The Value of Transcribing - Learning Jazz Improvisation

[fumblefingers]

Hey gang. There has been some loose, discombobulated talk about this so I thought I'd start a clean, clear thread about it.

Assumption: "Jazz transcription" means writing it down and committing it to paper. No more, no less. It doesn't mean for example, that you can play it.


1. Learning Jazz improvisation - is transcription effective/valuable?

2. If yes, why? If not, why not?

3. For each person who responds, what do the first TWO PARTS of "Imitate, Assimilate, Innovate mean to you?

[Guitarzen]

It seems to me like you are really talking about two things here: learning to play someone else's solo, and writing it down. The two are not dependent upon each other as you could learn to play a solo without writing it down, and you could write it down without learning to play it. But when we are talking about jazz transcription we are mostly talking about learning to play someone else's solo, and secondly I think we are talking about analyzing and understanding it from a theoretical point of view, and the least important part is the writing it down. The writing it down part is purely for reference and to make up for our imperfect memory, and to maybe try to make a few bucks by getting it published by Hal Leonard, lol.

So are you really asking questions 1,2, & 3 only in relation to the 'writing it down' part? Question 3 would not even be relevant to only the writing it down part.

[fumblefingers]

Yeah I hear you but you didn't really address the questions one by one. Big smile

[goldenwave77]

Hey gang. There has been some loose, discombobulated talk about this so I thought I'd start a clean, clear thread about it.

Assumption: "Jazz transcription" means writing it down and committing it to paper. No more, no less. It doesn't mean for example, that you can play it.


1. Learning Jazz improvisation - is transcription effective/valuable?

2. If yes, why? If not, why not?

3. For each person who responds, what do the first TWO PARTS of "Imitate, Assimilate, Innovate mean to you?

I was led to Jonathan Stout's website the other day, and on it, he has a number of really great little videos. One of them talked about he, as a swing player, always had trouble playing straight changes over "Tea for Two". The changes aren't complicated, but the ii-V's flip back and forth quickly, before going to I. He analyzed and transcribed Charlie Christian's solos and saw that Charlie C. just treated it as V-I, or sometimes just I...., or sometimes just played something bluesy, so transcription can show, how good players actually do stuff....as opposed to how "theory", i.e. outline each chord, says we should do it.

BTW, I think Jonathan Stout's playing is super, and his swing and sound are what drew me to listening to jazz in the first place. (I didn't know his band, or his playing, but I started to listen to swing stuff initially, when I first began listening.) His band The Campus Five really, really cooks....as a good dance band should.

[fumblefingers]

Hey gang. There has been some loose, discombobulated talk about this so I thought I'd start a clean, clear thread about it.

Assumption: "Jazz transcription" means writing it down and committing it to paper. No more, no less. It doesn't mean for example, that you can play it.


1. Learning Jazz improvisation - is transcription effective/valuable?

2. If yes, why? If not, why not?

3. For each person who responds, what do the first TWO PARTS of "Imitate, Assimilate, Innovate mean to you?

Ok, I'll tip my hand.

1. Yes, but to a point.

2. Listening skills, transcribing skills (that is, transferring sound to understandable symbols). If you are ever going to write music for any important reason, you will need to transfer perceived sound to notation.

3. You need to learn from the masters. Jazz is materially about improvisation and that is difficult to master from talent/ear alone. So, first just get it under your hands and in your ears. Then you analyze (a separate skill), understand, and begin to build skills that enable you to leverage the improv vocabulary/building blocks into your own playing and in similar, if not same, musical scenarios as the original sources you learned from. Once you can do that - with repeatability - you are ready for step 3. Maybe.

[fumblefingers]

So where does the amazing slow downer fit in?

if you are working on the "Imitate" part and the music is fast or very fast, there"s no shame in using a tool to decipher it. Only the rare talent can decipher warp speed articulation without some kind of aid/assist.

So go for it. Why worry?

