-
Somone told me to start off my solos with single note lines and towards the end do the chord stuff. I think he was half right. Using chordal riffs are a nice way to end a solo and i'm going to work on it. I still feel very restricted by avoiding chords/ stabs, whatever they're called, through the first couple choruses.
One thing I learned from other music is that you can start a solo with a 'lecture' so-to-speak. Start off screaming and then break it down to nothing. Then you're into having a conversation with the other instruments. You build up and towards the end of the solo you do something repititious. It's a cliche' but I like it.
I know it's not a good idea to start a jazz solo very agressively but I feel restricted if I have to avoid rhythmic/chord type riffs until the end. I'm trying to get other instruments to respond to what I'm doing. Should I just take the advice given and keep it simple? I don't want to throw people off.
-
02-11-2013 05:38 PM
-
Any formula gets tiring. Yes even, Wes'! (single notes, octaves, block chords)
I interject chords all the time...a habit from playing solo so much...I think the only rule of a solo is it should make a statement...it should have a shape, it shouldn't just be "one color." Let's see, anything else non-quantifiable and esoteric I can add?...
But generally, I approach a solo with some kind of a plan, even if it's just "loud-quiet-loud" or "low, medium, high" or something basic like that.
I'll end this ramble with a version of a quote I've said often here: "Anyone who tells you there's one right way to do something just doesn't know any other ways."
-
Same with me. I gave up on trying to be a soloist but the chord stuff probably comes from there. I usually thought loud-quiet-loud in other music when I could. I'm not feeling jazz that way.
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I'll work this out somehow.
This came up in a workshop and I try to give the instructor a break about this kind of thing. They're just throwing the basics at you.
-
At one point I was soloing and threw in a Wes octave for a second. I hear "Yeah!!" and I thought oh, no. I didn't really mean to do that.
-
Yea there are many ways to solo...
You can mechanically make lists of what solos are made of, from all the skills required to solo. Notes, chords and all the different methods to use them. Melodic, harmonic and rhythmic concepts, all the methods of organizing.
I usually always have a reference, then the relationships and then the development of those relationships. And usually fit all this into somewhat of a mechanical forms. The forms almost organize the spatial details.
For me I need to recognize what the gig is and what the audience is... that's part of the equation.
I'm always aware... do I have the skills to solo well enough to take audiences somewhere, as compared to playing what they want to hear. Do I need to draw them in first, earn their trust... then push a little... It's tricky.
But generally you need something up front besides the tune for establishing that reference... something, melodic, chordal, rhythmic... doesn't always matter... but you should have something.
From that reference, you should already be aware of how your going to wrap up your solo. At least have an idea. You may not get there but at least you'll have another reference while your developing your solo.
As far as the creating relationships and development... who knows. It's nice when you keep some sort of spatial shape in mind... so there is some sort of balance. That balance can be effected by what you and the band play, but again if you have a beginning reference for the shape.... again you have a reference.
Say you think you'll take 5 choruses... and your plan is to build toward the 4th chorus, the 4th being the high point of your solo... (what ever that is), and use the 5th to wrap it up and set up what's coming, interlude, another solo, back to head... whatever. Even if you keep soloing or get into that 5th chorus with your solo developing... at least your aware that you need to set up something... before the end of that chorus or cue that you'll take another chorus.
I use octaves and chords to help set up shapes... reinforce the shape I'm trying to create. If nothing else... cue beginnings and ends of sections. I also use chords to cue different harmonic concepts I want to develop.
What ever you do there are the physical aspects of what your playing... melodic, harmonic, rhythmic, articulations etc... and then there are the concepts for organization of those physical aspects... and of course your performance of those.
Easy way to start is have a few different improv concepts and plug and play within different forms... basic outline formulas.
-
^^
I need a few plans for jazz. How many choruses, whether to use octaves or not, etc.. How do you cue people you want to take another chorus?
-
Keep playing. Originally Posted by Stevebol
More seriously, any interesting solo has a shape of some sort, and although formulas like Wes's are one way to shape it, it doesn't have to so obvious. Everybody talks about how Sonny Rollins's or Jim Halls' solos have structure, and when you listen to them, you can usually tell long before they finish that they are winding down, even though neither of them uses anything as obvious as Wes did. So your bandmates should feel whether you are done or not.
WIth guys I've played a lot, everybody can feel when the solo is ending, no cues needed. In less familiar situations, you can communicate a lot with a glance.
