The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 77
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    A bit of practical musical philosophy here.

    I never had problem with melodic ideas - my problem was always how to express them deirectly on the instrument in the most convincing way. This has always been and still is the general thread of my practice.

    I am not pro or teacher but I do teach occasionally - I try always to limit it within the competence I feel secure - there are aspects of jazz playing where I do not feel I have the right to teach anyone but in some aspects I know I can help... besides I enjoy it as it helps to systemize and firmulate things for myself too.

    What I noticed during the communication with these 'students' and what was discovery for me was that for most of them the situation is quite the opposite than it was for me: they often want to play something in general but they have no melodic ideas.
    At the beginning I was confused with the fact that I had to teach how to create a simple melody or melodic line.
    Things that were on unconcious level for me had to be transferred into some rational system.

    I think that jazz melodicism is basically built by the same principle that in classical music - it was derived from stadards that were mostly composed by musicians with classical cultural background - even though in light classical music - and in jazz that 'skeleton' was embelished and developed.

    The basis of classical melodicism is expressive intervalic movement with compensatory principle: i.e. jumps are compensated by scalar line, movement in one direction with movement in another direction and so and so on.
    Classical (and jazz) intonation is very subtle precise and important, the melodicism is developed to highest point and ithe melody contains information almost about every other essential aspect: rythm, meter, harmony - even dynamics and tempo (as these two are secodary and ca be derived from the essentials in my opinion).
    Its expressiveness very much connected by harmonic subcurrent that stipulated ternsion/release relationships. But it was developed to such an extent that hearing harmony was natural - especially inrealtive simple music as standards

    (Imho - rock music has different melodicism -much simpler, closer to spoken intonation with less nuances and expressiveness --- though there are lots of exceptions to of course).


    So I tried to figure out how I can teach a student to 'melodicize his thought' - to improvize a line, a motive a melody that would be capable to express all teh musical aspects and at the same time be induvidual and meaningful and expressive as to some degree a pure gesture.

    I speak about practical excersise...

    I tried to apply some typical jazz approach

    1) triad arp + 1 note, like 1-2-3-5, or 1--3-5-6 or any other combinations

    2) penatonics which I treat also as triads wuth added notes

    3) triad pairs --- a bit strange tool imho as I do not catch any purely musical principle behind these hexachords... it is mechanical but it may help to force person into melodic playing as it mixes lines and intervals but it requires guidelines for a student too

    4) I used some BH melodic excersises which are great but they are too be-bopish -- I would like to have too narrow stylistic reference

    A few times I composed excersises that contained bass line (not chords) and occasional melody notes wirtten out and some restrictions according to whic a student had to fill-in

    But still i am looking tfor some new solutions. I f you have any ideas... again I am speaking about practical excercises (preferable guitar related) that would force student to make proper choices and he will get it into his ears and hands eventually.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Well, this seems obvious, but I didn't see it in your post: They need to learn and internalize a lot of tunes, and be able to sing and play them by ear. In my opinion someone should know 10 tunes before going into any of the stuff you mentioned.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    I think I’d just teach them a load of standards by ear and then start work on solos, talking about theory as necessary.

    I don’t feel it’s reasonable to expect anyone to compose idiomatic jazz melodies, and even less improvise them, until they’ve been exposed to a lot of that material.

    Beyond this initial phase, licks are a useful halfway house until the player starts to develop a more integrated musical sensibility.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    Btw I think jazz educators get obsessed with trying to teach improvisation because they see this is a unique aspect of jazz. I don’t need to tell Jonah of all people that it is not.

    these tools in the OP are compositional tools of course, that can be productive in combination with a good aural sense of the music... of course as I know nothing about the person in question, I can’t really go further than this.

    in the end improvisation is learned within an idiom. You can’t be creative until an idiom is mastered. That seems to bother a lot of people but I can’t see how it could be otherwise.

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Head for the 3rd, it's the strongest note. How you get there is up to you. Chromaticism and dissonance over the V is jazzy.