[Boston Joe]

I have an issue with your assumption right off the bat. Improvisation is about hearing and playing. I don't see any need to write anything down unless you're specifically trying to improve your notation skills. I regard the word "transcription" as something of a misnomer. It's the learning to play it part that's important.

[fumblefingers]

Maybe so. Playing is the point in most instances. But if you can pick it up by ear alone you haven't really transcribed, at least as far as I'm concerned. We debated this one before. Some people prefer a broad definition and others prefer a narrower definition. Meaning, transcribe means to write. For example, one could transcribe for an instrument they don't/can't play.

Furthermore,
There are a lot of people who can transcribe some terrific, virtuosic solos however. The slow downer helps with that. But have you heard them "play" these solos?

[Boston Joe]

I don't think writing it down is valueless. It's great for helping your reading and hearing. If you can hear a lick and know without playing it on an instrument what notes are being played, then you've got a great skill. You probably won't be able to play it, though, unless you run through it on the guitar a few dozen times.

[Guitarzen]

Maybe so. Playing is the point in most instances. But if you can pick it up by ear alone you haven't really transcribed, at least as far as I'm concerned. We debated this one before. Some people prefer a broad definition and others prefer a narrower definition. Meaning, transcribe means to write. For example, one could transcribe for an instrument they don't/can't play.

Furthermore,
There are a lot of people who can transcribe some terrific, virtuosic solos however. The slow downer helps with that. But have you heard them "play" these solos?

You still haven't answered my original question fumble, do you want to talk about:

A) Only the writing down part.
B) Both the writing down and the learning to play.
C) Mainly the learning to play it part.

Because your OP seems to be contradicting itself in that first you say you are concerned about A, and then in your questions 1 & 2, it seems like you could be asking about B, and question 3 is clearly about C. So I don't think we can have a productive conversation if you are confused and confusing us as to what the topic is about. Also I think your obsession with the literal meaning of 'transcribe' is silly, and not the real important issue to talk about. Yes clearly people have used the word transcribe incorrectly. But clearly it's understood by everyone (but you) that when we talk about the benefits of transcription on a jazz forum we are more concerned with the playing part.

The other point I brought up earlier is that just transcribing and just playing a solo is only 2 of 3 parts, the third part being understanding the theory behind the solo or at least having an idea what the player was thinking or at least what patterns they were thinking of.

Instead of having a fruitful conversation we are getting stuck on semantics...

[Boston Joe]

The other point I brought up earlier is that just transcribing and just playing a solo is only 2 of 3 parts, the third part being understanding the theory behind the solo or at least having an idea what the player was thinking or at least what patterns they were thinking of.

Maybe it's just because I'm not a great sight-reader, but I understand the theory of lick just as well, if not better, by seeing where it lays on the fretboard in relation to the chord.

[fumblefingers]

You still haven't answered my original question fumble, do you want to talk about:

A) Only the writing down part.
B) Both the writing down and the learning to play.
C) Mainly the learning to play it part.

Because your OP seems to be contradicting itself in that first you say you are concerned about A, and then in your questions 1 & 2, it seems like you could be asking about B, and question 3 is clearly about C. So I don't think we can have a productive conversation if you are confused and confusing us as to what the topic is about. Also I think your obsession with the literal meaning of 'transcribe' is silly, and not the real important issue to talk about. Yes clearly people have used the word transcribe incorrectly. But clearly it's understood by everyone (but you) that when we talk about the benefits of transcription on a jazz forum we are more concerned with the playing part.

The other point I brought up earlier is that just transcribing and just playing a solo is only 2 of 3 parts, the third part being understanding the theory behind the solo or at least having an idea what the player was thinking or at least what patterns they were thinking of.

Instead of having a fruitful conversation we are getting stuck on semantics...

fair enough. Option B.

first question.

i am curious if Reg or others think that either writing OR playing another's solos is a less than fruitful pursuit.


my thinking:

unless one is being paid to write it down, I believe that the greater value by far is playing it. I also believe in the basic Imitate, Assimilate, Innovate theory/approach however, and when it comes to the Assimilate part, I believe that analysis will be better enabled by having the material written down.

