learning improvisation- transcribing vs books...

[kessellang]

Hello fellow jazz guitarists,

I've come to a point in my playing where I'm not sure which path to follow; that is, whether to devote more time to transcribing tunes/solos/chords/licks or to continue doing a bit of that and a bit of "book learning" (or learning patterns etc.) I am leaning towards dropping the books of patterns/improv ideas and focusing on transcribing/analyzing and applying things learned from that into my own playing. I have worked through Leavitt's three books, which are wonderful (and will continue to be). I already know all the chords and scales and arpeggios, have been playing them in various patterns for years, as well as a significant amount of theory (brought over from the piano) and think that this, coupled with a good jazz theory book (although not Levine's- I absolutely did not care for his approach in "The Jazz Piano Book"), would be less redundant. Hey, I think I finally found the right word to describe how I feel about my current improvisation practice approach: redundant. I am not interested in getting another teacher, either.

So, what do you all think? What did you do when you reached the point where you got serious about jazz improvisation? I look forward to the responses!

[jazzadellic]

Any source of ideas is worth looking into. I feel I have made the most progress when I just sat down and struggled with creating my own ideas. I mean at some point, you need to put the books down and use your imagination. Naturally most of our tonal / harmonic vocabulary we pick up from listening, so I'm not saying abandon what you've read in books or picked up by listening. But I've found over the years that sometimes I personally have been to reliant on books, other peoples ideas, etc...And that defeats the purpose of jazz. So maybe the path to follow now is your own? Just wanted to give you something to think about.

[Petimar]

I feel transcribing is extremely valuable as you hear how great players think as they play. You hear how they solve problems, how they apply their knowledge in various situations, etc. Books don't teach that very well.

[marcwhy]

Hello fellow jazz guitarists,

I've come to a point in my playing where I'm not sure which path to follow; that is, whether to devote more time to transcribing tunes/solos/chords/licks or to continue doing a bit of that and a bit of "book learning" (or learning patterns etc.) I am leaning towards dropping the books of patterns/improv ideas and focusing on transcribing/analyzing and applying things learned from that into my own playing. I have worked through Leavitt's three books, which are wonderful (and will continue to be). I already know all the chords and scales and arpeggios, have been playing them in various patterns for years, as well as a significant amount of theory (brought over from the piano) and think that this, coupled with a good jazz theory book (although not Levine's- I absolutely did not care for his approach in "The Jazz Piano Book"), would be less redundant. Hey, I think I finally found the right word to describe how I feel about my current improvisation practice approach: redundant. I am not interested in getting another teacher, either.

So, what do you all think? What did you do when you reached the point where you got serious about jazz improvisation? I look forward to the responses!

What does your teacher recommend for you?

[fumblefingers]

Hello fellow jazz guitarists,

I've come to a point in my playing where I'm not sure which path to follow; that is, whether to devote more time to transcribing tunes/solos/chords/licks or to continue doing a bit of that and a bit of "book learning" (or learning patterns etc.) I am leaning towards dropping the books of patterns/improv ideas and focusing on transcribing/analyzing and applying things learned from that into my own playing. I have worked through Leavitt's three books, which are wonderful (and will continue to be). I already know all the chords and scales and arpeggios, have been playing them in various patterns for years, as well as a significant amount of theory (brought over from the piano) and think that this, coupled with a good jazz theory book (although not Levine's- I absolutely did not care for his approach in "The Jazz Piano Book"), would be less redundant. Hey, I think I finally found the right word to describe how I feel about my current improvisation practice approach: redundant. I am not interested in getting another teacher, either.

So, what do you all think? What did you do when you reached the point where you got serious about jazz improvisation? I look forward to the responses!

well, some questions might be:

1. whom do you derive great inspiration from? and,

2. in what style do they play?

for example, (3) would you find it worthwhile to play some Charlie Christian and Wes M. solos? (no need to transcribe, it's been done for these two).

or

4. are you more of a contemporary scene kid of guy? (more modal is probably where this is headed)

5. also, do you know a solid number (perhaps ten) of jazz patterns for all the standard progressions, in both major and minor, in multiple positions/fingerings?

