Building a jazz vocabulary

[AmundLauritzen]

To say that Tal didn't transcribe simply isn't true. Well, if your definition of transcription is writing it down then it's probably true.
But Tal learned Charlie Christian and Lester Young solos and from there he built the foundation of his own style.

What makes his take on the language unique though had more to do with physiological aspects, and early influences. He had extremely large hands, so he fingered lines with bigger stretches, allowing him to do wide intervallic leaps. He also started out on an ukulele tuned like mandolin. When he switched to guitar, he had already worked out chords on the top four strings, so he used his thumb on the bottom two.

So his uniqueness results from his own interpretations, and has nothing to do with not transcribing.

There is also this common misconception that transcribing will make you sound like whoever you're transcribing which is the biggest load of crap I've ever heard.
One MUST learn the language to be able to play convincingly in bebop oriented jazz styles.

[FatJeff]

Just because some great players didn't transcribe (much or at all), does not invalidate transcription as a method or a tool. Clark Terry is a great player and he advocates transcription above all else. So what?

I think people make excuses. Maybe they don't want to put the work into transcribing (because it is work, believe me), and they might not want to have to extract little tidbits and take them through all keys in order to assimilate them. My question then becomes, how do you get new language elements in the first place? Make them up? Fine. But what if you are not yet advanced enough to even know how to do that?

And another element of transcription of others' solos: they will undoubtedly come up with ideas that you will never come up with.

[fep]

FatJeff, Prince Planet, Jensl, AmundLaurintzen, I'm curious how much of your practice time is made up of transcribing.

How much have your practiced/played this week and how much of it has been transcribing?

[FatJeff]

I currently have a 2:15 daily regimen, and the first 30 minutes of that is transcription. This includes (depending on the "phase" I'm at for a certain piece) any of: listening to, singing along with, playing along with on the guitar, or writing down.

[JensL]

FatJeff, Prince Planet, Jensl, AmundLaurintzen, I'm curious how much of your practice time is made up of transcribing.

How much have your practiced/played this week and how much of it has been transcribing?

I have spent only a few hours practicing this week and none of that was transcribing. I transcribe in periods when I come across something I want to check out, the last two were Mark Turner and Lage Lund.
There was a JakeAcci line I wanted to check out because it sounded really hip, but I did not get around to it yet

Jens

[fep]

I guess I did a little bit this week. I learned Jeff's (MrBueamont) tune in progress. I suppose that counts.

Oh yeah, just a minute ago I listened to Overjoyed by Espernaza Spalding and after that I figured out the melody. I suppose that counts.

Perhaps I do this more than I thought.

And btw:

[JensL]

Learning entire solos without paying any attention to how you can use smaller portions of it in your playing is pretty useless.

I guess my experience with transcribing is that I've learned or extracted som melodic or harmonic concepts more than actual licks.

My phrasing and swing feel has been developed mostly by playing along with solo's Iv'e learned and not written down, and not analyzed. Probably mostly by learning Smoking at the Half note. I think that is a very important part of jazz playing and that is (for me anyway) by far the best way to develop it.

Jens

[princeplanet]

FatJeff, Prince Planet, Jensl, AmundLaurintzen, I'm curious how much of your practice time is made up of transcribing.

How much have your practiced/played this week and how much of it has been transcribing?

To be honest, I'm doing very little transcription these past few months, but did a ton these last few years, mainly sax players, Maclean, Griffin, Bird, Rollins, Adderley etc. I'm now going through lines I like and creating new ideas and lines from them, to the point you'd never know where they sprang from, and yes, the ideas I end up with I would never have happened upon without the transcriptions as a catalyst.

I don't know why we have people here warning against transcribing without taking things a step or 3 further, seems everyone here is into transcribing as a stepping stone for the own thing.

[coolvinny]

FatJeff, Prince Planet, Jensl, AmundLaurintzen, I'm curious how much of your practice time is made up of transcribing.

How much have your practiced/played this week and how much of it has been transcribing?

You didn't ask me (I'm not offended), but I'll answer anyway: Maybe 10% of my total practice time on average, but more like 90% over the past week (because I'm trying to learn the original version of Bird's "Confirmation" and it is a b!tch). I don't 'transcribe daily' but I work on language daily and this I do not consider "transcribing"...trying to "make it mine" after I've learned it by ear I consider "vocabulary building". I actually think that 'transcribing' should be viewed as a subset of "vocabulary building', and I imagine that over time it becomes more of a springboard for ideas than a pure learning of licks.

