Solo Improvised guitar without mastering jazz first?

[StringAddict]

I am a fingerstyle arrangement (chet atkins) player who got into jazz a few years ago.

I want to play solo improvised guitar one day - perform standards with a loosely arranged head, improvise while harmonizing the tune / keeping a bass line or rhythm, maybe some single line sections or chord heavy sections, etc. Like Tim Lerch, Joe Pass, Joe Diorio, etc

My question to those who have accomplished this - should one work towards this from the start or first master jazz? I ask because previously I couldnt improvise at all. I could arrange some tunes in a way that sounded good but I had to play it the same way every time. So I started learning jazz improvisation.

None of the guys I mentioned above are less than total pros when it comes to playing with others - it seems they all were first master jazzers before starting to play solo.

Because of this my practice for the last few years has really been focused on just learning bebop in a group setting - single lines, comping, etc, while keeping a separate part of practice for chet atkins arrangements / originals. I figured if my single lines are bad then I cant worry about solo polyphonic improv. Is this true? Or would my time be better spent working solely towards solo guitar? I understand to get good at anything you have to focus on that thing and play a lot of it, but it seems futile if I cant even play a single line improv I am happy with.

Any advice?

[pamosmusic]

Seems like there are two questions here:

1. Do you need to learn some jazz improvisation before being able to play improvised interludes for your solo stuff?

The answer to that one is pretty obviously yes. At least if you’re playing in a jazz style. Whatever style you’re working in, you need to be an accomplished improviser and work on it actively to be a strong solo guitar improviser.

2. Do you need to be able to improvise in a group to be able to do this?

No. But I think most people who listen to this kind of stuff can tell the difference between solo guitarists who spend a lot of time playing with others, and those who don’t.

[wolflen]

Again..your trying way too may things at once..

First..you want to "..master jazz"..

well get in line with every musician that has played the style..start with Miles Davis..

Then..Solo guitar...well chord melody can take years to internalize.

Just knowing all the chord inversions and how they work with each other with voice leading in harmonic and melodic ways.

Then using substitutions and still make the melody say "hello" every now and then..punch in some bluesy licks and bring it all back home.

There are many players that can do this..and it takes time and dedication

(btw..I studied with Ted Greene for two years)

So my advice is..pick one direction..study that alone for a good amount of time..in doing so you will gain insight into other styles and
realize each "style" requires is own set of disciplines to bring out its essence.

I remember well..when I first started playing..I thought..Albert King..how hard can that be.. yeah..right

[StringAddict]

Again..your trying way too may things at once..

First..you want to "..master jazz"..

well get in line with every musician that has played the style..start with Miles Davis..

Then..Solo guitar...well chord melody can take years to internalize.

Just knowing all the chord inversions and how they work with each other with voice leading in harmonic and melodic ways.

Then using substitutions and still make the melody say "hello" every now and then..punch in some bluesy licks and bring it all back home.

There are many players that can do this..and it takes time and dedication

(btw..I studied with Ted Greene for two years)

So my advice is..pick one direction..study that alone for a good amount of time..in doing so you will gain insight into other styles and
realize each "style" requires is own set of disciplines to bring out its essence.

I remember well..when I first started playing..I thought..Albert King..how hard can that be.. yeah..right

Sorry, in an effort to not have a wall of text I wrote in shorter hand. I figured this was a more concise version of my last post.

Obviously I didnt mean "master jazz" literally as I know that is a lifetime endeavor. What I meant was, is it futile / a time waste to try to make my practice totally focused on solo improvisation, especially since I want to play a lot of the great american songbook, without fluency in single line improvisation, chord soloing / comping improvisation, etc?

AKA, if I am learning single lines, comping techniques, and chord forms for group based jazz, could I just practice "Chord Melody" to learn the same things but in 5 years have a decent solo repertoire vs in 5 years have maybe stronger single lines and accompaniment in a group but still struggle to play a piece solo?

EDIT:

Also, I understand it takes years. Which is why I am looking for on advice on, is it wise to focus my practice on this now, or first become better grounded in ensemble style jazz. As you said, it is a lot to do both, but if my ultimate goal is solo guitar, am I wasting time learning for a group based style of play?

[StringAddict]

Seems like there are two questions here:

1. Do you need to learn some jazz improvisation before being able to play improvised interludes for your solo stuff?

The answer to that one is pretty obviously yes. At least if you’re playing in a jazz style. Whatever style you’re working in, you need to be an accomplished improviser and work on it actively to be a strong solo guitar improviser.

