maybe if you said 300 you’d be closer to right but if you told me Brecker or Coltrane or Joey D was improvising pretty freely there, I wouldn’t be comfortable saying you were wrong. But I take issue with the idea that using your good shi* in the heat of the moment at a smoking tempo is somehow not improvising in the first place.

You're relying primarily on muscle memory when you play at high tempos so by definition you're playing phrases you've played before. At certain tempos you only have time to react (play memorized phrases) rather than respond (spontaneously improvise ) to what you're hearing.

Also this is just kind of silly. Muscle memory is always a factor. And I’m not really terribly interested in the idea that rearranging little cells and licks into creative ways at 300 bpm is any less inventive than rearranging single notes in creative ways at 150.

[Christian Miller]

Another point - just because someone doesn’t improvise a solo from whole cloth doesn’t mean they can’t. Otoh just because they can improvise something doesn’t mean that they always will

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sully75]

Another point - just because someone doesn’t improvise a solo from whole cloth doesn’t mean they can’t. Otoh just because they can improvise something doesn’t mean that they wills

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I really think that "greats" playing the same solo years apart on bebop tunes is a (very) rare thing.

Reiterating that Jaco is on my short list of fav musicians.

[Christian Miller]

I really think that "greats" playing the same solo years apart on bebop tunes is a (very) rare thing.

Reiterating that Jaco is on my short list of fav musicians.

More common than you might think.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[princeplanet]

I don't get how some people here seem to be speaking as though from a place of knowingness, or authority when making claims about how the "greats" are creating their solos at fast tempi. I mean, even true greats like Brecker would never dare to suggest they knew how Bird or Coltrane were conceiving ideas for their solos. So let's just all agree that we can never know definitively how anyone conceives of anything, much less how they conjure their solo lines.

That said, we can get insights into the methodologies of others through study, or self disclosure. Pat Martino gave hints about some (certainly not all) of his processes, Trane left us diagrams, Bird's note choice techniques have been forensically dissected (see Owens dissertation), Clifford Brown left behind recording of his devices, and so on.

So from these and countless others we probably can deduce that there's a middle ground between totally original freshly minted never-played-before ideas, and rote playing. As mentioned, one obvious way is the re-organisation of
"chunks" of ideas, which in my view is still a form of improvisation, and lends itself nicely to the "language" metaphor previously alluded to.

But one thing that hasn't been mentioned is the way some players seem to be pulling from long sequential devices that are practiced into muscle memory. Certainly Trane, but also earlier players like Clifford Brown. Listen to those rehearsal tapes, and then listen to the solos. I think I noticed how he slipped in and out of much practiced material, moving between ideas at will, and different points. This is not quite the same thing as playing the same chunks in different ways where each chunk has a specific start and end, but selecting from say, a 64 note chunk where you might pull from 9 to 24, or 37 down to 17 or whatever. If you have dozens of these long chain devices burned in, you may be able to slip between gears as you fancy in the heat of the moment. I think this can obscure the seam lines better than regular chunking, and I admire players of all instruments who seem to be doing this (without me ever being sure of course). And yes, I do believe shifting gears in this way for rapid and long passages can spin unique lines even at 300 bpm, so that no 2 choruses need ever be similar, yet all have a similar style going on. Or something.

So I agree with those that contend that it's not only possible to be actually improvising at breakneck speeds differently each time for thousands of choruses, but that some players are doing this every time they play! (bastards)

[pamosmusic]

More common than you might think.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The recent interest in outtakes and alternate takes too.

Not a lot of those dudes ripping the same solo every time but often pretty clear they’re working off a concept

[Tal_175]

What would go against the spirit of jazz is to play someone else's solo note by note. I think what separates jazz musicians from musicians who are strictly performers is to be able to say "this is how I comp", " this is what I've come up with in my solo over this tune" when they play a tune. Even though the resulting music may not be as good as a rehearsed performance of the music of a great composer/arranger.

The distinctions between what is purely spontaneous, what has become ingrained over years, what reflects a recently practiced concept, or what stems from a compositional process are complex—and perhaps not even that relevant—as long as the music expresses genuine individual artistry.

[Mick-7]

Literally everyone good.

If the contention is that “at high tempos people play more licks and chunked vocabulary” or whatever, then sure. That’s obviously true.

But you’re saying that at 220 no one is really improvising and that’s nonsense.

220 is not that fast. Most professionals would call that a bright swing or medium up.

I don’t know … maybe if you said 300 you’d be closer to right but if you told me Brecker or Coltrane or Joey D was improvising pretty freely there, I wouldn’t be comfortable saying you were wrong. But I take issue with the idea that using your good shi* in the heat of the moment at a smoking tempo is somehow not improvising in the first place.

220 bpm was an arbitrary number I chose, my point was there is a tempo at which one can no longer freely improvise but must instead combine memorized phrases, which can also be an art but I wouldn't consider it "improvising." No doubt this will become a debate about what does or does not qualify as "improvisation."