And to clarify, the only reason I'd write down anything I transcribe is to figure out how it relates to the harmony and the rhythm (pick up notes, etc) so that I can better figure out how to use it in my own playing. But I'm finding that the more I transcribe, the better I get at keeping track of that without having to write down the 'transcription'.

[fep]

Sorry Vinny, I was trying to remember who was advocating transcribing. My memory didn't serve me well. I'll chalk it up to chemo brain (I shouldn't be able to get away with that as it was over a year ago, but it works for me )

[AmundLauritzen]

FatJeff, Prince Planet, Jensl, AmundLaurintzen, I'm curious how much of your practice time is made up of transcribing.

How much have your practiced/played this week and how much of it has been transcribing?

I try to work in new licks in whatever tune I'm working on. At least a new lick a week. Sometimes two or three.
If I'm working on something specific on a tune like "Just Friends" I'll usually listen to renditions of my favourite players and listen for licks that use that concept.
Say I want to work on using space more effectively, I'll listen to a player who uses that in a way I want to play. Like Jim Hall or Miles.
But I'll rarely transcribe entire solos. 2-4 bars is usually enough. It helps me internalize it better so I can move on quicker to transcribe new material.

So to me it's always related to whatever I'm working on at the moment. I mix it up with my own improvisation so I get a healthy balance of others influence and my own ideas.

[JakeAcci]

To me this is a very, very interesting discussion. Kojo's points are very interesting, good food for thought.

Everyone is on their own journey here, and I think in these threads sometimes we might lose track of the fact that people have different goals and different tastes, as well as, of course, different strengths and weaknesses. I never felt comfortable improvising strong melodies on the guitar until I did transcription. That's just me. Maybe I just wasn't being careful enough. Maybe my melodies still aren't strong but I just feel more confident in them because I feel they relate to famous music that I've transcribed. Maybe some other factor.

I'll pose these as further thought-food in this discussion:

1. Desire to be original

2. Desire to be "jazzy."

I think different people have a different level of interest in sounding like "authentic jazz."

#1 and #2 combine to be a question somewhat like "Do you want to be able to play in the style of famous jazz musicians, or do you want to sound as much like yourself as possible, even if that means some criticism that your playing isn't authentic, isn't 'jazz' enough, etc?"

And that's a big can of worms because on a professional plane that can mean two very different things...do you want to be an artist - a unique artist at that - or do you want to be a player who can sit in with whoever and swing like crazy and sit right there in the meat of the genre?

I'm not saying it's as simple as the idea that transcription brings you to one place and not-transcription brings you someplace else, but I do think it's interesting stuff to think about.

(2a...desire to avoid criticism...Kojo's right, transcribing is a good way to present an audience with something they have already heard before and understand...coming up with your own language means isolating some people and possibly getting a more negative reaction....)

3. Vocabulary building:

I think we can all agree that if someone memorizes every possible scale and arpeggio (and rhythmic permutation, or whatever) for five years and then gets up on stage to play over "Stella" that he will probably not sound very good or very "musical." (might be quite entertaining, though!)

There has to be some method (even if accidental) of building a musical vocabulary. Transcription is one method, but practicing scales up and down or reading books is NOT. However, composing one's own lines is a method, simply being immersed in the act of improvisation on a regular basis is a method.

I usually recommend transcription as a means of vocabulary building when the person I'm talking to spends all their time practicing scales and arpeggios up and down. But a good point is brought up here that there are other (possibly superior, or possibly just additional) methods of building vocabulary. Looking back on it, it seems like the best teachers I had seemed to advocate both writing out one's own lines as well as transcribing.

4. Self confidence in one's ability to create music. It relates to #1 and #2 above: self confidence in one's ability to improvise musically, and self confidence in one's ability to improvise in a way that seems fitting to the jazz genre. If an individual believes in himself then I suppose that confidence can carry him pretty far, especially if he can tolerate criticism from the 'jazz community'...

There was a JakeAcci line I wanted to check out because it sounded really hip, but I did not get around to it yet

Awesome! The highest of praise! (I wonder what it was...)

