Guitar Improvisation frustration

[christianm77]

Fonte is not that important for Mozart music... it's key realtions which makes it music.

Well Fonte is just a trope of 18th century music. It's not specifically to do with Mozart. But it's a thing. Raw materials that you can use. One of the essential melodic/harmonic modules used in writing a Minuet, for example.

Mozart taught that there was such a Fonte to his student, and showed where structurally it would be used in the Minuet, for example. That was posted by takemitsu (IIRC) elsewhere. Can repost if you wish. It's interesting.

According to Gjerdingen and Sanguinetti, Mozart's conception of key would have been quite different to ours.

Most analysis of Mozart's music taught academically is based on 19th century and 20th century ideas. This may not in fact be a bad thing (Gerdingen seems to think it is, at least form the point of view of being able to write music like that), but it certainly means that our understanding of his music has changed.

From that point of view, why not understand the music any way I find useful?

[fasstrack]

what's wrong with retro?

PM sent...

[fasstrack]

She actually checked it out of the library for me.

However, the Kama Sutra, it's not.

Good one...

[fasstrack]

Ah you know you want to :-)

Don't really. Not publicly.

I know you are joshing, you............................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ................IMP...

[fasstrack]

Yep. I think people should take it in context. But there's no shortage of young fogeys who want to recreate the music of 1956, only not quite as swinging and demand that what they do is the 'real jazz.' On the other hand, the other faction will make 'music' with no tradition and say the same.

A lot of these guys are phenomenal players, far in advance of myself.

But the musicians I admire have both. And some of the guys who are thought 'super modern' internalised the earlier music year ago - I mean, have you heard Dave Douglas playing bop as a young man? Good lord.

And just today, Gilad Heckselman (!) was asking David B from this forum where he could find Barry's weekly class. So he values both, too. (I mean we knew that already, right?)

Everyone who knows me understands I venerate the music and teachings of the Barry Harris, but I'm quite happy to play fusion, modal music whatever. I'm not even entirely convinced that jazz is a meaningful term for a lot of what I do, and I know for certain he would say that it wasn't (and consider it a value judgement).

That's cool. But I value tradition and purism even if I choose to ignore them in some of my own music.

The cutting edge, forward looking music of yesterday becomes the classical music of today, and attracts custodians, keepers of the flame who might reject the modern world, but crucially, know the history and have a deep well of knowledge. Drink from that well and take what you need.

What he said. Except the part about 'phenomenal players, more advanced than myself'. I get on the bandstand with these guys all the time and consider them peers. Neither they nor myself are 'phenomenal', merely good---on a good night. No put down there. It's hard ​to be good. We're all working on it, each in our ways...

[Jonah]

i feel frustration..

[Boston Joe]

Again, he's a great man....

Sometimes we lose sight of the fact that it's entirely possible to admire, or even revere someone, without necessarily agreeing with everything they may have said and/or done.

I admire Frank Zappa greatly. He's actually something of a hero to me. This is based on the fact that he did what he wanted to do, the way he wanted to do it, and somehow or other managed to make a pretty tidy living at it. Does that mean I'd have liked him if I'd met him? No idea. Do I endorse every aspect of his personality? Not on your life. Do I agree with everything he ever said or wrote? Nope. Would I want to write music like his? Maybe a little, but not in the main.

But still I admire him. More than anyone else, his example showed me the power of not giving a f*** what anyone else thinks of you.

[fasstrack]

And piggybacking on that: So as not to hijack the current thread I think I will start one about the Jazz Cultural Theater days, and talk about Barry, C. Sharpe, Tommy Turrentine, Junior Cook---guys who IMO were phenomenal, players and people. I think it needs to be told, as they have largely been left out of jazz history penned by 'experts'.

Stay tuned...

[fasstrack]

Sometimes we lose sight of the fact that it's entirely possible to admire, or even revere someone, without necessarily agreeing with everything they may have said and/or done.

