Formulaic Improvisation

[GuyBoden]

Formulaic Improvisation

[SoftwareGuy]

I think this applies to other genre of music.

[ragman1]

Then everything you play will be second-hand. The problem, at least the way I see it, is that it'll sound like it. It'll lack vitality and spontaneity.

So the question then is how to solo without imitating. One obviously has to know the musical basics otherwise it'll be nonsense. I think the only way is to hear it and feel it. It has to come from inside and be played more with the heart than the mind. That can't ever be formulised.

[DawgBone]

If there aren't any standardized licks in a given player's pocket then they aren't playing within the genre. If they are all standard licks then it's cliched, predictable, and boring. Or just a straight rip-off. They call those "tribute acts" today, lol. Finding yourself, your sound, is the most difficult part of the journey but doesn't just about every journey start with some level of imitation of the player's we love, and even some of the gear they use? Yes.

[charlieparker]

Then everything you play will be second-hand. The problem, at least the way I see it, is that it'll sound like it. It'll lack vitality and spontaneity.

So the question then is how to solo without imitating. One obviously has to know the musical basics otherwise it'll be nonsense. I think the only way is to hear it and feel it. It has to come from inside and be played more with the heart than the mind. That can't ever be formulised.

Charlie Parker didn't lack spontaneity.

[Christian Miller]

Formulaic Improvisation

Is this from a book?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GuyBoden]

I've heard idiomatic Jazz phrases played in a variety of different ways by Jazz players. Players mix these idiomatic Jazz phrases with their own creative ideas.

There seems to be various levels of creativity during improvisation, Paul Rinzler in his "The Contradictions of Jazz" categorised them into a table:

Ragman is on a quest for "Pure Improvisation" (Type 4 in the above table) and I genuinely wish him good luck with that, he has a good ear.

[Rodney Gene]

I think the blurb is a basic and lucid bit of truth and It sums it up perfectly.

Improvisation is never completely spontaneous, we all quote and cross pollinate ideas. And unless you are a perfect mimic: vitality and spontaneity are not found in the phrases or quotes anyway, but rather the players interpretation, energy, intent and natural variation that is bound to develop over time etc.

Imitation is the foundation for excellence. It precedes innovation or even true creativity. Hard to imagine my own favorite players without their influences. Thank goodness so many players tried to imitate, copy and lift lines off of Charlie Christian

[grahambop]

Is this from a book?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Google finds it on page 14 of this (apparently some kind of thesis about Tubby Hayes):

https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws....5f5d00ff71f853

[grahambop]

Then everything you play will be second-hand.

Well it’s basically how I learned, so of course I don’t agree. Jazz is difficult and there’s no way I could come up with good melodic and well-connected lines if I hadn’t initially learned how to put them together using examples from the masters. Eventually you find you can put your own spin on it and develop your own stuff. I never thought of it as ‘formulas’ though, to me it was just good phrases and ideas. Also figuring stuff out from records is great ear-training, eventually you can hear chord progressions and intervals really well which is very useful when improvising.

Charlie Parker learned Lester Young solos, Jimmy Raney learned Charlie Parker solos, Wes Montgomery learned Charlie Christian solos, etc. so it’s a pretty tried-and-tested approach.

Of course it’s possible someone could turn out purely as a clone, but I think that’s fairly unusual, if not a bit weird.

[James W]

I've heard idiomatic Jazz phrases played in a variety of different ways by Jazz players. Players mix these idiomatic Jazz phrases with their own creative ideas.

There seems to be various levels of creativity during improvisation, Paul Rinzler in his "The Contradictions of Jazz" categorised them into a table:

Ragman is on a quest for "Pure Improvisation" (Type 4 in the above table) and I genuinely wish him good luck with that, he has a good ear.

'Changing the tradition but still comprehensible'. I have to disagree with what it implies - that free jazz isn't comprehensible. In any case, free jazz at least now has its own tradition...

[Rob MacKillop]

[QUOTE=grahambop;1450574]Google finds it on page 14 of this (apparently some kind of thesis about Tubby Hayes):

Anything to do with Tubby Hayes would be worth a look at. England’s greatest.

[grahambop]

Yes I’ve got Simon Spillett’s biography of Tubby, great read.

A couple of years ago I saw Simon’s big band playing all the Tubby Hayes big band arrangements he had been able to source from all over the place, that was an amazing sound. Some had never been recorded (if I remember correctly).

Simon has done an album of these, I must get it sometime!

DEAR TUBBY H | SIMON SPILLETT BIG BAND | Pete Cater

[Aiq]

[mr. beaumont]

"Fomulaic" has a negative connotation...but essentially, it's all been played right? if we're talking within a certain established idiom, like bop.

We are all just re-combiners of sound. It can still be done with a lot of creativity...the notes might be finite, but combined with rhythm the permutations are limitless.

[Mark Kleinhaut]

"Fomulaic" has a negative connotation...but essentially, it's all been played right? if we're talking within a certain established idiom, like bop.

We are all just re-combiners of sound. It can still be done with a lot of creativity...the notes might be finite, but combined with rhythm the permutations are limitless.

Thanks Jeff for saying it so simply. Spot on.

[Christian Miller]

I've heard idiomatic Jazz phrases played in a variety of different ways by Jazz players. Players mix these idiomatic Jazz phrases with their own creative ideas.

There seems to be various levels of creativity during improvisation, Paul Rinzler in his "The Contradictions of Jazz" categorised them into a table:

Ragman is on a quest for "Pure Improvisation" (Type 4 in the above table) and I genuinely wish him good luck with that, he has a good ear.

