The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 159
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    What separates the great improvisors from the rest of us? Setting aside the prerequisite years of study, practice etc, why do some players seem far more advanced when compared to those that have been practicing just as hard for the same amount of time?

    Is it down to how musically gifted one is (perfect pitch etc)? Or how intelligent? Or is it down to how well one can remember what they've learned?

    When you first hear a player playing Jazz involving functional or non functional chord changes (as opposed to modal vamps) that astounds you, you're amazed at the endless invention, the seemingly impossible perfection when spinning perfect lines that meet every change, not with plain arps, scales or patterns, but with melody making at any tempo. The solos can be analysed to reveal true mastery, achieving the holy grail in Jazz improvisation, perfect composition in real time, a masterpiece of invention every time, whether for one chorus or a hundred. Must be genius, right ?

    Well, sometimes it obviously is. Just like there are born mathematical geniuses (people who can solve incredibly difficult equations effortlessly), at any one time there will always be a very small percentage of people alive that are bona fide musical geniuses. But there are also a greater number of people who can appear to be musical geniuses only because they can recall a great deal of pre learned material giving the impression that those 100 choruses you just witnessed must have been freshly minted and unrepeatable. Until you've been to a hundred gigs, or listened to a hundred different recordings where you start to notice large repeated chunks which make you realise that these players are mortals after all!

    Of course, it's no mean feat to have that kind of recall, indeed it's a different kind of gift. So I'm just putting it out there and looking for your own thoughts about this, particularly as it relates to your own aspirations- Are you trying to increase your store of prefab "material" to draw from? Or are you trying to avoid that approach and aim instead for true improvisation? Do you feel that the prefab brigade - that go close to impersonating true genius - are offering the listener better quality music? (because of it being largely precomposed?). Do you think the average listener cares how much is pre learned and recalled? (not just licks or lines, but maybe up to entire choruses).

    Or are you more focused on the enjoyment your improvisation brings you? Is making the changes with less interesting but truly improvised playing more satisfying for the performer if not for the listener? If you play for your own enjoyment, is there any point rehashing words, sentences or even paragraphs of music note for note? Even if you could?

    Finally, do you agree that many players feel the need to impersonate true musical genius and achieve that - to an extent - by committing a lot of material to memory and having it recallable? Are they trying to "fool" the listener? Or even other musicians?? (much harder I expect) ...

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    - Are you trying to increase your store of prefab "material" to draw from?
    I guess my question is, as a beginning Jazzer, are you referring to collecting licks verses just going for it? Is that a gross oversimplification? I remember being a young fresh faced Rocker back in college a hundred years ago, and I was talking to Jazzer who said, in no uncertain terms, "F*$% licks". It scared me off from jazz for about 30 years. And I still assume it's frowned upon to collect licks. Is this incorrect? Because if it isn't this raises a whole slew of additional questions best saved for another post.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Well, everybody has licks. Some folks are just better at tweaking them on the fly.

    A good jazz lick isn't like a ceramic bowl, it's a lump of play-doh. It's easily manipulated to work in different situations. You can add stuff to it and it will stick, or you can pull stuff away from it.

    I think I'll do a video on this. I'm good at a couple of things only, but one of them is tweaking licks on the fly.


    The thing with licks is, eventually they're ingrained enough that the lick, and it's permutations and possibilities, aren't "canned responses" to harmony anymore. They're an actual part of who you are musically, they're your "language" (there I go again, using the language metaphor that I've blatantly said I don't like)

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    Conflating musical language repertory with a perhaps simplistic-view term of "licks" makes an entire discussion of "improvisation" a bit ... odd.

    There are only so many ways to do X movement. For any given X. So any approach to any ultimate note has been done a billion times between 1700 and now.

    Add in a couple more lead-in measures to that ending, you add in more variations possible.

    But the language ... the notes ... by nature are rather limited. Even for jazz, which does add in complexities via chord replacement, quartiles, modal inversions and rinky donk. Ahem. (Jazzers always trying to be inventive) ;-)

    So discussions over "the TRUE method [style, form, mode, whatever] of Improvisation" always have a bunch of kinks in the very discussion.