[srlank]

Hi Fep,

You didn't ask my opinion either, but I know you won't mind if I respond. LOL

Transcribing isn't a primary part of my practice at all, and I only recently got back to doing it after completely omiting it for a long time. I started up doing it recently however, just because I loved some of the sounds I was hearing and simply wanted to play them. In other words, I started to do it because it is fun. What happened is it added a little confidence to my playing, because I was getting better feel and phrasing without having to really think about it. I also found out some really cool concepts, but in bite size pieces so I could internalize it better. For example, I've been working with Wes's Lover Man, and while he was on the G7 approaching a Gminor 7 he plays a lick that turned out to be an Ab minor 7. Now I've heard of this concept before, but I understood it so much better by using an example on a solo I really love. I think it really helps to internalize the concept by playing it in a lot of areas of the neck, fingerings and keys.
And I am also just starting to do what Amund discussed above, which is incorporating these things into tunes.

[JensL]

Awesome! The highest of praise! (I wonder what it was...)

It was the line with the Abmaj7 to Bdim to Bbm7 Eb7 Ab in the first chorus of the traveler guitar video.
I like the way you use a big range and the chromatic triads in the II V.

Thanks! I guess I did spent some time transcribing this week
Jens

[monk]

I've said in other posts that the fastest way to get up and running is to learn the solos of great players who have gone before.

I was told this repeatedly during my days at GIT by guys like Howard Roberts, Joe Pass, Joe Diorio, Don Mock and Ron Eschete. I have no reason to disbelieve them because that's what they did and it got results. Every jazz great, innovator or not, that we listen to on recordings did just that.

All of the great jazz innovators were novices and journeymen before they became innovators. In some cases, for a long time. They learned their craft and then, at some point, they started to hear something in their head that they worked out that became a musical innovation.

There was a great video of Clark Terry posted awhile back in which he stated that he sees a lot of young players to whom it is more important to be seen as creative than it is to learn the craft of playing jazz well. To me, this begs the question of "Do You Want Play For The Joy Of Playing The Music or Are You Just Trying To Feed Your Ego By Being Seen As Creative?"

Reading biographies of innovative musicians and talking to people who knew and played with them, I firmly believe that they all started out to play for no other reason than because they loved it and at some point in their growth as a musician something clicked in their brain and they came up with something new that they synthesized out of their influences and experiences.

Everyone who picks up an instrument is not going to be creative or an innovator. But everyone who follows in the footsteps of the greats can reap the joy of playing music.

[JakeAcci]

It was the line with the Abmaj7 to Bdim to Bbm7 Eb7 Ab in the first chorus of the traveler guitar video.
I like the way you use a big range and the chromatic triads in the II V.

Thanks! I guess I did spent some time transcribing this week
Jens

Cool, thanks...it's really interesting to know what caught other people's ears.

I love major triads in 7/8!

[AmundLauritzen]

I've said in other posts that the fastest way to get up and running is to learn the solos of great players who have gone before.

I was told this repeatedly during my days at GIT by guys like Howard Roberts, Joe Pass, Joe Diorio, Don Mock and Ron Eschete. I have no reason to disbelieve them because that's what they did and it got results. Every jazz great, innovator or not, that we listen to on recordings did just that.

All of the great jazz innovators were novices and journeymen before they became innovators. In some cases, for a long time. They learned their craft and then, at some point, they started to hear something in their head that they worked out that became a musical innovation.

There was a great video of Clark Terry posted awhile back in which he stated that he sees a lot of young players to whom it is more important to be seen as creative than it is to learn the craft of playing jazz well. To me, this begs the question of "Do You Want Play For The Joy Of Playing The Music or Are You Just Trying To Feed Your Ego By Being Seen As Creative?"

Reading biographies of innovative musicians and talking to people who knew and played with them, I firmly believe that they all started out to play for no other reason than because they loved it and at some point in their growth as a musician something clicked in their brain and they came up with something new that they synthesized out of their influences and experiences.

Everyone who picks up an instrument is not going to be creative or an innovator. But everyone who follows in the footsteps of the greats can reap the joy of playing music.

I agree 100%
And I put in bold the points I want to elaborate on.

