Anyone else experience this?

[John A.]

On second listening I'm nearly always unhappy with something I recorded. It's very difficult to have perspective on oneself, and one almost invariably notices the flaws/mistakes more than the high points or the overall quality. I've also noticed that no matter how much I think I've advanced over the years, new me doesn't sound all that much different from old me. My take on that is that subjectively large improvements in understanding and execution yielding incremental outcomes is just the nature of the beast.

[pamosmusic]

Do you know Lee Child, the author of the Jack Reacher novels? His thing was that he never plotted out his books. He had his main character, established a backdrop, dropped him in some troublesome situation, and then wrote the story as it occurred to him. He never know what was going to happen next. He lived it as he went along; he was Jack Reacher.

Result: his books had an extraordinary sense of excitement that made them unputdownable. The first one shot to number one and so did the next 23 or 24 in a row.

Compare that with authors who plotted their books. They worked out the beginning, middle and end. Thereafter it was just a matter, a chore some would say, of getting the story down on paper. Which is why they weren't bad but, compared to Lee Child's style, were dull in comparison. And everyone accepted it because they'd got used to reading that kind of thing.

His agent used to say 'It would be much better if you made this bit happen before this bit'. So he said 'It might be better... but it didn't!'.

Lots and lots and lots of authors don’t plot.

All the good ones edit mercilessly.

So I’m not really sure the analogy is useful here.

[pamosmusic]

Also for what it’s worth, John Grisham is an author of suspenseful pop fiction and writes hundred page outlines before he sits down to write chapter one.

writers of thrillers and popular fiction tend to be the MOST likely to plot.

[CliffR]

On second listening I'm nearly always unhappy with something I recorded. It's very difficult to have perspective on oneself, and one almost invariably notices the flaws/mistakes more than the high points or the overall quality. I've also noticed that no matter how much I think I've advanced over the years, new me doesn't sound all that much different from old me. My take on that is that subjectively large improvements in understanding and execution yielding incremental outcomes is just the nature of the beast.

Yes! Sometimes I'll listen back to recordings I made a few years ago and think: not sure I can play that well anymore .

[ragman1]

Lots and lots and lots of authors don’t plot.

Quite right. I chose Lee Child because he's the best selling one. His friend Stephen King doesn't plot and, strangely, the brilliant Elmore Leonard doesn't either (as far as I know).

the analogy is useful here.

Perhaps not perfect but I'm sure there's an analogy somewhere. In any case, in my view anyway, improvisation is no longer real improvisation when one is simply regurgitating what has been formulated beforehand. A computer could do that.

[ragman1]

Stringing riffs together (no matter how subtly, artfully, cleverly and intelligently) is not artful improvisation

Quite.

[ragman1]

third serving of the mashed potatoes

Wow. Where is this place?

[pamosmusic]

Quite right. I chose Lee Child because he's the best selling one. His friend Stephen King doesn't plot and, strangely, the brilliant Elmore Leonard doesn't either (as far as I know).

Sure but plenty of better selling authors do plot. And if the standard is how well they sell I think you want to keep that analogy as far away from Jazz as you can.

Perhaps not perfect but I'm sure there's an analogy somewhere. In any case, in my view anyway, improvisation is no longer real improvisation when one is simply regurgitating what has been formulated beforehand. A computer could do that.

Hate to break it to you but computers can assemble melodies from pitch collections without licks as well.

[Christian Miller]

@OP Yeah this process is familiar to me haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CliffR]

@OP Yeah this process is familiar to me haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I seem to remember you once saying you'd found the opposite to be true sometimes as well? You'd listen back later to a performance and think it better than you originally thought?

[emanresu]

Hm. I had a piece done - recorded and edited. Gave it to a mixing guy, had to reject the result.
Tried another. He generally did well.. but I heard snares being way too front. Sounding nice, but I almost told him to turn them down a bit. Struggled with it for days.. Then decided to leave them as they came.
I disliked the outcome for a year but whenever I listen to it again, now I like it. So weird. Psyhchopathical snaring, amuzing

Another was.. I recorded the whole thing - guitar, bass and drums - myself. It was some kind of rock or roll. But didn't want a clinical sound.
So I went with loosey goosey drums. Tried to keep the hihat tight, but all else most of the time just like mad max car over an apocalyptic desert.
In a few weeks before mixing, I was not sure anymore.. thought maybe it was way too loose and maybe should make a more correct version.
But again, after mixing/mastering, took some months and I am completely fine with it.