    Improv is a personal "discussion" of musical material. Some are more interesting than others *to the listeners* but that is always a personal thing.

    And listening to Theorists have at it is at times intriguing. And can be humorous or ... very snoring.





    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by rNeil
    Conflating musical language repertory with a perhaps simplistic-view term of "licks" makes an entire discussion of "improvisation" a bit ... odd.
    Why odd? Improvisation to many means stitching together pre learned chunks - the art becomes how to hide the seams, or as Jeff puts it, how to tweak the chunks on the fly...
    The other extreme may be free form "singing" through your instrument, just inventing melodies without reverting to any rehearsed moves. Personally, I like (and try to do) a bit of both, but am noticing more and more that many players, even some of the greats, relied on prefab material more than I once thought. Kinda makes you re appraise...

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    I read a bit from one of the Yardbirds about Clapton's early days there. He was clearly kinda peeved at the kid at the time. This KID ... well, was getting constantly and rapidly increasing attention from the audience.

    This other YB said it was like every freaking night, Clapton's ability to play solos that pleased the audience grew. But ... it wasn't that he was pandering to them, or even seemed that aware of the audience while soloing.

    And ... damn it all, he was getting more interesting for the rest of the band to listen to.

    Yet ... that other YB player has never been able to put his finger on the big question: why?

    What was it that made Clapton's solos just seem more interesting and satisfying than the other guys? Because of course that difference is why Clapton became ... CLAPTON ... for such a large part of the public.

    And the other YB, and so many other very accomplished git players ... never did. Oh, major long careers in several bands for sure. But ... never ... Clapton.

    Doesn't make any difference if any of us like Clapton ... but he's a good example. Why his "sound" is so appealing to so many and distinguished from other players?

    So many jazz players are the same. There have always been highly proficient players who are pretty awesome ... but then there's Wes, Pass, Django, even Metheny.

    There's something there where the rest of us can try to play as beautiful, craftsman-like, and inventive as we can. Become very worth listening to.

    But ... there's something that makes some results just More. And that can't be taught.

    My best voice teacher had been developing an operatic career when young. SF Opera, Merola program, much work with Oakland and other places. I digitized her studio demo/audition tapes here a few years back.

    That gal had the best and fastest coloratura I've ever heard ... yet maintaining the exact same focus on every note no matter the jump.

    Power ... sheesh. Altitude! With the same timbre everywhere and at every volume. Plus incredibly good at acting through the voice.

    She went to her teacher and said "teach me to spin". That's the ability to sing a seemingly very quiet note, yet it still carries in a 4,000 seat house and over the 100 piece orchestra and other voices.

    Victoria DeLosAngeles could do that incredibly well. Emotionally VERY effective.

    But Jackie's teacher just laughed at the request. "No one can teach that. You either can or you can't." Making one angry young 20-something vocal student. Who found ... you either can or you can't. She learned to do anything else with her vocal instrument an operatic soprano need do. She couldn't ever spin.

    You can ... or you can't. Big lesson for some of those top end talent questions.

    The rest of us can always get better, a very worthwhile goal. And we enjoy playing and listening to each other. And we enjoy discussions like this too!

    But ... using music as an incredibly focused, touching language that "hits" people ... at the level of a Master... well ... if you can define exactly why some people are somehow at that level, maybe you can intellectually achieve the goal.

    What is the right mix of familiar and "new" ... that somehow also seems fresh? Why is his timing just ... more *something* ... than the other guy or gal?

    I don't think anyone ever has been able to define this, not really. But the possibility must exist ... ;-)

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  8. #7
    I don't think Clapton had a very large trick bag. I think I worked most of them out pretty quick when I was young. I never (nor did most) put them quite together with his distinct phrasing and tone, but the method to his approach was relatively simple. Learn a couple of box shapes, some key patterns and licks and you sounded like a Clapton clone within months.