I will endorse any book called "The Contradictions of Jazz" on the title alone.

In terms of musical organisation I think there's always an element of setting up expectation and subverting them. Pattern, and break from that pattern.

This relies on the audience and musician knowing what the pattern is to start off with. This is where idiom is helpful. TBH idiom happens whether you intend it or not. There is an idiom for 'non-idiomatic (ie free)' improvisation. Squeaky bonk, etc. Keith Tippett told us he liked to buck the trend by playing the odd major sixth chord. And then he'd tell me off for playing jazz lol.

I don't see the C word as being connected to a more 'progressive' idiom anyway. I think that's a cultural bias coming from a generation who grew up with a strong idiom - 'stimulus' to react against. Younger people have a more complex context.

This has nothing inherently to do with improvisation. I think the improv/composition/performance are not clearly distinguished in jazz and possibly other musical traditions and may be more a hang up of 20th century classical performance and copyright law than anything else. For everyone else it's a spectrum.

'Formulaic improv' is an example of that. The chunks maybe considered repertoire of a kind.

[GuyBoden]

Thanks Jeff for saying it so simply. Spot on.

Personally, I think that the original post below encapsulates my experience of the Formulaic Jazz Improvising (FJI) approach succinctly. Or simply, the opposite of how you, Mark Kleinhaut play Jazz.
(Formulaic: meaning a predictable pattern; imitative, not original.)

[James W]

In the context of Stockhausen's music, there is nothing pejorative about Formula(ic) music -

Formula composition - Wikipedia

[Mark Kleinhaut]

Personally, I think that the original post below encapsulates my experience of the Formulaic Jazz Improvising (FJI) approach succinctly. Or simply, the opposite of how you, Mark Kleinhaut play Jazz.
(Formulaic: meaning a predictable pattern; imitative, not original.)

Hi Guy, I don’t think I’m opposite to this at all. In fact, I’ve done exactly what is stated in the original post, TO A DEGREE. Long ago I heard Clark Terry’s famous quote “Imitate, Assimilate, Innovate” and I took it to heart that everyone without exception goes through these 3 phases of development. I do believe too many folks get lost in the first and second phases and that innovation is perceived as some rarified thing that only a special few can attain. That’s BS (methinks). The problem is simply the mistaken belief that the 3 phases are not only separate but also sequential. So, no innovation for you until everything before is completely mastered. Guess what, mastery is an ever expanding goal post. Nobody teaches how to innovate so it’s easy to put it off. The only thing I did different than lots of folks is that I worked backwards at many things and skip around, like starting a book in the middle and working your way to both ends.

[ragman1]

I suppose I ought to reply to all this but I don't really want to. It means the same old endless thing again.

There are only so many notes regulated by theory and all that. Add that to the many varieties of rhythm, expression, different note lengths, styles... it can go on forever.

So that's what we use when composing a tune or improvising. Plus, of course, there's the stuff that works and the stuff that doesn't. And we're not going to play silly stuff because it's absurd,.

So in one sense, naturally, there's nothing new in it at all. But what is known to us can be rearranged endlessly, which is what we do whatever the style of music is.

One could say all that is a formula. Of course it is, otherwise we'd be lost. Not the free-jazzers but that's another matter.

So there is what one might call legitimate formulation. I mean, when we play the blues, for example, that's definitely a formula yet consider how many totally different blues songs there are, same sounds, same licks, etc, but different in their own way.

So when I say formulaic I'm not talking about that. By playing formulaically I'm talking about the mindset behind the playing rather than the available content. A mind that wants to be safe, is fearful of making mistakes, will stick to what it knows, afraid to depart from it. That inevitably robs the music they're presenting of any sense of freedom. I think that's indisputable.

So to really express, improvise, there must be a certain freedom and no fear. It doesn't mean they won't copy the bebop style, or the bossa style, or the blues style, and so on, it means they're not straitjacketed by rigid boundaries or inhibited from trying new things out. Nor does it mean just playing any old nonsense thinking they're being 'creative'.

Does that answer it more or less?

[kris]

Why doesn"t this whole discussion touch on the technical aspect of jazz playing....?
Proficiency in each musical instrument makes it easier to play jazz music.
Once you have mastered the instrument, creativity comes easily.
Playing at the right tempos teaches humility and exposes technical shortcomings in playing the instrument.
Playing jazz is quite a challenge.

[GuyBoden]

Why doesn"t this whole discussion touch on the technical aspect of jazz playing....?
Proficiency in each musical instrument makes it easier to play jazz music.
Once you have mastered the instrument, creativity comes easily.
Playing at the right tempos teaches humility and exposes technical shortcomings in playing the instrument.
Playing jazz is quite a challenge.

Good point, learning the instrument is an essential and related topic, but a different topic, maybe covered in other threads.

Kris, you can play very well, so how did you learn the Jazz language?

Did you copy Jazz licks from the great Jazz recordings and use them in your playing?

[grahambop]

Learning some bebop heads is good for technique, I remember trying to figure out how to play e.g. Donna Lee or Scrapple from the Apple, that took a lot of building up dexterity in both left and right hand.

After that, playing complex lines in 8th notes became a bit easier, at least technique-wise.

[Mark Kleinhaut]

Once you have mastered the instrument, creativity comes easily..

Kris, I isolated this one sentence from your comments, so perhaps it’s unfair to take this out of context, but the idea you express here is one I completely disagree with due to the implication that mastery on an instrument is prerequisite to creativity. I would suggest it’s actually the opposite