But whatever you do, don't play two solos in a row: I hate it when the soloist builds a logical solo, winds it down, the band responds, prepares for the next soloist, and then the doofus takes another chorus!
-
It's much easier to communicate you're finishing rather than you're gonna keep going...
as pkirk says...not stopping sends a pretty strong message...
My take is, if it's talked about ahead of time how many choruses you get then there's a reason, and I had better have a damn good idea if I'm gonna break that.Last edited by mr. beaumont; 02-11-2013 at 08:15 PM.
-
Working with singers it was 2-3 choruses and I'd give them a glance towards the end of the last one. Originally Posted by pkirk
-
Yea... long solos can get boring...You need some skills... I always cue with verbal cue or hand gesture up and in circular motion... keep going. And generally that reinforces what your playing cue... what everyone's feelin...
I'm about to head off to trio gig, organ and sax, no drums... actually the organ is a Nord and he kicks bass with small separate keys. Aren't many who can cover like he does... the piano and bass are always locked in, anyway we're basically light entertainment... at swanky restaurant/ Bar... I generally play very melodically with octaves first set...burn just enough to keep the energy up... We strrrretch out most of the tunes, inject lots of interludes on the spot etc... normal BS.
Singers are different gigs, I work with a few, actually too many... Usually we, (band), take 1st set and half of the others, solos are always short once the vocalist is up. If they need some energy they usually cue us... and we'll pick it up.
I'm used to directing ensembles... I usually don't leave that much to chance, unless I know the musicians well. And even then most dig not having to worry about where things are going.
Reg
-
^^^
I'll try to remember the hand gesture. Makes sense to me.
-
Just as long as the band doesn't think your cue means... next soloist, keep going on to head etc...
usually not, but it has happened.
-
Most of the times I wind my solos down, so without looking, the guys know when I'm finishing. Many times it's a quick glance, or I point my index finger to my forehead to indicate we're going to the out head, meaning either no next solo, no bass solo, no 4s pr 8s with the drummer. The shit has gone on for too long.
I like to do 2 chourses and sometimes 3 but almost NEVER more. That's just piggish and unless it's REALLY SMOKING. pointless and can wear on an audience, even when they're there to hear you SPECIFICALLY. Rarely when doing background jazz and no one is really listening and we need filler, I can stretch but even then, I'd rather just play another song.
-
Hmmmmm...
Two chorus... don't you dig playing. When I'm having fun, usually the audience is diggin what's going on. Even when playing... turn on the background music gigs... unless the tunes going no where quick, I still try and create something. And yea, head and out. I think the head jester has been around as long as the finger(s) up or down for what key or get out the hook... not to be confused with middle finger jester. Haven't got that one in a while, I'm due.
I'm playing another swanky Restaurant/ bar gig tonight, this time in Napa on the river. I'm sure all they want is background and improve the atmosphere etc... but what they'll get beautiful Wes and burnin Benson...
I think that's the reason I get gig calls... (besides being able to read anything in front of me, napkins included).
I played a gig in Citrus Heights a couple of weeks ago, I think up by Henry's hang, anyway through booking agency... cover jazz to R&B. We ended up playing very hip jazz tunes most of the night, the audience dug the jazz. The gig was cheesy Chamber of Commerce Regional Annual Installation/ Dinner. Vocalist sang only a few jazz standards... we were killin all these funky jazz grooves. Not quiet sleepy time take on standards, huge place, big stage... we were just a trio... same pianist kickin bass.
My point... sure we could have played background, short, safe solos etc... still would have collected the check,(was good gig)... but because we did our thing... people noticed and will get...the agency will get many more calls for gigs.
I'm not just going through the motions...
Reg
-
I LOVE soloing. Sometimes I think cats really put an audience at risk by playing too much. If its burning, yeah sure I MIGHT take 4 or more choruses, but geez, if you can't say it in three . . .
-
I'm used to 3 and I like 3. It was usually 2-3 doing R&B, 3-4 for blues, and 31 for jam bands. Just kidding. I never actually counted how many it was for the jam band. We were way too high to count. I'll play 50 chouses if someone wants to pay me to do it but I doubt it will come up. Originally Posted by henryrobinett
-
I play in a quintet with a great pianist and tenor player. The tenor player tends to trane out and play endless choruses. As much as I love him it pisses the hell out of me and the band gets a little agitated. The more you play the less others can. Your shit better be seriously on fire to justify that in my book. He does it less now as we've gently let him know.