    On the other hand, if you tried to improvise (and what would be the point?) in the style of a Wes clone, let's say, then, then that takes several decades for most. At any rate, I'm not as interested in the "je ne sais quois" of a player's style in this discussion as I am in the player's store of ideas. A vast store (and the ability to use it all) can impersonate true genius maybe? Take Sonny Stitt vs Charlie Parker, or even Joe Pass vs Wes. It's contentious, I know...

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    Good points, and I think it is becoming more clear that it is not really a "musical memory" thing... musical memory, rhythm, and chops are all considered "given" - they comprise the foundation for everything else. It is that "everything else" that is really being eluded to here.

    So given memory, rhythm, and chops, what else?

    I think it is a quality of instantaneous emergent creativity, an absolutely fluid management and development of vocabulary that reveals no seams or rivets of construction, and a transcendent flexibility where one hears multiple musical paths and lets the best one be executed and expressed. But ultimately I think all this "everything else" is really just pure musical judgement, the most difficult thing a musician achieves in one's playing, but of highest valuable because it is the musical magic that cultivates listeners and transforms them into enthusiasts.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Certainly memory and intelligence play a role, as they do in the study of anything.


    But if you listen long enough, everyone has a bag. Listen to Eric Dolphy. At first listen, it’s like nothing you’ve heard before. Listen to him for a month, and you practically know what his first line will be.


    Ftr, it’s a hell of a line.

  11. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by vintagelove
    Certainly memory and intelligence play a role, as they do in the study of anything.


    But if you listen long enough, everyone has a bag. Listen to Eric Dolphy. At first listen, it’s like nothing you’ve heard before. Listen to him for a month, and you practically know what his first line will be.


    Ftr, it’s a hell of a line.

    Yes, even the most famous of the renowned spontaneous improvisors like Parker, Rollins, even Wes.... all have their bag. Parker ingeniously got maximum mileage from his tricks by making an art form of hiding the seams. Does not diminish his genius however!

    But if you had a prodigious memory and could compose and remember a thousand solos for every tune you play, then who could tell that you're not actually improvising? Even if you actually analysed every solo (and who's gonna do that! ). Hey, there are people with amazing memories (reciting pi, memorising a card deck within minutes, remembering names and events perfectly from any day of their lives etc etc). If someone with such a memory used if for Jazz, then they wouldn't need to learn to be creative on the spot (totally different art form) and yet still be able to leave those around them convinced they are improvising...

    Yeah, I know, what would be the point, right? The "being spontaneous" bit is the whole point, and the whole reward. But then there are plenty of examples of players repeating entire solos note for note, for one reason or another. Certain bands like the Modern Jazz Quartet (unless I'm mistaken) made a thing of it...

    Speaking for myself, I would be more than a little disappointed if I were to realise that a player who had amazed me with their endless well of ideas was actually drawing from a large resource of memorised large chunks (say 8 bars or more), because the memory trick ( as impressive as it is) seems far less transcendent than the spontaneous creativity feat we admire so much.

    Further, I'm willing to bet there are many players, even some among us, that would rather their audience or band mates be left thinking that they are genuinely freewheeling when they are in fact just regurgitating prefab lines. Takes a lot of shedding to be a magician!

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    It's like fairytales: you thought they were true when you first heard them; then in spite of learning that they're not, that first impact isn't lessened.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    What separates the great improvisors from the rest of us? Setting aside the prerequisite years of study, practice etc, why do some players seem far more advanced when compared to those that have been practicing just as hard for the same amount of time?

    Is it down to how musically gifted one is (perfect pitch etc)? Or how intelligent? Or is it down to how well one can remember what they've learned?
    Your first paragraph glosses right over something, and that is the practice of improvisation itself. It's not a matter of practicing rote material or memorizing exercises and then flipping a switch to masterful improv. And memory? Sure. But thoughtful, reflective, recall? No. There is no time. What one improvises is more like an impulse. So how does one prepare themselves to respond with effective impulses?