I admire Frank Zappa greatly. He's actually something of a hero to me. This is based on the fact that he did what he wanted to do, the way he wanted to do it, and somehow or other managed to make a pretty tidy living at it. Does that mean I'd have liked him if I'd met him? No idea. Do I endorse every aspect of his personality? Not on your life. Do I agree with everything he ever said or wrote? Nope. Would I want to write music like his? Maybe a little, but not in the main.

But still I admire him. More than anyone else, his example showed me the power of not giving a f*** what anyone else thinks of you.

Yep. People, especially brilliant people, are multi-layered.

Hey man, we're hijacking the OP's question and the thread...

[danmcb]

+10000 for play the melody, and work it up from there.

Lot of guitar players I met see a tune as a grid of chords. It's a disease.

Really cool thing is just comp the chords and sing the song (actually as I am more of a horn player, this is main reason I play some guitar - we were too poor for pianos when I was a kid, etc etc )

Or, sit at the piano, play partial chords in the left, melody in the right.

Whatever it takes to hear the melody and chords as kind of attached to each other. The melody is the washing line, the chords are the clothes hanging off it.

Oh yeah, and start with simple tunes with great melody and work up.

good luck!

[fasstrack]

i feel frustration..

Sorry. Why?

I feel you...

[Thumpalumpacus]

I read somewhere Mozart was actually HIGHLY influenced by the work of Charlie Parker, and later Coltrane. Really interesting stuff

Was this before or after he served in Vietnam?

[Thumpalumpacus]

For a while, I dated a girl who was a grad student in music history. When I started talking about how jazzers use modes to analyze stuff, she looked at me like I had two heads. I said something like, "It's really just looking at a key through the lens of a particular chord," and then talked about how that was useful for improvising. Then she got it. But it was obvious that never in any of her classes had modes been discussed in that way."

That's wild. Boorstein, in The Creators, marks the introduction of modes as a turning point in Western music. Hard to imagine a music historian not having heard of such a basic concept.

[fasstrack]

Was this before or after he served in Vietnam?

...and picked up a habit...

[Jonah]

...and picked up a habit...

for wearing wigs

[fasstrack]

for wearing wigs

....A good place to hide the s&&t...

[Boston Joe]

That's wild. Boorstein, in The Creators, marks the introduction of modes as a turning point in Western music. Hard to imagine a music historian not having heard of such a basic concept.

She knew about modes, but more in the context of, i.e. Bartok, etc. The idea of using modes as an entry point to functional harmony was what she hadn't heard of.

IOW, why would you analyze a II V I as Dorian, Mixo, Ionian when it's all just major? Using modes that way is helpful to an improvisor, but to an analyst, not so much.

They were interesting conversations (she was the only GF I ever had who knew anything at all about music theory, so that was kind of nice), but ultimately, she didn't really care for theory and was much more interested in the history.

[Jonah]

Sorry. Why?

I feel you...

maybe because I cannot explaine myself properly...

Excuse me this off-top but in conlusion to my Mozartian line I want add this air for 'Don Giovanni'.

You actually do not need to understand the text - the music contains it all: this short air is complete instruction and descritions...
Mozart shifts between slightest changes of temper... so swiftly tha you canot even catsh it... now it's doubt, now it's hope, now belief, now it corwadice, the decision, the prayer, then anger, threat, rejection... everything...

How short it is! But how much of us is in it!
The dramatic climax lasts about 30 seconds of music only (from approx 1:30 to 2:00) - but just listen it contains so much that sontimes it take a life to leave through..
And listen how Mozartian it is - how suddeny deep thoughtful doomed turns this seemingly light-hearted scene...

I take this performance not only because of great baritone Piter Mattei, but also because of wonderful action that reflects musical dramatic action better than any I've see... Peter Brooke could understand music.

Check how subtle is his usage of form, genres, harmonic movements, orchestration to achieve the meaning...

he was greatest dramatic composer ever... he did not need signature motives like Wagner - but the effect he achieved was so complex and so astonishingly unexpplainable that it was just real life as it is.

Bach knew all about God in us, Mozart knew all about human in us...