[gggomez]

fumblefingers I am right into this at the moment. Just transcribed my first song and I am well down the path on 2 more (silly me had to lose focus and not do one at a time).

For me:

imitate - being able to sing it and/or play it with out assistance (not along to the original and without a piece of paper in front of you

assimilate & innovate go together - being able to use parts of what you learnt in other songs (which means knowing what chord you are playing over as you play the original). This is the super fun part.

In terms of your definition of transcription (writing it down) effective/valuable yes for me there are benefits eg it may speed up your understanding and provide more depth to your understanding as it is taking things from sound to eyes so another sense is involved - what sounds/notes are happening over what chord, the rhythm, how many times does he start a phrase before 1 and is there a pattern to it, how many times does he play the 13th over the 7th and is it over a particular chord etc?

Writing it down slows down my ability to imitate and therefore assimilate and innovate. You are not committing it too memory, you are not singing it you, you are not hearing the notes you end up relying on a written document.

I am thinking the written analysis should come last. Learn to sing it and play it by ear first.

Personally my improvement has exploded from this process.

[fumblefingers]

Cool.

for me, I always had to play it before I wrote it down. First I would try to transfer the sound to my guitar and be able to repeat it at will. Then I would use myself as the amazing slow downer - to a point.

We all interpret things differently but I always took "Innovate" in this context to mean "come up with something new and with a personal stamp". I further took it to mean that unless one did the hard work with the first two parts they would likely enjoy little success with the third.


edit: i don't mean to imply that i believe that this process or these phases (I-A-I) are linear. i believe that they are iterative & incremental (to borrow from software method speak).

[Reg]

So I still transcribe tunes all the time... I make modern lead sheets, for gigs. I don't write out the solos... unless I hear something i really dig, there isn't much that is really new.

When I was a kid in college I made $ making piano lead sheets of all kinds of music... I didn't learn the tunes on my instrument... I world obviously check by playing through when done.

I also transcribed big band charts for Berklee while I was there, put together some of the latin big band books. Just used a reel to reel and manuscript paper. I wasn't learning how to perform the music then notate it out... I learned how to transcribe the music straight to the chart. Actually teaches you how charts work etc... I developed transcribing skills, basically notate what your sure of... and generally fill in the blanks logically, along with your ears.

It takes about 15 to 20 min. to make lead sheets for most tunes... I've been using finale for years so I don't really need to figure anything out... I know the pros and cons. I generally also have hand written notes on most charts... for options of performing. Most of my gigs don't involve rehearsal... so charts need to be flexible, with options etc...

I'm still from the school that learning to play from developing musicianship and good technical skills works better than memorizing solos etc... from transcriptions. You might learn how to play over a tune quicker buy memorizing a solo... but I believe you'll develop more from understanding the tune... from analysis and possible analysis etc...

Sure coping others solos is also great... but if soloing over a tune is difficult for you, it's still going to be difficult after you play what you've memorized... the other aspect, how many times do you really play a tune the same, different feel, different time sig, different changes etc...

So improv personally is about a lot more than hearing and playing. For example I'm very conscious when I take a reference. the A section of some tune... or a number of bars with changes, anyway I create a relationship, I decide to create subdominate relationships maj chords and sub with Dorian down a min 3rd, like the relative minor of Lydian.
Then I play pentatonic shapes and lines over the changes... I'll start straight then develop those relationships, Use same type of relationships to change all the chords to to maj, then Dorian then pentatonics...

This is a very conscious approach to creating relationships. I could sure just say... I hear the notes and play them because I've used this approach and applications a million times before... But I fine when I'm aware of what I'm playing... before, after and in the moment... the results... where the music goes generally sounds better when there is conscious awareness of the organization of what I'm playing. I understand many can't think of anything else besides what their playing etc... but that's not the case for me. I can make that feel, the pocket the melodic or harmonic aspect of the music better when I'm aware of what's going on. This comes from practicing those skills...