6. can you easily construct a solo using chord tones, encircle approach, upper and lower neighbors and all that?

7. can you apply this to ryhthm changes, blues, and modal tunes?

8. can you construct "antecedent/consequent" phrases in the blues form and some modal forms? (also known as "question and answer", "call and response", "complaint and answer" etc, etc)

9. do you know if you want to become a player who can blow over changes like a mad man, or play lyrically and weave motifs and phrases like a composer/song-writer over changes? (like Lester Young or Dexter Gordon, to name only two), or both?


depending upon your answers it will be easier to advise. on the other hand, it goes without saying that learning great solos from the masters is something that most serious jazz musicians do at some point in their careers/development. many players never cease this practice, regardless of personal accomplishments/capabilities.

[RyanM]

I say drop the books for now and focus on transcribing 100%. Seriously. You've done the book thing.

Listen to a LOT of jazz and transcribe the solos and players you like the most (and not the ones others think you should!).

There was a time when, although I knew this, I didn't really get this, only after i had transcribed quite a few, but nothing compares. This is how jazz has always been learned (or at least before it went into acadamia). Learning jazz is about learning the vocabulary.

[Petimar]

Learning jazz is about learning the vocabulary.

How true!!!

[mr. beaumont]

none of the good jazz players i know learned how to improvise from a book.

[kessellang]

thanks for all the replies.

In reply to fumblefingers: I am into all areas and eras of jazz, except maybe some of the "avant garde" noise stuff. I am theoretically familiar with most of what you asked, but have yet to apply it/ use it in context. What I have been reading recently (I cant recall where, exactly- it might have been a couple of jazz sites) says that all of the things you need to know are on recordings, and questions the use of books of patterns and transcriptions, saying that one should take the hard way and learn everything by ear- tunes, changes, and solos. Similar to what Hal Galper talks about in the video above. Basically, what was said is that using Real Books, done-for-you transcriptions, and books of patterns are shortcuts that do not make you a real jazz musician. So, what I am asking, I guess, is this: is there any need to learn patterns etc. from books when you can do the same aurally? I, for one, am on the fence yet and am hesitant at going all out, but something tells me this is the way to go. I just don't want to waste time on material that wont get me that far. And I love music books! It would be so wonderful to know exactly what players like Barney Kessel or Wes Montgomery did in the practice room (aside from technique) to become great improvisors!

[monk]

.
It would be so wonderful to know exactly what players like Barney Kessel or Wes Montgomery did in the practice room (aside from technique) to become great improvisors!

Kessel and Montgomery both were quoted many times in interviews as saying that they learned Charlie Christian solos note-for-note from records. Wes said on more than one occasion that he learned all of Christian's solos. They also participated in jam sessions which allowed them to take the things they learned from Christian's recordings and use them in other tunes.

It's a bit more difficult now because the jam sessions are not as prevalent as they were from the 1930s through the 1960s. Also the music that they played, what we've come to call the Great American Songbook, was coming out of every radio and jukebox in the country. They were saturated with this music, whereas we have to search it out.

The big advantage for guys like Kessel and Wes was, that once they started getting their playing together, they were able to immerse themselves in the jam session culture.

[Arpeggio]

thanks for all the replies.

Similar to what Hal Galper talks about in the video above. Basically, what was said is that using Real Books, done-for-you transcriptions, and books of patterns are shortcuts that do not make you a real jazz musician. So, what I am asking, I guess, is this: is there any need to learn patterns etc. from books when you can do the same aurally? I, for one, am on the fence yet and am hesitant at going all out, but something tells me this is the way to go.

I think you can sound better in less time by learning licks, but then that is a shortcut. If you know a set of licks then your "improvisation" can be executed accurately.

My improv over a backing track seldom flows completely and can be scatty. Playing without a backing track in my own time (singing to the guitar and singing phrases then repeating on guitar) I sound much better and I want to be eventually able to process this information quick enough for real time improv. .