2. Do you need to be able to improvise in a group to be able to do this?

No. But I think most people who listen to this kind of stuff can tell the difference between solo guitarists who spend a lot of time playing with others, and those who don’t.

Interesting...I suppose you mean like Ted Greene? It's definitely closer to an arranged, more orchestral solo guitar but I wouldn't say the difference between him and someone like Barney Kessel is necessarily bad.

I guess what I am saying is when I first picked up guitar, I wanted to play Gypsy jazz, but others advised me to learn the basics of music and the instrument first. In hindsight, that was good advice. It would have been overwhelming to try to practice arpeggios without knowing the notes on the fretboard...

I'm wondering is it the same for this. Like can I learn "All the Things You Are" solely in the context of solo improv, or will it always fall short compared to learning and understanding the tune from a traditional jazz group setting, and getting competent at that, before putting together the solo piece.

Most solo guitarists who show others dont say you need this as a prerequisite, but i have noticed all of them have great single lines, accompaniment, and regularly play with groups

[pamosmusic]

AKA, if I am learning single lines, comping techniques, and chord forms for group based jazz, could I just practice "Chord Melody" to learn the same things but in 5 years have a decent solo repertoire vs in 5 years have maybe stronger single lines and accompaniment in a group but still struggle to play a piece solo?

okay this is framed the opposite way … this is a hard no. You can’t work only on playing in a group role and then be able to play solo. You have to play solo to be able to play solo.

Maybe you can string together something passable but solo is its own thing

[StringAddict]

okay this is framed the opposite way … this is a hard no. You can’t work only on playing in a group role and then be able to play solo. You have to play solo to be able to play solo.

Maybe you can string together something passable but solo is its own thing

Yeah my question is, is solo something that people tend to get together after really getting the group thing down? All the best solo players have great group role abilities.

Where as I on the other hand can make a decent arrangement, and I look like a good player. But I cannot improvise on it at all, and cannot even mildly alter it otherwise it falls apart. Downstream of that, I am clearly a beginner / intermediate improviser when In a group setting.

Wiser to get good at the group role thing first, or try to force the concepts I am learning into a solo style for a while until it just "happens"?

[pamosmusic]

Yeah my question is, is solo something that people tend to get together after really getting the group thing down?

Which would you rather be playing?

All the best solo players have great group role abilities.

I'm not really sure that's true? Most for sure. There are some like Peter Bernstein who are great solo players but are top of the heap group players. There are folks like Joe Pass who were skilled group improvisers, but very clearly more inspired on the solo front. There are folks like maybe George Van Eps who sound fine in a group setting, but really don't seem to have too much to say** ... and on the other hand, they shine as real virtuosos in a solo setting.

Where as I on the other hand can make a decent arrangement, and I look like a good player. But I cannot improvise on it at all, and cannot even mildly alter it otherwise it falls apart. Downstream of that, I am clearly a beginner / intermediate improviser when In a group setting.

Again, you're conflating two things. Being an improviser and being comfortable in a group setting are not the same thing. You don't need to be a spectacular group player to be an extraordinary solo improviser (again, maybe George Van Eps).

Wiser to get good at the group role thing first, or try to force the concepts I am learning into a solo style for a while until it just "happens"?

It's wiser to get good at the thing you enjoy and want to be doing. There is overlap -- basic single note improvising, basic chord voicings, etc. And any good semi-professional jazzer should be able to comp and take a ride on a standard in a group and should be able to hold down a forty-five minute solo set. But beyond that, who cares? What do you want to do and what do you want to be playing?

** no, I'm not knocking George Van Eps. He's one of the greats.

[StringAddict]

Which would you rather be playing?



I'm not really sure that's true? Most for sure. There are some like Peter Bernstein who are great solo players but are top of the heap group players. There are folks like Joe Pass who were skilled group improvisers, but very clearly more inspired on the solo front. There are folks like maybe George Van Eps who sound fine in a group setting, but really don't seem to have too much to say** ... and on the other hand, they shine as real virtuosos in a solo setting.



Again, you're conflating two things. Being an improviser and being comfortable in a group setting are not the same thing. You don't need to be a spectacular group player to be an extraordinary solo improviser (again, maybe George Van Eps).



It's wiser to get good at the thing you enjoy and want to be doing. There is overlap -- basic single note improvising, basic chord voicings, etc. And any good semi-professional jazzer should be able to comp and take a ride on a standard in a group and should be able to hold down a forty-five minute solo set. But beyond that, who cares? What do you want to do and what do you want to be playing?

