Do you have worked out solos for jazz standards?

[JohnW400]

From my experience , after playing a song many many times you start to incorporate what sounded good from previous solos.

We've all "aha" moments in a solo where something nice pops out.

I think we tend to remember those things and eventually we wind up with a
'shell' or outline. Of course that shell is (or should be) constantly changing as we evolve as musicians

After playing Blue Bossa 300+ times in 35 years I do have some 'pet licks' that pop up now and agian in that tune. Although not usually in the exact spot nor preceded or followed by more pet licks (hopefully)

Writing out your solo really belongs in other musical genres where your audience expects to hear the song note for note like the recording

[Gramps]

As a certified "Jazz Hack" I like to learn a few transcriptions of solos to standards and then mix and match sections of them when I solo. This allows me to learn what some of my favorite players have done and gives me a starting point to develope my own solos that will vary each time I play.

[Kman]

Wow, it might be time for everyone to switch to decaf. I liked the OP's original question (A lot of great jazz players work out their solos note for note. I was just wondering if you have a solo you play everytime you play a standard. Lets say someone calls up autumn leaves. Have you worked out a solo?) and was looking forward to reading the different response from the many talented musicians that participate in this forum. I'm certain different situations lead to different approaches.

I do not. I think it would get very boring doing that. The great thing about jazz is that it is a moment in time that is captured and it is unique, so if you are playing the same thing over and over you lose that.

[mr. beaumont]

I do not. I think it would get very boring doing that. The great thing about jazz is that it is a moment in time that is captured and it is unique, so if you are playing the same thing over and over you lose that.

Exactly.

That's why I play jazz! My inability to do anything the same way twice is a virtue!

[ESCC]

Exactly.

That's why I play jazz! My inability to do anything the same way twice is a virtue!

PERFECT, "I call it jazz".

[Reg]

Hey SRS5 sorry I missed your musical examples... those are not Jazz, those are shows, I would hope there only playing them for the money or to have other options. I can feel the pain...

[TH]

While we're on this thread, let me throw in a really helpful experience I've had. Before I began at music school, I'd worked on solos mostly in real time, working on phrases and figures during practicing, putting them into solos in playing situations. I had an ensemble class and we got a stack of standards that we worked our way through- but our assignment each week was a written solo for one tune; our choice, we didn't have to perform it, just write out a solo as a composition-1 to 2 choruses.
I'd never done this before, never forced myself to bother. The process changed me forever; stepped me up to a whole new level. I became aware of how and why I'd use rhythmic and syncopated figures, for example. I'd consciously use triplets to create a motivic section. I'd use melodic devices to set up a harmonic chordal section... you get the idea.
Having the time to actually write out a really thoughtful solo allowed me the consciousness to put these devices into my real time soloing, anticipate sections and developments and think compositionally in real time. Now I try never to allow a solo to get the better of me, to be caught playing something I regret because I didn't have the space reserved for a good idea.
David

[Reg]

Lets hear something... post us a sample.

[ingreen]

When a jazz group is really going, the soloist is not the only person improvising. The whole group is collectively, listening, feeding off each other, pushing the soloist and the soloist pushes back. There's nothing else like that, at such a high level of complexity, in music. It's why I play jazz, because that's as rewarding as it gets.

I agree completely. That's how you get the fresh, energetic, driving feel in a group. You can't do it with some dead thing you've rehearsed to death (imo).

I've been blessed in that, from my earliest days, I've played with a load of talented musicians who were better players than I was. I still want to play with better players, it forces you to raise your own level of playing.

But in those groups no one I know played a "canned" solo. We would have tossed them off the stand. Even if a guy fell back on the same licks too often, he was sure to hear about it.

I think a player will, over time find paths through a given song that work for him. But, along that path, good players are always trying new things, stretching out. Otherwise they'd bore themselves to death. I love musical surprises, so I've never written out licks or solos. And my memory is kind of shot, so I'm always trying new stuff. As long as I know the changes to a tune I don't worry about the solo.

If you're going to play a rehearsed, written out solo, you might as well go play for strippers. You don't have to be creative there, either.

I wouldn't want to play with musicians who played the same tired cliches night after night. Gad, that would be too painful to bear.

[ingreen]

Also Mr. B,
You said the greats wouldn't work out a solo. I think otherwise. If you were considered one of the greatest guitarist, would you want to risk your job and rep by sounding bad because you had a bad day?

Had to respond to this quote. One of my best friends is a terrific jazz pianist I've known for decades. Long ago we had a talk about this subject, canned solos. He said he tries to play something fresh and does not compose, then memorize, his solos. In fact, he hates people who do so.

He said it's like with grandma's cookies: you might have preferred the cookies she baked yesterday, but THESE are the cookies she baked today.

==

As far as second sentence is concerned I would say this: the musicians I know would have greater respect for a musician who had a bad night, but was always trying new things. They would hate a player of rehearsed solos. Why even go out to hear him? a recording would do just as well ...

[cosmic gumbo]

I remember reading a Freddie Hubbard interview, talking about coming to NYC as a young turk and covering standard tunes with note for note copies of Miles' solos. One night someone came up and told him Miles was stopping in to hear him, so he knew he had to play some new stuff. After the gig, Miles introduced his manager to Freddie, and got him his first record deal.

[bako]

No, I try to memorize how to play but not what.

Sonny Rollins (2 takes ST. Thomas)

[S_R_S5]

Even if you have a solo written out, who said it wont come out differently? There is no way to exactly have the same tone, timing, pick pressure or whatever other variables there are. Also I personally don't see a difference between "jazz" and a "concert" as described earlier.