[Boston Joe]

he was greatest dramatic composer ever... he did not need signature motives like Wagner - but the effect he achieved was so complex and so astonishingly unexpplainable that it was just real life as it is.

I don't think that drawing comparisons between Mozart and Parker diminishes the genius of either. They were different men working at different times. In Mozart's time there were no movies, no TV, no radio, no records. The theater was all of that (and even then, mostly for the rich). Parker was improvising on tunes that people already knew from hearing them on the radio or on records. So, there's a difference in intent. What Mozart does in the video above probably has more in common with what someone would do when scoring a film soundtrack. What Parker did was probably more akin to what folk musicians or minstrels did in Mozart's time.

The fact that some commonalities exist between them shows only that jazz is informed by the classical tradition.

I appreciate Jonah's frustration. I think he feels that we are not getting the full gist of his appreciation for Mozart's genius, or that finding threads of commonality between Mozart and Parker somehow reduces the magnitude of Mozart's accomplishments.

To me, those commonalities are illuminating. They speak to tradition and history. They don't place the two men in competition with one another.

[Longways to Go]

+1 on Mozart as a source of inspiration for improv. However, it helps if you have put in hours on the piano.

I'm no expert, but in my world, melody comes first, then chords -- by ear if possible (as opposed to reading the chart), then start foolin' around. One string soloing is a great way to break out of dead sounding technique/formula for me. Also the blues, always the blues. And I find practicing my scales slowish to be very useful at this point.

I love that Lee Konitz scale mentioned above too Seems right on to me.

[fasstrack]

maybe because I cannot explaine myself properly...

Excuse me this off-top but in conlusion to my Mozartian line I want add this air for 'Don Giovanni'.

You actually do not need to understand the text - the music contains it all: this short air is complete instruction and descritions...
Mozart shifts between slightest changes of temper... so swiftly tha you canot even catsh it... now it's doubt, now it's hope, now belief, now it corwadice, the decision, the prayer, then anger, threat, rejection... everything...

How short it is! But how much of us is in it!
The dramatic climax lasts about 30 seconds of music only (from approx 1:30 to 2:00) - but just listen it contains so much that sontimes it take a life to leave through..
And listen how Mozartian it is - how suddeny deep thoughtful doomed turns this seemingly light-hearted scene...

I take this performance not only because of great baritone Piter Mattei, but also because of wonderful action that reflects musical dramatic action better than any I've see... Peter Brooke could understand music.

Check how subtle is his usage of form, genres, harmonic movements, orchestration to achieve the meaning...

he was greatest dramatic composer ever... he did not need signature motives like Wagner - but the effect he achieved was so complex and so astonishingly unexpplainable that it was just real life as it is.

Bach knew all about God in us, Mozart knew all about human in us...

Aha. BTW, who gets paid for running this group therapy session?

[fasstrack]

I jest, of course.

'I kid ​Jonah'...

[christianm77]

And piggybacking on that: So as not to hijack the current thread I think I will start one about the Jazz Cultural Theater days, and talk about Barry, C. Sharpe, Tommy Turrentine, Junior Cook---guys who IMO were phenomenal, players and people. I think it needs to be told, as they have largely been left out of jazz history penned by 'experts'.

Stay tuned...

Hell yeah

[fasstrack]

Hell yeah

2 stories already posted: funny guitar player stories, everything else...

[Thumpalumpacus]

She knew about modes, but more in the context of, i.e. Bartok, etc. The idea of using modes as an entry point to functional harmony was what she hadn't heard of.

IOW, why would you analyze a II V I as Dorian, Mixo, Ionian when it's all just major? Using modes that way is helpful to an improvisor, but to an analyst, not so much.

They were interesting conversations (she was the only GF I ever had who knew anything at all about music theory, so that was kind of nice), but ultimately, she didn't really care for theory and was much more interested in the history.

I guess it's harder to feel it when you ain't playing it?

BTW, couldn't get along with anyone who thinks Dorian is major. That flat third just kills the relationship.