    But it's never random or abstract. What's played must be in concordance with the whole feel of the tune, the harmonies, and the rhythm - so the 'backdrop' is more important than the notes. What I've done in the soundclip is only generic.

    If you think the 3rds sound like 'All The Things You Are', they do, but it's really the other way round. 'All The Things You Are' sounds like the 3rds, that's how it was composed :-)

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    They can also work on standard motivic development. The best thing about that approach is that it applies to any style of music, melody and improvisation. You take a simple melodic motif, and start working with that, transposing, altering, moving, augmenting or diminishing it, questions and answers, etc. Motivic development is pretty much taught similarly in classical and jazz, and it's easy to find material, theory and ideas online.

    You can organise motivic development material to either be a short lesson with having students work on it for weeks (for ever? ), or elaborate with multiple lessons.

    If they have been listening to any kind of music they will have a grip on that, whereas the second part of jazz improvisation, the "through composed" part, is a bit more advanced to get into as it requires some knowledge of the idiom, licks, transcriptions, etc. Mixing both works great, taking a transcribed simple phrase and working with that as a motif.

  8. #7
    They can also work on standard motivic development. The best thing about that approach is that it applies to any style of music, melody and improvisation. You take a simple melodic motif, and start working with that, transposing, altering, moving, augmenting or diminishing it, questions and answers, etc. Motivic development is pretty much taught similarly in classical and jazz, and it's easy to find material, theory and ideas online.
    Thank you

    'Motivic development' is a bit arguable area for me... bith in classical and in jazz. I know what is meant under that term usually, the problem I see there is that.... there is practically no actual development of motive as I understand it.
    But it is another topic maybe...
    Last edited by Jonah; 02-21-2020 at 04:02 AM.

  9. #8
    Thank you all for the idea with songs...

    Sure I use songs - and I insist on learning by ear... and I have an approach of hwo to use and learn from a song, from melodic structure/ harmonic realtions etc.

    I remember myself - before I got seriously into jazz guitar I knew many songs - some I could play on piano, some I could just sing, I knew the lyrics, knew the performers, often the movies where they came from, the context - I loved it... so jazz guiatr was natural expression of this love and passion

    But what surprises me that people sometimes want to play something 'jazzy' but do not know either context or music


    Btw I think jazz educators get obsessed with trying to teach improvisation because they see this is a unique aspect of jazz. I don’t need to tell Jonah of all people that it is not.

    these tools in the OP are compositional tools of course, that can be productive in combination with a good aural sense of the music... of course as I know nothing about the person in question, I can’t really go further than this.

    in the end improvisation is learned within an idiom. You can’t be creative until an idiom is mastered. That seems to bother a lot of people but I can’t see how it could be otherwise.
    This i very true.

    I would only stress one point.

    Why I was about more 'abstract' tools in this thread - not that much style related - because in modern conditions we have problem with living styles. We do quite a lot of 'what was before' and 'how it was before".

    Ho to keep it vivvid amd living? I do not know... it is probably in today's world becomes very individual issue as thee is no living language of that music ... nevertheless Peter Bernstein, or Bill frisell (when plays standards)., or Lage Lund or even Julian Lage with his direct stylistic references - they sound like modern language to me...

    So - maybe I am wrong - but I try to combine that more or less abstract (truely it is not abstract of course too bu more general maybe) tools that force a person maybe just to think in terms of what is going now with no big reference to style
    with diving into the style through songs and idioms... but for that the student muct really know what he wants.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    I don't know small a minority I'm in, but I think of this differently - I think.

    To me, melody comes from scat-singing, or some other form of musical imagination.

    What helps is to scat sing an idea for a measure's worth, or so, and then scat sing the next measure, and so on.

    To my (possibly narrow) mind, this is melody.

    I don't know what to call an idea that's composed from mathematical constructs (I know, that's too extreme). I guess it's melody too, but I don't think it's the same sort of thing. Not that I don't like it when it's well done.