Maybe, try your best, do 10 takes, pick the one that kinda talks to you the best, then let it get mixed well, then forget about it for a few months and only then listen it critically?

[pauln]

It's universal and completely normal. There's also the other side of the coin...
I can't tell you how many times this has happened to me:

- perform a tune that gets recorded
- think my judgement and execution was flawless but not quite so regarding the drums and/or bass
- listen to the recording surprised to note the judgement and execution of drums and bass flawless
- notice my playing had some "weaknesses" (I don't make mistakes)

[ragman1]

Sure but plenty of better selling authors do plot. And if the standard is how well they sell I think you want to keep that analogy as far away from Jazz as you can

But I don't care how many or which authors do such and such. One example is good enough to make the point. There's a great difference in performing preset formulas in a solo, and it sounding like it, and playing something that flows freely. As I'm sure you know very well :-)

Hate to break it to you but computers can assemble melodies from pitch collections without licks as well.

Of course they can, but it's mechanical, not human, and machines are neither intelligent nor creative. Thank god.

[CliffR]

Hm. I had a piece done - recorded and edited. Gave it to a mixing guy, had to reject the result.
Tried another. He generally did well.. but I heard snares being way too front. Sounding nice, but I almost told him to turn them down a bit. Struggled with it for days.. Then decided to leave them as they came.
I disliked the outcome for a year but whenever I listen to it again, now I like it. So weird. Psyhchopathical snaring, amuzing

Another was.. I recorded the whole thing - guitar, bass and drums - myself. It was some kind of rock or roll. But didn't want a clinical sound.
So I went with loosey goosey drums. Tried to keep the hihat tight, but all else most of the time just like mad max car over an apocalyptic desert.
In a few weeks before mixing, I was not sure anymore.. thought maybe it was way too loose and maybe should make a more correct version.
But again, after mixing/mastering, took some months and I am completely fine with it.

Maybe, try your best, do 10 takes, pick the one that kinda talks to you the best, then let it get mixed well, then forget about it for a few months and only then listen it critically?

Sounds like you have much higher standards than me . I usually record three takes and pick the best. It’s usually the third. After that I tend to get worse.

[Christian Miller]

It’s best to ignore the self appointed improvisation police

Truly free improvisation is a lofty goal, and how important it is varies from player to player. And licks are a good way in (though uI doubt most of us would ultimately like to sound like lick players long term.)

The ultimate aim as I see it, is music. The musician’s process is their own business, in a way.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

I seem to remember you once saying you'd found the opposite to be true sometimes as well? You'd listen back later to a performance and think it better than you originally thought?

Yep. I’m not a good judge at the time


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James W]

But I don't care how many or which authors do such and such. One example is good enough to make the point. There's a great difference in performing preset formulas in a solo, and it sounding like it, and playing something that flows freely. As I'm sure you know very well :-)

There is a venerable strain of jazz in which using pre-arranged melodic formulas is absolutely integral if you want to actually succeed in playing it.

[emanresu]

Sounds like you have much higher standards than me . I usually record three takes and pick the best. It’s usually the third. After that I tend to get worse.

No!
I do many takes for a very good reason - I am just not a good player.

[GuyBoden]

Hemingway Quote "The first draft of anything is shit, so don’t expect yours to be any better. The most important thing is to keep going and get to the end. Don’t worry about editing for now; the first draft is just for you, a guide. Once you’ve completed it, you’ll have a whole novel. Then you can start worrying about editing and revising it."

For Jazz, maybe the Editor is YOU.

[pamosmusic]

… and machines are neither intelligent nor creative. Thank god.

Humans too, sometimes

[CliffR]

The plotters versus pantsers novelist analogy doesn't really hold for another reason: even meticulous plotters are not simply regurgitating formulas when they come to write the novel. I dare say Joyce and Salinger knew exactly where they were going with their masterworks, for example. There's much more to writing than mere plot. Funnily enough, I watched a Lee Child youtube video recently when he basically said not to worry about the plot.

[Phil59]

Also for what it’s worth, John Grisham is an author of suspenseful pop fiction and writes hundred page outlines before he sits down to write chapter one.

writers of thrillers and popular fiction tend to be the MOST likely to plot.

Yes, and while his plots are good, his writing is not top tier.

[lawson-stone]

Wow. Where is this place?