-
I don't gig. I love listening to jazz. I can play it a little but not to the caliber of some(probably most) here so I think I am about as tolerant an audience member as you will find. If you are soloing for more than 3 choruses, you better be literally on fire or I am not likely to be interested anymore.
-
Coltrane or Joe Henderson, or Rollins or Brecker, Chris Potter - guys like that can play as many choruses as they like and it builds and is interesting. They can take the rhythm section with them. It's true art. But Smedley Bloggs playing endlessly at the Elks Lodge or the VFW or some restaurant is too much. It's one of the many things that killed jazz for a lot of people: self indulgence.
-
Yeah you should give a call next time you're out this way. And btw I never go through the motions. That not in my DNA either. I can't do it. But if we're playing just standards I'm really into it. Same with funky burning stuff. Even doing corporate gigs I play for real.
-
Depends on the tune how many choruses I'll take. If we're playing a ballad I'll rarely play more than one chorus. Usually I'll split the chorus into two with another soloist on ballads.
If we're playing a burner, I'll take as many choruses I'll need to say what I got on my mind. I always try to view my playing from a third person perspective to determine when I'm done. But when you're in the zone, you just know by instinct anyway.
These are my observations. I'm not half the player that Reg and Henry are anyway. Give me 20 years in the shed and I might have a realistic perspective to offer
-
Yea it does depend on many things... but in general, if I can... I play for while.
Henry... wasn't implying you did, sorry if it came off that way. But the standard intro, head, two soloist for 2 or 3 choruses, maybe an interlude... gets old, boring and seems like work.
Amund... great comments, I also always read and listen to the audience, there part of the music.
I'll try and keep a count of how many choruses at tonight's gig. Maybe I'm in dream land...
And Amund... I've checked out your vids... you get goin...
Reg
-
it ain't the tune, Rich, it's the player:
but I agree about the audience bit. I play a lot of musical wallpaper gigs, and I know what the people want...but the beautiful thing is, when folks aren't paying attention you can take as many chances as when they are...if not more. so public practice it is...
cutting edge can mean a lot of different things...I think about the stuff Lee Konitz is playing nowadays....nobody would kick him out of the local martini bar...but if you're one to listen you'll hear some great stuff...but that's the best stuff...you're not going to get that everywhere...
-
I think it all depends and it's not at all helpful to generalize or demonize. I do several kinds of jazz gigs and love each and everyone. I do serious original composition jazz. I do "cutting edge" free jazz, for want of a better term. I do standards jazz that's intense and in your face, also that's quiet and doesn't have to be in your face. I do funk jazz and loud electric jazz. Whatever integrity you have as a musician and as a visionary is the integrity your music will have regardless of the style.
I love playing standards quietly and digging into them, getting outside or staying in, stretching and trying to play some deep shit.
Ive heard this before and used to believe it as well, but I do NOT believe jazz is about being cutting edge. There's a lot of absolutely brilliant and highly significant jazz that's not cutting edge. Jazz does not have to be innovative. It happens to be overwhelmingly the jazz I've valued the most over the years has been, but I totally dig Dexter Gordon, Oscar Petterson, Freddie Hubbard, Hank Jones, Hank Mobley, Jim Hall, Cedar Walton, -- none of whom were particularly innovative but who were all FANTASIC musicians. I love Eric Dolphy but I don't listen to him half as much as I do Sonny Rollins these days and Dolphy was far more cutting edge. I still prefer to listen to the cutting edge of the '58 Coltrane to the '67.
I really dig Donny McCaslin but I don't know how cutting edge he is really. Sometimes I think jazz became far too self conscious about having to be innovative, rather than just being about creating some great music. It doesn't HAVE TO BE THE NEXT BIG THING! It just has to be good, that's all. Just good.
-
Kurt Rosenwinkle is pretty cutting edge. But Sonny Sharrock was more cutting edge. Does that make him better? Or Derek Bailey. Is he better because he was the most-est cutting edge? Ben Monder is pretty cutting edge. More than Sco. So he's better? It's about the quality of the music and whether you like it or not. If you have preconditions on the music you like, like it has to be the next big innovative thing for you to dig it, then that's cool. But I tend not to be that ridged or mechanical in my musical tastes.
Reply With Quote
Concerto for Electric Guitar
Today, 03:18 PM in Other Styles / Instruments