    But for the student, it seems to me that being able to scat sing over some changes and play the line -- is the fundamental skill. The theory comes in later, at least to this way of thinking. The theory helps you remember and find the sounds and, at a more advanced level, find new sounds (not that I've gotten much from the time I've spent trying that).

  11. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    I don't know small a minority I'm in, but I think of this differently - I think.

    To me, melody comes from scat-singing, or some other form of musical imagination.

    What helps is to scat sing an idea for a measure's worth, or so, and then scat sing the next measure, and so on.

    To my (possibly narrow) mind, this is melody.

    I don't know what to call an idea that's composed from mathematical constructs (I know, that's too extreme). I guess it's melody too, but I don't think it's the same sort of thing. Not that I don't like it when it's well done.

    But for the student, it seems to me that being able to scat sing over some changes and play the line -- is the fundamental skill. The theory comes in later, at least to this way of thinking. The theory helps you remember and find the sounds and, at a more advanced level, find new sounds (not that I've gotten much from the time I've spent trying that).
    Musical imaginotion is as much part of pernoality and personal experience as rational tools. There is no contradiction.
    All in - I am not into theory here -- I am mostly very practical in music.

    But yes, singing (and scatting) is important part of - let me call it - natural musical expression.

    Even more: most greates classical condutors I admire im my opinion sing with orchestra (I can clearly hear it), or pianists like Horowitz - he just sings... it does not mean simplification of complext music... singing is phrasing, singing is breath.

    I absolutely agree about its importance.

    Especially on plucked instruments with its natural decay - singing on guitar means control on all the details of articulation or phrasing: where and how it starts how it flows - where and how it ends

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    A more precise description of "melodic idea" would help. I get the sense so far that what you mean is "an idea for a melody" rather than "an idea that IS a melody"...?

    If so, I would think it better to produce ideas whose content IS melodic in form from its inception rather than attempting to melodize thought that isn't.

    Thoughts or ideas that are intrinsically phenomonologically melodic need no reformation because they are neither verbal, visual, graphic, geometric, theoretical, nor any other sensory or conceptual modality other than the natural form of melody itself - in the perceived form of sound itself (applies to harmony and rhythm, too).

    If your thought or idea were not in melodic form (so you weren't hearing the melodic line in your mind's ear), then despite transforms, algorithms, methods, or systems to execute it, where would be the comparator against which to judge quality control, so you might know if you even played what you intended?

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding... music is intrinsically self revealing - it teaches you directly by your hearing it.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    You can also make up lyrics on the spot when you've an idea of what sound and phrasing you want. Or adapt existing ones. Like this: "Do you know the way to San José? Yes, that's where Cosmic Gumbo lives, and he's very [still trying to come up with a rhyme there]" (sorry CG, I can't help it; it's your silly handle & picture that get me going)

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    I never had problem with melodic ideas - my problem was always how to express them directly on the instrument
    I think it's called practice the fingerboard!

    they often want to play something in general but they have no melodic ideas.
    That's because they're young. Most college stuff is derivative. In fact, nearly all of it is derivative.

    I f you have any ideas... again I am speaking about practical excercises (preferable guitar related) that would force student to make proper choices and he will get it into his ears and hands eventually.
    I told you, head for the 3rd, it's the strongest note. Add a dash of chromaticism and a sprinkle of dominant dissonance and bingo. Your lines will be unarguable.

    Then, when you've got the rules, you can break them... and jazz was born.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    I've seen a couple of quotes
    one from Frank Vignola ...
    Essentially, 'learn lots of tunes....'

    Branford Marsallis , something like
    'dont worry about improv , learn lots of tunes
    and the improv will come along ....'

    I'm paraphrasing there

    I'm finding the above to be true
    (for me anyway)

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    There's one a month... and nobody does them except me. Even the thread-master has given up


  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by pingu
    I've seen a couple of quotes
    one from Frank Vignola ...
    Essentially, 'learn lots of tunes....'