** no, I'm not knocking George Van Eps. He's one of the greats.

Okay, thanks, this is what I was looking for. I guess I am still learning the basics that overlap with both in a lot of ways. Especially single line bebop. But where I can I am going to just go for solo playing. I didnt think of Van Eps but you are right, he is definitely better solo. That said I'll probably never come close to his musicality in a group setting either!

[Mick-7]

All the best solo players have great group role abilities.

I'm not really sure that's true?

Definitely not true. Very, very few guitarists can do everything well, usually good to great at one thing, such as group improvisation, and so-so at solo guitar playing, or the reverse. For example, Johnny Smith is one of the greats at chord melody, but to me his single line solos sound like he's running scales.

[Christian Miller]

Many professional players can do many things well and can cover a big range of gigs. There are also specialists who do one thing superbly.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

I am a fingerstyle arrangement (chet atkins) player who got into jazz a few years ago.

I want to play solo improvised guitar one day - perform standards with a loosely arranged head, improvise while harmonizing the tune / keeping a bass line or rhythm, maybe some single line sections or chord heavy sections, etc. Like Tim Lerch, Joe Pass, Joe Diorio, etc

My question to those who have accomplished this - should one work towards this from the start or first master jazz? I ask because previously I couldnt improvise at all. I could arrange some tunes in a way that sounded good but I had to play it the same way every time. So I started learning jazz improvisation.

None of the guys I mentioned above are less than total pros when it comes to playing with others - it seems they all were first master jazzers before starting to play solo.

Because of this my practice for the last few years has really been focused on just learning bebop in a group setting - single lines, comping, etc, while keeping a separate part of practice for chet atkins arrangements / originals. I figured if my single lines are bad then I cant worry about solo polyphonic improv. Is this true? Or would my time be better spent working solely towards solo guitar? I understand to get good at anything you have to focus on that thing and play a lot of it, but it seems futile if I cant even play a single line improv I am happy with.

Any advice?

I think learning solo guitar while different from the skills needed to play jazz in a group teaches one so much about songs and harmony that it is an important part of being a well rounded player.

You don’t have to be Ted Greene to get something out of it or be able make something musical. I’d start with just playing the melody and bass of a standard in two parts on the guitar. That alone teaches you a lot.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kris]

Many professional players can do many things well and can cover a big range of gigs. There are also specialists who do one thing superbly.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

+1
Jazz musicians are often very versatile and therefore become more creative.

[JazzPadd]

In my limited experience playing live jazz in a group setting and as a solo performer, doing both is possible but it depends in part on the aspirations and context.

I have little to no aspirations to master jazz, nor to gig regularly, nor to record, or be in a band. I think it’s more along the lines of being an amateur, playing for what Andy Merrifield refers to as “the joy of doing what you love.”

My main musicking contexts are local jazz jam sessions and local community events. I go to open jams a few times a month and participate in community events a couple times a year, both for fun and for social interaction.

On live group playing, it’s usually an annual set at a street jazz festival with musicians I know from the jam sessions. Each player or singer suggests two tunes. I always pick different tunes each year, and work on tunes specifically for the event.

For the solo sets, there are two community events per year at two local venues and I also pick different tunes for each. Mostly chord melody style for jazz tunes or something akin to what Bill Frisell does with pop music.

For example, one solo set was “Echoes of Jobim” for which I arranged a few tunes for solo guitar. It took a some months to get that together. Same for a “Beatles Suite” at another event.

That adds up to maybe a handful of tunes per year, spending as much time as I can around a busy work life and family life.

This mainly emanates from being an active member of a regional music scene focused mostly on jazz, participating regularly in local jam sessions and open mics. It doesn’t involve mastery nor booking gigs, but I find it fun and very rewarding.

In any case, that’s my contexts and aspirations, and I wish you all the very best in your own.

[mr. beaumont]

I basically learned how to play "jazz" by playing solo.

It is NOT the same as playing with people, and when I started to do that, I learned that lesson VERY quickly, in the "get your feelings hurt" kind of way.

[rpjazzguitar]

I don't think there's a right or wrong way to do it. So, you just have to pick a place to begin.

Trying to play great single line jazz takes most players a lot of work. You don't sound like somebody who is looking for shortcuts, but just in case ...

A fundamental question, or so it seems to me, is if you can scat sing a solo you like. If you can do that, and you can play it instantly, and you're happy with the result, maybe that's all you need to accomplish. The first part of that is a lot of listening and the second part is practicing playing what's in your mind -- instantly. If you're not happy with the lines you find that way, then you may choose the deep dive approach. Again, no one way. I don't know what would be best for that.