Also this is just kind of silly. Muscle memory is always a factor. And I’m not really terribly interested in the idea that rearranging little cells and licks into creative ways at 300 bpm is any less inventive than rearranging single notes in creative ways at 150.

So you're saying that improvising at 150 bpm is also a challenge for many musicians, they must resort to rearranging memorized phrases at moderate tempos too?

[princeplanet]

I'd just like to add that if I had an audience every time I soloed, I think I'd be inclined to stick to set guide stones far more than I do at home, for the audience's sake! You will probably play more enjoyable solos for the audience if much of it has been pre fabricated and tested in the field as it were. But as most of us here are probably hobbyists more than pros, I certainly hope that every minute spent on developing improvisational prowess goes into developing a skill that brings reward for effort. Now some may feel reward for nailing a worked out solo every time, but that's not for me. I love flying by the seat of my pants, or however the saying goes, I like going dangerously close to falling off the rails (which I often do). The reward for me is when I make it through and land on my feet.

That's 100% why I invest in this Jazz guitar thing, for that feeling. Playing close to the same solo over and over again might please an audience, but would bore me shitless as a player.

[Christian Miller]

What would go against the spirit of jazz is to play someone else's solo note by note. I think what separates jazz musicians from musicians who are strictly performers is to be able to say "this is how I comp", " this is what I've come up in my solo with over this tune" when they play a tune. Even though the resulting music may not be as good as a rehearsed performance of the music of a great composer/arranger.

The distinctions between what is purely spontaneous, what has become ingrained over years, what reflects a recently practiced concept, or what stems from a compositional process are complex—and perhaps not even that relevant—as long as the music expresses genuine individual artistry.

Ah I’ve heard cats do that too. Lester’s two choruses on Lady be good for instance. In this case it’s obviously a tip of the (porkpie) because it is such a famous solo. Probably less hip to play something not well known as it might come off as a steal .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mick-7]

Three different Charlie Parker takes on Dexterity. Apparently the first two recorded on the same day, the third shortly afterwards. There are similarities, for sure, but each solo is quite distinct.

Not a real fast tempo though, maybe 185 bpm.

I don't get how some people here seem to be speaking as though from a place of knowingness, or authority when making claims about how the "greats" are creating their solos at fast tempi. I mean, even true greats like Brecker would never dare to suggest they knew how Bird or Coltrane were conceiving ideas for their solos. So let's just all agree that we can never know definitively how anyone conceives of anything, much less how they conjure their solo lines.

A subjective judgement does not need to be made, one can compare their solos on very fast tempo tunes and see if they repeat themselves, as Jaco did.

[pamosmusic]

220 bpm was an arbitrary number I chose, my point was there is a tempo at which one can no longer freely improvise but must instead combine memorized phrases, which can also be an art but I wouldn't consider it "improvising."

Okay then say that and not that you have some secret knowledge that no one is improvising above 220.

220 might be a quick tempo for you (I believe that’s come up before in your improvising thread) and that’s okay and totally normal. But it’s not that fast in the grand scheme and people handle tempos quite a bit faster fairly well.

No doubt this will become a debate about what does or does not qualify as "improvisation."

Well … maybe, but if that’s disappointing for you, you may steer clear of broad statements about who is and isn’t improvising and when they are or are not doing it.

[princeplanet]

220 bpm was an arbitrary number I chose, my point was there is a tempo at which one can no longer freely improvise but must instead combine memorized phrases, which can also be an art but I wouldn't consider it "improvising." No doubt this will become a debate about what does or does not qualify as "improvisation."



So you're saying that improvising at 150 bpm is also a challenge for many musicians, they must resort to rearranging memorized phrases at moderate tempos too?

I took it as suggesting that truly improvising at the note level at 150 is kinda like truly improvising at the chunk level at 300. Which I'd agree with, FWIW.

[Mick-7]

Okay then say that and not that you have some secret knowledge that no one is improvising above 220.

No secret knowledge needed, you need only compare their high tempo solos and see how different they are. For example, every one of Trane's solos on Giant Steps that I've heard is essentially the same.

I took it as suggesting that truly improvising at the note level at 150 is kinda like truly improvising at the chunk level at 300. Which I'd agree with, FWIW.

If that were true, putting aside the technical challenge, most improvising musicians would have no more trouble improvising at 300 bpm than they do at 150 bpm, which is obviously not the case.

[pamosmusic]

No secret knowledge needed, you need only compare their high tempo solos and see how different they are. For example, every one of Trane's solos on Giant Steps that I've heard is essentially the same.

and how many is that?

and that’s aside from it being 280 and the most difficult set of changes in common usage … so not the best example

[sully75]

More common than you might think.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Listened to a few Miles 1st 16 bars on So What solos from France 1963 on the way to work. Without detailed listening, it seems like he is starting with the same flourish a few times but ultimately is not playing "the same solo".

Again I'm differentiating between improvising with similar ideas and playing "the same notes in the same places".

I am still wondering if people actually listened to the Jaco recording in question and the famous self titled solo...seems like we are talking about different things.