    Branford Marsallis , something like
    'dont worry about improv , learn lots of tunes
    and the improv will come along ....'

    I'm paraphrasing there

    I'm finding the above to be true
    (for me anyway)
    I guess I'm confused. How can the answer to "how to play beautiful melodies" not be "learn and play a lot of beautiful melodies?"

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    I teach Barry Harris's Basics for melodic improvisation-
    Last edited by rintincop; 02-21-2020 at 03:59 PM.

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Ask yourself - How did Chet Baker do it? ...

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by princeplanet
    Ask yourself - How did Chet Baker do it? ...
    haha do what? you gotta be a bit selective here...

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Interesting topic. The "learn a lot of tunes" (to begin improvising) certainly makes sense. The more tunes I learn (and especially in the realm of lead/solo "licks" and passages)... the more arrows in my quiver. However...

    I have also always thought... there's little originality in that. Meaning, the great got great by "learning a lot of tunes", but many times their individual style (note choice and phrasing) did not come just from learning other's music... at some point, it comes out of the players imagination... it's the only way to be unique. I'll use an obvious example, altho not jazz: Steve Vai. Vai sounded like no one when he burst on the scene- including EVH- and to this day sounds like no one, and no one sounds like him (unless they are mimicking him of course). And having read/listened to ALOT of his interviews, it came from exploring the instrument, and the harmonic ideas, and his imagination (the "record player in his head")... e.g., a lot of noodling an experimenting. And a lot of sucking goes along with that, for a long time lol. I believe this is one aspect that cannot be taught, except in concept only.... just as I am talking about it here. You have to play freely, NOT being stuck to a particulate tune or idea, or "standard sound", you have to dare to suck as you explore the connection between your brain/soul and the music.... like meditation, the connection exists, you just have to figure out how to use it...

    Another more jazzy example is Jim Campilongo. Far from playing licks he's memorized over 45 years, he plays things NO ONE has played before, because HE pulled them out of his own imagination and brought them the life. Sure, a lot of his "tricks" come from Roy Buchanan, but if you've seriously listened to Campy, he sounds like no one else.... you can hear influences, like Buchanan and Bryant, but he's not just playing an amalgamation of other's people's licks in different orders. He has actually CREATED a new space on the instrument... he's gone where no one has gone before.

    In concept, being able to play whatever you think - instantly- is the goal. To be one millisecond ahead of the music, and know where the next note is going... taken directly from your imagination and placed on the fretboard. (not taken from a memorized lick). The journey may take a lifetime, but that's the joy... it never ends!

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Absolutely, that's the point. I'm quite sure that a lot of inquiries here are about looking for a 'quick way' to do things. We want the magic solutions, the quick route. Probably it's the same with most things, not just music.

    There isn't a magic quick way. Or maybe there are one or two but they're not really much good. The only way to get good at something is to become a nerd. You've got to get right into it, live it, breathe it, play with it, explore it, experiment with it, maybe see what others have done... you've got to immerse yourself in it completely for a long time without thought of time and, given the requisite flair, something will come out of it, bound to.

    Einstein once said he didn't think he was smarter than anybody else, it was just that he worked harder at it; he worried at it like a dog with a bone.

    I think that's true. There are no magic short cuts, just a lot of doing it for its own sake. Which, if you love what you're doing, isn't that terrible.

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by pingu
    I've seen a couple of quotes
    one from Frank Vignola ...
    Essentially, 'learn lots of tunes....'

    Branford Marsallis , something like
    'dont worry about improv , learn lots of tunes
    and the improv will come along ....'

    I'm paraphrasing there

    I'm finding the above to be true
    (for me anyway)
    see my comment above.

    i try not to post stuff that isn’t based on a foundation of something. Usually.

    people get hung up on improv. I blame the hippies and their individualistic notions of creativity.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rintincop
    I teach Barry Harris's Basics for melodic improvisation-
    This isn’t a good path for a neophyte improviser in my experience. It’s a pretty good one for a player with a good command of the basic materials.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ruger9
    Interesting topic. The "learn a lot of tunes" (to begin improvising) certainly makes sense. The more tunes I learn (and especially in the realm of lead/solo "licks" and passages)... the more arrows in my quiver. However...