One way to build a house would be to buy every material and tool you'll need, work out a plan of attack, lay out all the items and put them together per the plan, working diligently. And build a beautiful house the first time. But maybe that requires a certain kind of mind.

Other people might approach it in a haphazard manner and quickly build a bad house. But then build another and another with the last one being well made.

Either way can work. Which is more efficient may depend more on the builder than the approach. But I'm guessing.

[John A.]

Yeah my question is, is solo something that people tend to get together after really getting the group thing down? All the best solo players have great group role abilities.

Where as I on the other hand can make a decent arrangement, and I look like a good player. But I cannot improvise on it at all, and cannot even mildly alter it otherwise it falls apart. Downstream of that, I am clearly a beginner / intermediate improviser when In a group setting.

Wiser to get good at the group role thing first, or try to force the concepts I am learning into a solo style for a while until it just "happens"?

I’ve never taken a poll on the subject, but my guess would be that most people put more time and effort into learning to comp and solo in group contexts than into developing their solo/chord-melody bag (and most don’t ever develop their solo guitar chops and repertoire to the same degree). That said, it’s not a matter of “first I’m going to learn one, then I'm going to learn the other”. One learns both.

It seems to me that all of these sorts of questions we see here along the lines of “which aspect of jazz guitar should I master first?” (e.g., rhythm, harmony, melody, improvisation, solo playing, repertoire, “language”, chops, etc.) are looking at it wrong. You learn all of them from the beginning and throughout your life. You may stress this aspect or that more than others at various points along the way, but it doesn’t work to treat them as distinct things to be learned separately in sequence.

[starjasmine]

Yes, you are feeling overwhelmed and are looking for some ways to simplify and focus. Trying to OVERsimplify is not the answer, tho.

You don't have to choose. You can (and should) work on your solo stuff along with the rest. As another poster (JazzPadd, I think) indicated, music is a lifetime pursuit, so the idea that you have to make a choice in order to be great at one thing five years from now is a false dichotomy. Five years from now, you'll be better at what you worked on. If none of that was solo guitar, then, well, you won't be any better at solo guitar. If you focus on solo to the exclusion of other things, then, yeah, you'll be a better solo player than you are now, but you won't necessarily be better at the things you ignored.

As Peter suggested, ask yourself what you like doing. If the answer is "both" then work on both. Don't rathole on one thing to the exclusion of others. While you are thinking of this in terms of single-line vs solo, both skills require a growth process that involves many things. At risk of repeating myself, exposure to a comprehensive music curriculum, such as in a community college setting, will show you that there is a skill set common to both of these activities. You need to focus on that in addition to whatever your topmost goals are.

Think of it like what you need as a human being: not just air. not just water. not just food. not just exercise. not just mental stimulation. not just emotional well-being. not just light. not just darkness. not just <fill in the blank.> To say "I'm going to focus on food and water only, screw that other stuff" is not going to work.

Same thing for music. You may have one or two main goals, but a lot of other things must happen below the waterline in support of the skills that the audience sees.

[starjasmine]

I don't think there's a right or wrong way to do it. So, you just have to pick a place to begin.

Trying to play great single line jazz takes most players a lot of work. You don't sound like somebody who is looking for shortcuts, but just in case ...

A fundamental question, or so it seems to me, is if you can scat sing a solo you like. If you can do that, and you can play it instantly, and you're happy with the result, maybe that's all you need to accomplish. The first part of that is a lot of listening and the second part is practicing playing what's in your mind -- instantly. If you're not happy with the lines you find that way, then you may choose the deep dive approach. Again, no one way. I don't know what would be best for that.

One way to build a house would be to buy every material and tool you'll need, work out a plan of attack, lay out all the items and put them together per the plan, working diligently. And build a beautiful house the first time. But maybe that requires a certain kind of mind.

Other people might approach it in a haphazard manner and quickly build a bad house. But then build another and another with the last one being well made.

Either way can work. Which is more efficient may depend more on the builder than the approach. But I'm guessing.

Great point of view, because every house is different. The idea that you can architect or blueprint a musical skill set or career like you'd design and build a house is a really common misperception amongst people just learning to play. While there may be a certain set of common features to shoot for (shelter from the elements, plumbing, electricity, windows) there are so many ways to realize those goals that one can't just "design the perfect house." My perfect house might be horrible for you, and nobody's subjective opinion is incorrect.