I can have a conversation while I'm soloing...to a point.

Fumblefingers... I can sight read most solos, really. Most won't notice the few mistakes, because it will feel right.
I can also write out music very fast, as much as I can memorize at a time. Usually phrases.

I don't believe copying other solos really helps as much as developing the technique to be able to play at the level of the solo. Which leads to how to develop the musicianship and technique.... of which I've posting about since I joined this Forum... it's always great to watch realizations about different aspects of playing jazz...

When I see there is a better approach to anything... I check it out and will develop the approach or technique if it checks out. I'll change... It almost seems that many won't change for any number of reasons, I digress sorry.

As far as playing others solos... I'm sure it helps... I mean if you really like someones approach etc...copy it and try and understand why you dig it so much, there's usually a reason... or it's just something that new to your ears.

I do believe if one develops the skills of transcribing music... eventually it will become easy, to the point that you'll hear something and it will fall into a form and you'll get it with out writing it out or memorizing each note. Just as you develop ear training skills... you don't just memorize all the notes... you memorize all the note in relationships to each other.

[fumblefingers]

Reg - impressive.

i remember that Dick Grove pointed out to us that we need to develop the ability to "write what you hear, hear what is written, play what we hear, write what we play, play what we read..." you get the idea. i was a long way from being able to do all of that when i bugged out of music and headed for computer science, lol. like a lot of kids i got started somewhat late, but even more devastating, spent my teenage years as a pop/rock/blues garage band player. no reading, very little formal study/concerts/recitals etc. lost a looooot of time there, and decided not to spend my 20s making up for it.

i remember a story in recent years on 60 minutes and/or the Wall Street Journal about a kid who is a composition savant/super talent. naturally he's also a pianist but he writes symphonies/concertos from the sound in his brain/ears, not unlike writing down one's thoughts in words. large sections of music are simply written down at a clip by this kid.

back on topic, what if a developing jazzer doesn't have the type of skill/talent that you had/have? Is I-A-I effective for them?

[Hep To The Jive]

Maybe it's just because I'm not a great sight-reader, but I understand the theory of lick just as well, if not better, by seeing where it lays on the fretboard in relation to the chord.

Same here. I always trying to see how a phrase fits the chord, and its easier by playing than by looking at the paper. Has something to do with me starting out playing by ear and learning reading and theory later, im sure

another thing, I dont understand why it so hard for me to apply a solo I learned to a real situation. Like, I was transcribing But Not For Me(Doug Rainey solo on Chet Atkins record), and Coltrane solo on I Hear Rhapsody. I got the licks, I understand their note choice, all sounds good when Im practicing at home. I played those tunes at a gig, and I just couldnt use any of it! I play a few notes, and then I have to do my own stuff, which is kinda based on those solos, but not nearly as consistenly good. It s like my mind start panicking, and I have to play what I play, not what those guys played. What I want is to be able to reproduce those solos live at will, and it never happens.

[Reg]

Hey Fumble... I believe you start with what you can do and have a plan of where you want to get... If that is "A" as far as how much to hear and memorize and write down...
So you start with just the form, right the spatial thing... I pretty much say this about everything in music, anyway. The form or spatial organization... then there is the filling in of the space. Most can get the rhythmic or at least the main rhythmic patterns etc... then the target notes of those target rhythmic patterns. Eventually you develop a routine and fill in the blanks.

I'm average talent at best... But I try and be organized and use what I have to develop what I don't.

I'm on a few fingering threads... wow, there is no organization, just memorize what your able to do or come up with and move on to memorizing the next thing. Sorry I'm just a little amazed.