    I have also always thought... there's little originality in that. Meaning, the great got great by "learning a lot of tunes", but many times their individual style (note choice and phrasing) did not come just from learning other's music... at some point, it comes out of the players imagination... it's the only way to be unique. I'll use an obvious example, altho not jazz: Steve Vai. Vai sounded like no one when he burst on the scene- including EVH- and to this day sounds like no one, and no one sounds like him (unless they are mimicking him of course). And having read/listened to ALOT of his interviews, it came from exploring the instrument, and the harmonic ideas, and his imagination (the "record player in his head")... e.g., a lot of noodling an experimenting. And a lot of sucking goes along with that, for a long time lol. I believe this is one aspect that cannot be taught, except in concept only.... just as I am talking about it here. You have to play freely, NOT being stuck to a particulate tune or idea, or "standard sound", you have to dare to suck as you explore the connection between your brain/soul and the music.... like meditation, the connection exists, you just have to figure out how to use it...

    Another more jazzy example is Jim Campilongo. Far from playing licks he's memorized over 45 years, he plays things NO ONE has played before, because HE pulled them out of his own imagination and brought them the life. Sure, a lot of his "tricks" come from Roy Buchanan, but if you've seriously listened to Campy, he sounds like no one else.... you can hear influences, like Buchanan and Bryant, but he's not just playing an amalgamation of other's people's licks in different orders. He has actually CREATED a new space on the instrument... he's gone where no one has gone before.

    In concept, being able to play whatever you think - instantly- is the goal. To be one millisecond ahead of the music, and know where the next note is going... taken directly from your imagination and placed on the fretboard. (not taken from a memorized lick). The journey may take a lifetime, but that's the joy... it never ends!
    its interesting how people see the result and imagine that to be the process, or that the process remains static over the course of the musician’s development.

    i can’t speak to Campilongo as I’m less knowledgable about his development as a player, but Vai’s first break was not as a guitarist per se, but a transcriber for Zappa. His second break was then to play very difficult written parts in his touring bands. As I understand he had some solos in Zappas band, but Frank was very much the main improviser.

    needless to say he literally wrote the book on Zappas playing. In short, he served a (very tough) professional apprenticeship. The diversity of his musical interests made him very original, but he was paid by Zappa to play and write down the right notes.

    how did he start? Learning Zeppelin and Kiss like most guitar playing kids of his generation.

    now, it’s interesting that we never seem to expect jazz players to follow the same path as a budding rock player. That is to start with the music itself.

    the need to be original is a terrible expectation to inflict on yourself let alone your students. I honestly believe trying to be original leans too much towards self love. It is better to love music and dive right into it.

    Originality comes from a deeper place than that. We may strive to have our own voice, but I think even then we might be trying to shape things too much. As teachers we can encourage a students in this direction of course, but we have to start with some basic skill set. The interesting thing is while people feel this instinctively with regard to rock and blues, they seem to think that originality is important from day one in jazz.

    At some point an element of self denial kicks in - if we copy Wes or whoever for too long, we need to stop playing those licks. often in accounts, this pressure comes from the community. But that’s not to say it’s wrong to start by copying Wes, or whichever beloved Musican.

    i think this shifting nature of this journey is poorly understood in current pedagogical practice.

    anyway if this was a forum of bass players, we’d be framing this completely differently haha
    Last edited by christianm77; 02-22-2020 at 12:58 PM.

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    I wish we could get away from this idea of trying to be like somebody else. We'll never be like somebody else and, even we did, we'll only ever be a poor imitation so what's the point?

    This doesn't mean we ignore what others have done, though. Stealing's fine but only when it corresponds with one's own feeling. Staying true to one's own feeling is the quickest way to finding one's own voice.

    There - 'the quickest way'... now I'm at it too