As you say, the masters all transcribed the players they liked. This is a labor of LOVE. They played jazz because they loved it, and when your heart is involved in the process you learn all that much faster. These cats were all "prodigies" in the sense that they were playing professionally after only having played guitar a short while. Pat Martino is a stellar example of this. If I remember correctly, he started playing gigs when he was 14 years old. He learned Wes' solos off record - a labor of love, because the music struck him like lighting. When the music hits you like that, you gotta do it or die trying! It's that intense. And that's how they learned so effectively. They were 110% focused.


Then, the second point which is a perfect description of the young players in the Norwegian jazz scene. You'd have to look under a lot of rocks to find a bebop player who's not 40+ around here. There are a few who can really play. The new generation of "jazz school" kids don't want to play over changes. None of them do. I know a few, and I can count them on one hand, who know the language fluently. Particularly a monstrous saxophone player who is younger than me. But bebop is dying here, because everybody have bought into the hipster attitude.
Most of the cats that I play with could be my parents or grandparents.
It's really that bad(Bad in the sense that bebop players here are a dying breed). And when you ask these young jazz school guys if they play standards, or where the bebop guys are, then they all get their panties in a bunch and call you narrow minded and tell you to piss off and play your grandpa music at the retirement home - go figure.

Hey, I'm all for diversity in music. I love modern jazz, even some atonal avant garde and free improvisation. But it must come from the heart. If it comes from fear of judgement, then I don't respect it at all.
You can tell when music is hollow and is motivated by fear or capitalism.

[princeplanet]

..... bop is dying here, because everybody have bought into the hipster attitude.

I think it's hilarious that college jazz kids think playing changes ain't hip. I mean, if I listen to (or see pictures of ) Miles, Dexter, Clifford Jordan, Monk, Hank Mobley, Rollins, Bobby Timmons, Mingus, early Shorter and Henderson (we could go on all night, right?), I see and hear the very definition of "hip". Those cats - even within the constraints of changes- were far more risk taking and exciting than the modern young counterpart. It was just a cooler scene, you'd have to be an egghead to miss that ! .....

[JensL]

I think it's hilarious that college jazz kids think playing changes ain't hip. I mean, if I listen to (or see pictures of ) Miles, Dexter, Clifford Jordan, Monk, Hank Mobley, Rollins, Bobby Timmons, Mingus, early Shorter and Henderson (we could go on all night, right?), I see and hear the very definition of "hip". Those cats - even within the constraints of changes- were far more risk taking and exciting than the modern young counterpart. It was just a cooler scene, you'd have to be an egghead to miss that ! .....

What were they saying about Pat Metheny and Scofield in the 90's? Ornette Coleman? Miles?

If we make jazz music a celebration of a tradition it will never be relevant today, it is only natural that there are periods in jazz where the emphasis is not going to be on playing changes, it will come back like it has before.

In the Hague the bop scene is still going quite strong and some of the people coming out of the conservatory know quite a bit of tradition, that's one of the reasons I chose to study here. A lot of the people I play with coming out of Amsterdam Conservatory know a lot of tradition too.

For me, I mostly don't want to hear a concert of people playing bebop cliches their whole solo, I have them on record I know what they sound like and I get bored.

Jens

[princeplanet]

What were they saying about Pat Metheny and Scofield in the 90's? Ornette Coleman? Miles?



For me, I mostly don't want to hear a concert of people playing bebop cliches their whole solo, I have them on record I know what they sound like and I get bored.

Jens

I get bored too, but only because people don't do it as well as the greats of the day did.... What I find more boring still is to see youngsters playing "what they feel, man".... Like the old joke goes, "Feel something in Bb , motherf*cker!"

[JensL]

I get bored too, but only because people don't do it as well as the greats of the day did.... What I find more boring still is to see youngsters playing "what they feel, man".... Like the old joke goes, "Feel something in Bb , motherf*cker!"

The same argument would of course work for people performing contemporary jazz but are not Gilad or Chris Potter or whoever..

All your greats where not playing in the tradition back in the day, they did their own thing, that's why they stood out and why we remember them.

If jazz stops moving forward as a style it stops being jazz, that aspect of the style is as important as swing and improvisation, since it is in the nature of the jazz artist to explore and expand his music.

Jens

[princeplanet]

All art reserves the right to "progress" and/or mutate.

All people reserve the right to enjoy or reject any such progress and/or mutations.

Happy to leave it at that, chief,

Peace.

[JensL]

Yeah sorry! I have that discussion around here way too often and get carried away..

Jens