[pamosmusic]

I think the value of transcribing for me comes more in that it forces me to listen closely to the same tune a hundred times. Beyond that I think the obvious thing would be learning to imitate it on your instrument. I think there's probanly some value to the act of actually writing the notes down but I also think that it can contribute to habits that are detrimental to your improvising. I think improvising is an ear-based skill first and a tactile skill next. The music is learned best aurally so if you write it all down (and I know this because I'm guilty of it) eventually you'll find yourself putting two hours in on your "transcription" just looking at the page without ever turning the record on. I think that's bad. The connection needs to be hands to ears. Hands to eyes will make you a better reader but not a better improviser. At the end of the day I find I got more from transcriptions i slaved over without writing down Nd never went to learn all the way through than I do transcriptions I learned thoroughly off the page. Sticking to your original question which is dealing only with improvisation ill say that I don't see any value in writing it down except to aid in returning to it to work further at a later date. Even then ... I recently started setting a rule for myself where I would only write the notes down after each chorus or something

[grahambop]

another thing, I dont understand why it so hard for me to apply a solo I learned to a real situation. Like, I was transcribing But Not For Me(Doug Rainey solo on Chet Atkins record), and Coltrane solo on I Hear Rhapsody. I got the licks, I understand their note choice, all sounds good when Im practicing at home. I played those tunes at a gig, and I just couldnt use any of it! I play a few notes, and then I have to do my own stuff, which is kinda based on those solos, but not nearly as consistenly good. It s like my mind start panicking, and I have to play what I play, not what those guys played. What I want is to be able to reproduce those solos live at will, and it never happens.

I think you meant Doug Raney and Chet Baker! a Doug Raney and Chet Atkins record would be ... different!

But I agree that's a great solo - I've been listening to that track too, in fact I intend to transcribe Chet's solo as well as Doug's.

I don't think the process works for me in those terms, I mean I know that I won't reproduce those solos in actual playing, and I don't really want to. What happens is that some elements of what I've learned rub off on my playing. For example I spent some time playing a couple of Jimmy Raney solos a few years ago, I really memorised them. But within a couple of weeks I couldn't remember them properly, and now I've forgotten them. But I know that my playing improved because of it. Better note choices, better ideas, better rhythms and phrasing, more inventive use of chromatic runs, etc. - I got a lot of benefit out of just those 2 solos. In fact I could hear better ideas in my head afterwards, without even picking up the guitar. And that stuff has stayed with me.

So I'm not worried about reproducing someone's solo or exact phrases - I don't think that's the benefit. It's more intangible than that. At least that's how it seems to work for me.

[kris]

If you like transcribe it is OK.It is like a passion. You can learn just one chorus or some licks from the solo.It is great. Work on your own language and adopt new things.Be creative.

[kris]

here is clint playing grant's solo:

Miss Ann's Tempo...

[JensL]

Hey gang. There has been some loose, discombobulated talk about this so I thought I'd start a clean, clear thread about it.

Assumption: "Jazz transcription" means writing it down and committing it to paper. No more, no less. It doesn't mean for example, that you can play it.


1. Learning Jazz improvisation - is transcription effective/valuable?

2. If yes, why? If not, why not?

3. For each person who responds, what do the first TWO PARTS of "Imitate, Assimilate, Innovate mean to you?

1. Yes, it is however not the only thing a student needs to work on...

2. It is basic research in writing (and hopefully later) playing good lines.

3. Transcribing something is not imitating or assimilating it, it is at most analyzing and storing. Learning to play it is imitating, and possibly assimilating the timing/phrasing. Learning to play lines with the material you transcribed is assimilating the melodic(or harmonic info)

Jens

[Jehu]

Question for those who have done a lot of transcribing (as in, learning to play others' solos): Do you make any effort to maintain the solos or material you've learned? Or do you just absorb what you're going to, and then let it fade away as you move on to other stuff?

[kris]

Learning to play jazz is a proces.Transcribing is one of the elements of this proces. In the practise you can learn what you play and how do you play. "You play what you learn".