    Generally speaking, you have to practice the way you want to play. So that means that one's improv routines should be comprised of the exact same challenges that will be encountered when improvising. The "pure" creation part - almost like one is possessed by a spirit, or is relying on pure chance, has to be very small. Otherwise, what gets played will probably be pretty darned forgettable.

    IMO of course.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Sonny Rollins was mentioned above, I think he is an interesting example. His earlier work seemed to have more ‘recognisable’ lines and I personally find it more enjoyable. In later years he tried to get away from that approach, and play with more ‘pure improvisation’ as it were. Even by his own admission, this resulted in good nights (when the inspiration flowed) and bad nights (when it didn’t).

    Unfortunately the only time I saw him was one of the latter, it was one of the most tedious concerts I have ever endured. He just basically honked single notes repeatedly, or played the most banal phrases endlessly, for twenty minutes or more on a single tune.

    So that is probably why most jazz soloists rely on a certain amount of pre-learned ideas (I know I do). But when you play, you try and let your mind go almost blank and see what comes out. Sometimes phrases emerge that you have never played before, or maybe some of your usual ideas get transformed a bit, then you know your ‘music brain’ can subconsciously create new things out of the old (at least that’s how it feels to me when it happens).

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Great point about memory.

    I am thinking about it since a few months... I mean is my lack of memory of the bottleneck of my progress. The trigger was Mark's great tagline about learn the repertoire. I see it every day, and I am happy to see it every time.

    There is a trap in this conversation, there are two kind of memory, the melody memory and the muscle memory. To simplify the topic, just disregard the high tempos, where muscle memory is mandatory.

    So I think the key is a great memory (in head, you can recall, associate, sing) full of melodies, both tune heads, and great moments of solos. Then in case you can play by ear, plus you have at least medium or better creativity to combine, alter then you are done. We can call this a "trick", but this case every high level human activity can be called as a trick, so I see no reason to call it that.

    My current view is a great recallable, associable melody memory in ear is mandatory, maybe in unconcious level.

    This is very different from muscle memory and what we usually mean on lick. Of course no one can be live entirely without licks, especially when starting learn to improvise.

  16. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    your ‘music brain’ can subconsciously create new things out of the old...
    That's what I'm in it for, I think, that feeling you get when you sink back and let your subconscious express something. If you were 100% rote, you miss out on that feeling and you may as well be a parlour magician. I emerge from an artful experience like I do a sexual one, there's transformation, release, and yes, sometimes, disappointment!

    But I hear ya re latter day Rollins, and agree that pure improv might make the player feel good, but the listener unmoved. That's why I think I rely on more prefab stuff when playing in front of others, I don't wanna bore people. You gotta be either brave, ignorant, or confident in your ability to entertain for long periods if you're gonna eschew the licks...

    But to get back to the memory thing, do you ever get the feeling some players (past or present) are just basically rehashing etudes?

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    That's what I'm in it for, I think, that feeling you get when you sink back and let your subconscious express something. If you were 100% rote, you miss out on that feeling and you may as well be a parlour magician. I emerge from an artful experience like I do a sexual one, there's transformation, release, and yes, sometimes, disappointment!
    I really do not think that sexual experience has similarity, I mean if there is similarity that is not the way. High emotions and high sensual and chemical state seems to be obviuos to get the great great solo, but if you examine the greatests, you will find, that majorty of them a very disciplined, self concious, and controlled even during the performance. Miles, Bill Evans, Coltrane, Chick Corea (my hero of creativity), Brecker (well, an other hero of creativity). Of course you can list contra examples, Keith Jarrett seems to be in trans sometimes

    If you insist to search mind states, then a very relaxed, meditatve state, where you allow your mind to wonder and explore is more useful I think, to achieve creativity.

  18. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Zina
    ...A biology teacher says it could be due to a pretty bad concussion I had not long before this started. Is that possible or just hippie talk? ...
    I'm quite sure there are many confirmed cases of head trauma leading to special "gifts" regarding sudden increased capacities in memory, creativity, or both if you're lucky!