The "Golden Corral" is a chain the US that is an all-you-can-eat buffet. It's exactly the kind of place that European tourists during the World Cup have been raving about on YouTube and elsewhere. Classic middle-class American over-indulgence but fun. Not at all the place you'd expect to find an open jazz jam session...

[digger]

Hi Cliff

Interesting thread.

I think what you're feeling is probably what we all feel, whatever our level. I'm never happy with anything I've ever recorded, and I know many other - very good musicians - who say the same. It's so easy to focus on the errors, hesitations, flubs, stumbles, and ignore the good stuff.

I always enjoy listening to your playing. You always have a great tone - and that's very important and shouldn't be taken for granted (I remember hearing someone talking once about the great orators / great speakers of history and to imagine how their finest moments would have gone down had their voices been like Daffy Duck's?) There are many players who don't have great tone and, though they may be playing at a higher level, I don't enjoy listening to them. Tone is equally as important as notes, maybe more so. So don't discount that part of your playing. Likewise, there are always great melodic moments in your solos, neat turns of phrase - all very good, and pleasant to listen to.

I guess the question is, what is your goal, and who are you trying to please / impress? If it's the folks here, then that's a very tough audience. You don't have to dig very far to discover some people here can be quite disparaging about many a great (professional) player. But it all comes down to personal taste (more about which in a mo'). If you're trying to please yourself, then why not set yourself some easier goals to start with - maybe a single chorus? I know a guy who's YT channel is full (I mean thousands of videos) of short segments of solos. He's got quite a stellar reputation but we never hear an intro, a developing solo, and ending, we just hear 20 nor 30 seconds from the middle of what may have been a ten minute jam. It can't be too difficult to cherry-pick just a few seconds, post every day, and voila - everyone thinks you're wonderful. Whereas you're playing several choruses. So why not play one? Play the melody, fool around with the melody, drop in a few licks in the gaps, and then hit STOP. Once you've nailed one chorus, move onto two - maybe the first one as outlined above, and then and really give a second chorus your everything. You don't have to play extended solos at this stage. On the other hand, iIf you're trying to impress a non-jazz audience, then just the melody will be fine. If you want to hang at a jam session, then... the melody will be fine, with a few variations and some licks thrown in. I know this focus on licks doesn't go down well here, which harks back to who are you trying to please? Maybe there is someone here who's playing you love and whose admirition and respect you long for. That's fine, too. But in which case don't worry about the others.

So onto taste - what do you like? It's your solo. It's your improvisation. These aren't necessarily the same thing - and they don't have to be just because someone here says so. I mean, to join in the literary (or rather popular fiction) tangent going on here, I think Lee Child is awful. I've read many of his books and I can't put them down (luckily they're four for a pound at the charity shop) and yet I've never finished one feeling good. The endings, without exception, suck big time. The reason (in my view) is because he hasn't planned them. Now, others on this thread - and many a billion people in the general populace - love him. That doesn't make them right and me wrong. It's just taste. Planning a solo, with a few licks (any of which might be used - so it's not the same as composing a solo) or a few motifs that might be explored, repeated, twisted inside out, and with, say, a general idea of increasing tempo / intensity as the chorus progresses might be a great way to come up with a chorus or two that pleases you (others won't like it - but now I'm repeating a motif).

Derek

[charlieparker]

So, I'm not looking for advice, or reassurance. I'm just interested to know if this is a common experience, or what others' experiences might be.

This is certainly not the first time this has happened to me. Last night I recorded a couple of improv takes over the tune I'm currently working on, Sunny Side Of The Street. The first was not great, but I was really pleased with the second. I made the changes - mostly - felt I had some motivic development, and even matched the way the intensity of the backing track changed throughout the song. Flushed with success, I was all ready to post it. But then I thought, wait, keep your powder dry; practice it more and you can make an even better recording. Well, thankfully I did choose not to post it. This morning, I listened back to it, and I could hear all the hesitancy, bad timing, bum notes etc etc. More and more I'm beginning to think I'm just not cut out for this hobby! I mean, I do feel like I'm continually improving. I can't remember the last time I felt like I'd hit a plateau. But as an old friend used to say, taste always exceeds technique. The more I grow, the more critical I become of what I can do.

How do you folks experience this?

Yeah. That happens to me a lot but maybe you are being too harsh. Even Pass and Holdsworth were hyper-critical of their playing.