-
Originally Posted by Reg
One can be in complete control without knowing (analytically) what he is playing. We all know this from singing. We learn to sing songs after hearing them and we sing on pitch with records without even knowing what key it is. When we scat or just catch ourselves humming, we don't know what scale or chord it is. We don't have to.
That said, some times you need to 'think your way through' passages--unusual changes, new material, something you're just not feeling at the moment--but as for your general question, yes, of course one can be 'unaware' (-in the sense you mean) and sound fine.
I'm not a great player. I wish I was but I'm not. I'm not asking anyone to take my word for something because it's mine. But it's just obvious that a ton of great jazz has been played by people who would give you the fish eye if you asked them what "harmonic concept" they were thinking of on that second chorus. Not everyone thinks that way. It's fine and dandy(-fine and mellow?) if you do, but not everyone thinks that way.
I am NOT against technique or practice or theory. I'm just FOR lines that sound cool to me, and it turns out that a lot of them are pretty simple, though when well executed in the right spots, they soar. I think like a singer---I wanna sing stuff I wanna sing and I wanna play stuff I want to hear, and a lot of it ain't that complicated.
I appreciate many things I don't care to do myself, and I can enjoy analysis of styles I don't play. (I studied philosophy and theology--I love a great analysis!) But I don't think Charlie Christian would have sounded any better if he knew more theory!
-
10-08-2012 08:04 PM
-
Do you need to know everything to know anything.... Obviously not.
Hey Mark...I do basically agree with you... Maybe a better approach would be to use examples of lines and what they could imply. The difficulty is we need to post examples and most don't want or don't have the set up to do so.
I'll read your lines and try to transpose to different application... might help hear and see how the lines work... Or we might have beaten the subject into the ground...
Just a note for playing fast bebop lines... you need accents, which rhythmically helps organize your line... many times when you break down the line or pattern your playing... there is a simple collection of target notes , and you can connect them anyway you choose. much easier than memorization of entire lines... hey and your actually playing in a jazz style as compared to memorize and perform. Reg
-
You don't think of anything when you improvise. If you are thinking about what to play, it means you haven't practiced it enough.
Does a tennis player think about how/when to use his forehand? I don't think so...he/she just play...
The time to think is while you're practicing...
Enjoy!!
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
Inner movement won't happen naturally. For that, you have to dig deeper.
That inner movement, and its understanding, will be the catalyst for many different paths through the music, a much better chance to develop the narrative in fresh ways.
-
Originally Posted by Gle55nn
-
Originally Posted by mike walker
-
Originally Posted by randalljazz
I am not good with this stuff.
Thanks Randall, I'll keep my eyes peeled.
Can you explain a little more why they would go to such lengths?
How does this help them? Link count? I'm clueless with this stuff,man.
-
Originally Posted by mike walker
-
Originally Posted by randalljazz
They could just use the time to get some 'time on the instrument'.
It's a funny old life. Thanks, man.
-
Although chord tones/arpeggios are vital to improvisation, I don't think that scales should be totally disregarded. After all, aren't scales just rearranged 13th chords? I've found that when it comes to improv, excluvisely using arpeggios is extremely boring and greatly limits what I can play. The most interresting players (especially Charlie Parker and Joe Pass, who were previously mentioned as improvisers who always used chord tones, WRONG!) use the extensions of the chords through scales and modes, as well as the occasional chromatic. This is not to say that I don't like to use arpeggios as a PART of my improv. In fact, my favorite Kenny Burrell lick that I've transcribed is based entirely off a Am7 arpeggio. But to say that scales shouldn't be used and shouldn't be practiced is totally incorrect.
-
Originally Posted by rob l
I prefer thinking in terms of chord tones; someone else may prefer playing in terms of scales. Both ways can work. Historically, I think it's pretty clear that the emphasis was on chords before it was on scales.(But saying the emphasis was on chords does not mean people only played chord tones!)
-
If you're using anything to improvise it'll sound boring. You use scales or arpeggios as an organization system...not to dictate what notes you use to improvise...
This is such a non issue....you got 12 notes available. Organize them and play. Sometimes I think we look for things to disagree about.