  19. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabor
    I really do not think that sexual experience has similarity, I mean if there is similarity that is not the way. High emotions and high sensual and chemical state seems to be obviuos to get the great great solo, but if you examine the greatests, you will find, that majorty of them a very disciplined, self concious, and controlled even during the performance. Miles, Bill Evans, Coltrane, Chick Corea (my hero of creativity), Brecker (well, an other hero of creativity). Of course you can list contra examples, Keith Jarrett seems to be in trans sometimes
    Some call it "spiritual", some liken it to a sexual thing, I think what we all mean is that we get to experience some level of transcendence...

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    I'm quite sure there are many confirmed cases of head trauma leading to special "gifts" regarding sudden increased capacities in memory, creativity, or both if you're lucky!
    "Falls down a well, eyes go crossed. Gets kicked by a mule, they go back to normal."

    Cousin Eddie

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    That's what I'm in it for, I think, that feeling you get when you sink back and let your subconscious express something. If you were 100% rote, you miss out on that feeling and you may as well be a parlour magician. I emerge from an artful experience like I do a sexual one, there's transformation, release, and yes, sometimes, disappointment!

    But I hear ya re latter day Rollins, and agree that pure improv might make the player feel good, but the listener unmoved. That's why I think I rely on more prefab stuff when playing in front of others, I don't wanna bore people. You gotta be either brave, ignorant, or confident in your ability to entertain for long periods if you're gonna eschew the licks...

    But to get back to the memory thing, do you ever get the feeling some players (past or present) are just basically rehashing etudes?
    Not sure if this is quite what you mean, but I read somewhere that Sonny Stitt was sometimes thought to be a kind of ‘lick-machine’ player. But then again he knew so many and they were so good, that he always sounded great!

  22. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    Not sure if this is quite what you mean, but I read somewhere that Sonny Stitt was sometimes thought to be a kind of ‘lick-machine’ player. But then again he knew so many and they were so good, that he always sounded great!
    Well yeah, that's exactly what I mean, and a fine example. I know that a lot of his audience wouldn't have cared whether he was recalling licks or not and might even be impressed that he's actually not "just making up all that stuff" - haha, but other jazz musicians I think can sense when a player is just too perfect. We like to hear some risk taking and a flub or two is not just forgiven, but appreciated!

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Imo, musical memory, as most memory types, is active. The "bits" are "processors" themselves - merging the emotional memory - the feel - with ways to produce this. If a lick or snippet doesn't have much emotional value anyway, using this comfortably while putting the mind into rest would cause some annoyance probably.. eventually. Hopefully enough, to go search for a better way to play a nice solo.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    So the spontaneous thing... personally I believe external stimulus or interaction is part of the show. And when one is not able to recognize what's going on in that moment... or some basic conscious skills of playing music, much can be missed or misinterpreted. I know... I get the level of performing up to where it may sound magical etc... (it's obviously not, I'm just an average pro...) But music does get more dialed in.... when good players want to. Personally again... there are standard very physical approaches for reaching those levels of performance. And not just putting together licks.

    But... there are those players where you just get on board and go. And make sure you don't cross that line.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    Well yeah, that's exactly what I mean, and a fine example. I know that a lot of his audience wouldn't have cared whether he was recalling licks or not and might even be impressed that he's actually not "just making up all that stuff" - haha, but other jazz musicians I think can sense when a player is just too perfect. We like to hear some risk taking and a flub or two is not just forgiven, but appreciated!
    I saw Sonny Stitt once and he sounded great, it was certainly a lot more enjoyable than that Sonny Rollins concert I went to!

    Also I think when it’s live, the impact of any good player is different from hearing them on records, it probably sounds more spontaneous when live because everything is played once and gone, as it were.

  26. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg

    But... there are those players where you just get on board and go. And make sure you don't cross that line.
    Which line do you mean here?