[jonotes]

I can't beleive the artists you mention play the same solo every time. The nature of jazz is to be spontaneous and have a musical conversation with your fellow players. Sure, there are certain phrases I will use again and again on a particular tune because I know they work, but the ones that come as a surprise or are inspired by something someone else played are often the most exciting and satisfying. Transcribing solos and playing them over is a good exercise but I don't feel it has a place in live jazz improvisation. Too many players spend too much time learning to play other players solos. Once again, a good way to learn but you have to find your own voice. Wes Montgomery never played the head the same way twice and certainly never his solo and he was without question one of the greatest. He learned by copying Charlie Christian solos but went on to develop his own style.

[mr. beaumont]

Even if you have a solo written out, who said it wont come out differently? There is no way to exactly have the same tone, timing, pick pressure or whatever other variables there are. Also I personally don't see a difference between "jazz" and a "concert" as described earlier.

Did you see my earlier post in which I showed that the solos in the clips by Benson and Metheny were not the same as other versions?

SHows-- often for TV or other "live" recorded output, time limit put on tune, everybody knows what everybody's doing. Audience may not be "jazz friendly" (awards shows, cruise ships, etc.) Solo may or may not be worked out, but it's time parameter is likely set.

[ronjazz]

Johnny Smith improvised his solos.

That's a fact.

[mr. beaumont]

actually, I have read interviews with johnny where he did say, at least for some recordings, that his solos were figured out ahead of time.

Johnny also didn't consider himself a jazz player. I'd still consider going with one kidney if I could play like him though...

[ronjazz]

Well, I've read everything I can find in connection with Smith, and have never come across that statement, perhaps you can send me in the right direction. I do have alternate takes of some tunes, and the solos are entirely different, and, in the scheme of things, speaking generally, it would be rather difficult to work out more than a few bars given the insane schedule he had of studio work and performances. In any event, as you have said, jazz is improv, or it isn't jazz.

[mr. beaumont]

I'll have to look around for it--hearsay evidence, but I'm pretty sure it was someone who claimed to know Johnny on allaboutjazz.com

The gist was, Johnny liked things on record to sound clean and rehearsed, so he'd have a real plan going in--if not completely worked out-- particularly on shorter solo spots and when he was a sideman.

THis of course has balooned into somewhat of an internet legend as well...

Johnny could improvise, however, the man could BLOW.

[S_R_S5]

So is this more about where jazz is located instead of the music itself? say you go to a jazz club and you play improvised solos then You go on a TV show and play a planned out solo. Same style of music; different setting.

[mr. beaumont]

I don't think it's that cut and dry. Nothing is.

I actually disagree with Reg that the Benson and Metheny clips you linked were just "shows," they were improvising the solos. At least they were different from the originals, and different from what I could find of other versions.

In any controlled environment (big band, radio/tv program/ recording) you might have at least a time parameter set on your solo...or things like trading fours or 8's might be talked about ahead of time...I'm not saying every jazz solo you hear is a completely off the cuff free improvisation.

I asked you a bunch of questions on the last page...could you answer those so we can get an idea as to what you think improvisation is in a jazz context? It would really help clear up some stuff...

[TH]

The gist was, Johnny liked things on record to sound clean and rehearsed, so he'd have a real plan going in--if not completely worked out-- particularly on shorter solo spots and when he was a sideman.

I'd read old articles where Johnny said he had written arrangements ahead of time for some recordings. He was the one that played the guitar part for the premier of Schoenberg's orchestral work, by the way.
The liner notes from the incredible Mosiac collection offers some insights: "One of the criticisms leveled at this group in some circles was that the music was over-arranged, but a performance like this one strikes a perfect balance between writing and improvisation. ... Nice Work If You Can Get It gives everyone a chance to blow" [... and there is more accounting of improvised Smith solos on that particular session] -of the Nov 1952 Getz sessions.

May 1954 sessions "All these quartet (and subsequent trio) performances are less arranged than the quintet items and give us a chance to hear more of Smith's improvisatory prowess."

The liner notes are full of documentation of every session and does indicate that Johnny Smith was fully adept at real time improvisation on and off recordings, and knew how to arrange at the highest level, written solos when he chose to or felt it was appropriate for larger ensemble situations. There is a LOT of improvised soloing on his small group recordings.
And the fact that his pre-arranged work is virtually indistinguishable from his improv work points to the fact that his composer's ear was always functioning any time he played.

Hope this adds some light.
David

[mr. beaumont]

There is a LOT of improvised soloing on his small group recordings.

That would be my assumption as well. That write up does shed light, thanks for posting.

[S_R_S5]

So op, was it just not clear where the improv starts on these tunes? Did you think improv had to be completely different than the structure of the tune? Or were you yanking our chain a bit? You gotta understand, a comment like you made in 5he opening post is basically an indictment of jazz as a fraud. I'm sorry to be so nitpicky about debunking the comment, it's just that a lot of beginners read this board, and I don't want to make jazz any more confusing to them.

was it just not clear where the improv starts on these tunes? It is clear.

Did you think improv had to be completely different than the structure of the tune? Funny question. No! Some people use the melody and play around with it to make their solo. It doesn't have to be any different.

You gotta understand, a comment like you made in 5he opening post is basically an indictment of jazz as a fraud. - sounds like a jazz purest.

It is very simple. I consider anything that is not part of the written melody of the piece to be a solo. (unless its multiple instruments, which is normally written/worked out.) Improvisation no doubt is making it up in the moment, but a solo isn't.

[mr. beaumont]

Okay...so then did you listen to the original recordings of the tunes you posted? Did you listen to multiple versions of Breezin' like I did?

The solos are different. So the videos you posted are not evidence of the claim you make in your OP.

Jazz purist? Maybe. If thinking that improvisation is one of the things that makes jazz unique makes me a purist, then purist I am.