-
Originally Posted by rob l
Last edited by monk; 10-28-2012 at 04:03 PM. Reason: spelling
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
I reckon some could think in both ways.
Some might like to see the Chord tones as part of the scale they come from.
See the trees as part of the landscape, so to speak.
I don't see a problem in that at all.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
In my opinion, scales and arpeggios are mechanics, visuals, and components of lines. They are one way to practice and they are tools to craft lines from.
A healthy practice regimen should also include learning licks by ear, and composing them, then integrating them on the guitar.
Then in the end, it comes together and the organizational system can't really be boiled down to one thing, because when it comes down to playing, the player visualizes line forms containing all these things.
That's the point where a line is conceived in the mind and is "mapped out" on the guitar and that map, path or whatever one would call it is likely to contain many different elements.
I'd recommend anyone to practice allegedly "contradicting" approaches because they will always complement each other in the end when internalized. It's usually "scales vs ear" - practice both.
-
Originally Posted by AmundLauritzen
Another example involves knowing when to play G + over F7.
Or consider the series of triads over a Dom 7 chord: major, minor b 5, minor, major, minor, major. Charlie Parker would switch out the minor flat 5 (B minor flat 5 for G7, for example) for a straight minor, which would take things into another key. If you think of this in terms of chords, it is much easier to hear (and play) what he was dong than if you think of it in terms of scale choices. At least, I find it much easier.
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
A family of arpeggios lend themselves to a key center, or scale if you will regardless of how they are practiced. Triad pairs a whole step apart is a good example - they lend themselves to a key where those are the IV and V degree triads. The player can choose to relate these to the parent scale or look at them as a separate entity. Both approaches may influence his decisions in different ways.
As for mental roadmaps, yes I agree that it is a good idea to also practice them as separate entities. The scale alone as a roadmap for a while. Then practice a different approach where arpeggios, chord shapes or chord tones act as visuals that can be embellished etc.
Then maybe practice arpeggios as part of a scale where they overlap the scale shape to try to bring the concepts together.
For practicing it's good to choose one concept at the time IMO. Then when they are automatic, it will be easy to merge them and then a crossing over of knowledge usually happens(in my experience). There is now a composite concept in its own right, if that makes sense.
My 2 cents.
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
You still have to know function. Again, it's a non issue. There's no dichotomy...12 notes...organize them and play.
And Summertime is very much a minor tune...it's NOT in C major.Last edited by mr. beaumont; 11-09-2012 at 05:28 PM.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
This
Again, it is this simple. What is the problem?
I'm not even sure what the debate is to be honest.
-
Originally Posted by rcaballero
TD
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I know "Summertime" is a minor tune. I mentioned C major because that is the same key signature as A-. But improvising over "Summertime" in A- and thinking "G" (-which is about as simple a thought as one can have while improvising; it's not even "in G" , just "G") is something jazz players have actually done. There's a long tradition in jazz of treating major chords as I chords and minor chords as ii chords, wherever they may be in a progression. A- is the ii chord of G. What could be simpler?
-
Originally Posted by Tony DeCaprio
-
Originally Posted by Tony DeCaprio
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Improvisation is the spontaneous reorganization of known material. Joe Pass said time and again he wasn't making it up off the top of his head. Neither was Charlie Christian or Charlie Parker. Same thing with Lester Young: "Bird has his licks and I have my licks." Herb Ellis played out of the "shape system" that he taught. It's a simple system but he could work wonders with it. These were all world-class improvisers. Their lines always sounded like them because they did the same sorts of things over and over. (They weren't all doing the same things; each had his own bag of tricks, an approach that suited their tastes and talents and an approach that they applied to most everything they played. It's why they always sounded like themselves!)
-
You can at least quote my whole thought. Or thoughts...I've been pretty clear on my opinion in this thread.
The point is, everything needs to be internalized. If you're trying to think as you play, you're asking for trouble. You should be trying to hear...if you can do both, more power to you...I ain't that good
2014 Gibson ES175 1959 Reissue Natural
Today, 02:21 AM in For Sale