The brain is the most advanced computer on the planet, guitar practise by the long term ear training kind of route, is perhaps like computer programming, kind of boring and slow progress until the end result, and won't happen over night.

[MaxPicks]

I think the best thing you could do is get together with other musicians for organised rehearsals aimed at getting gigs. Having to take 2 choruses on every number over 3 sets is what will bring your stuff together. Notw I said organised rehearsals, not just jam wankfests.

[wizard3739]

Hello fellow jazz guitarists,

I've come to a point in my playing where I'm not sure which path to follow; that is, whether to devote more time to transcribing tunes/solos/chords/licks or to continue doing a bit of that and a bit of "book learning" (or learning patterns etc.# I am leaning towards dropping the books of patterns/improv ideas and focusing on transcribing/analyzing and applying things learned from that into my own playing. I have worked through Leavitt's three books, which are wonderful #and will continue to be#. I already know all the chords and scales and arpeggios, have been playing them in various patterns for years, as well as a significant amount of theory #brought over from the piano# and think that this, coupled with a good jazz theory book #although not Levine's- I absolutely did not care for his approach in "The Jazz Piano Book"#, would be less redundant. Hey, I think I finally found the right word to describe how I feel about my current improvisation practice approach: redundant. I am not interested in getting another teacher, either.

So, what do you all think? What did you do when you reached the point where you got serious about jazz improvisation? I look forward to the responses!

I think you may be at a level that could best be improved by playing with other jazz musicians. I think the best learning process is being on the stage playing with others. Transcribing and listening to the music you want to learn will sharpen your music senses (your ear , timing and rhythm abilities) but getting into a groove with a few other musicans is a wonderful experience and a great process for learning jazz. This is IMHO, but has worked for me and many of my students and musician friends.

wiz

[wizard3739]

sorry all, the multiple posts indicate a problem with my computer. I'll bae back after I fix it.

wiz

[mod]
Double posts deleted
[/mod]

[kessellang]

Great replies. Getting together with other musician peers for organized "jamming" is exactly what I've had in mind for about a month now. I think that, along with some serious transcribing (and really learning and feeling what is going on, not just rote memorization and writing it down and then moving on), and a good theory/improv book to answer questions when they arise should get me closer to where I should be at this point. Now, I just have to get the courage up to put myself out there...

One more question, regarding improv books. I had a book when I studied piano that dealt with improv in a very concise and clear way. I think it was by Dan Haerle. Is there anything like that for the guitar? I'd love a book like that for guitar or or no specific instrument (rather than piano, for example).

[Reg]

There a few paths... yada yada...
1) you do need to get your Jazz musician skills together.
Do you want to take test.

2) you do need to be able to translate all those skills to your guitar...
Again, do you want to take a test.

3) jazz, as mentioned above is about playing live. That is a skill... being able to 1)consciously and 2)instinctively use all your skills.

You need to be aware of the moment as well as what might happen next chorus and where the tune may go because of that those moments. This takes awareness from knowledge.

Yea, transcribing is cool, but it's just a learning device... hell most use slow down devices anyway... what's the point. Way over rated... You'll train your ears much quicker and really hear what's going on playing live. Being able to hear ... doesn't mean later... it means now, as it's being played.
Part of being able to hear is also knowing what is implied... what's not played. All the possible choices implied by what's played.

It's not like you have a choice of what to do... you need to do it all. The learning process is always ongoing. It's not a fixed set of guidelines...adjustment are needed all the time to reflect and correct skills that need work. Your life will also affect those adjustments.

All this being said... start playing Live Jazz... that will put everything into perspective. You'll know what you need to practice. usually helps with the motivation also.

Reg

[mr. beaumont]

Sink or swim, right Reg?

[Reg]

Sink or swim, right Reg?

LOL, We all sink sometimes... but at least we know why we're learning how to swim...

[vsaumarez]

Stay with both until you are confident you have mastered the theory, and then focus on transcriptions which will transform your playing probably more than anything. If you just do transcriptions you may take some stuff for granted. Joe Pass apparently once said it amused him that even his mistakes were copied.