Can expert players really modulate fast or do they plan it out?

[Christian Miller]

This might all be right, Christian, but you'd still need to be able to get from a 3 down (C minor) to a 5 down (C locrian) and in my understanding is this what gives him or her headaches.

Or maybe I'm wrong and misunderstood the OP...

I would personally regard this as a more complicated way of looking at it, but nothing shocks me these days lol.

The long and the short of it is - practice.

People think they have trouble playing changes often when actually they have a trouble keeping track of the form.

[mr. beaumont]

I'm always of the "micro to macro" school of thought...practice until you can change what you play with every change...then look for ways to group.


Or the way I've said it in the past is "get to the point of where you can nail every change...and then don't ever do that."

[Rsilver]

For instance does Blue Bossa in fact have three key areas in it - Cm Fm and Db? Or just two as the melody would suggest?

Or is it all just in Cm and the Db is a sort of mode change (to C locrian)

Its funny the things you start thinking about that you never normally think about when you have to explain or teach something. Is a blues in three separate keys/modalities, or just one overall key?

Is autumn leaves in Bb and Gm or just Gm?

The answer is yes to all. All these things can be true at the same time.

You can do all this sort of analysis at practice time or you can just practice the tune “by ear” and try to get better at fitting your lines to the changes. They are both valid approaches. I would say that many great players (Django, Wes, G. Benson, Tal Farlow) took the “by ear” approach but analyzing the tune theoretically is certainly an approach that many take. However, at PERFORMANCE TIME you can’t be fishing around mentally for all the analysis you did at PRACTICE TIME. The tune will just proceed while you run through your mental/theoretical maps. You have to play by ear at performance time, in my opinion. But it’s scary, especially at first, because you have to jettison your mental maps.

[Mark Kleinhaut]

Jazz comes from the ear. Theory is cool for educating the ear, and it’s helpful sometimes to have analytical tools to refine concepts and grow. But actual playing music has nothing to do with knowing a bunch of chords and scales. Learn tunes. Memorize them and really know them. Play them in multiple keys. If you learn a tune like Donna Lee inside and out you will have enough raw material to play hundreds of tunes- it’s pack solid with essential vocabulary straight from Bird. It takes many hours of doing simple things. Hundreds of hours. Thousands of hours. Spending that amount of time on a tune like Donna Lee is more valuable for PLAYING Jazz than every other book on jazz ever written combined. Once you can play all those books will be fun to explore. Before you can play they will all be torture, enough to make any sensible person quit.

[Victor Saumarez]

You've arrived at more or less the correct conclusion on your own. Most people discover this later, and some never believing creation will suddenly fall from the sky. Players do indeed have a library of licks, which can be short phrases, extended phrases (a whole chorus even), and rhythmical ideas. The closest analogy is language. If you've ever learnt a language you know you aren't given grammar and vocabulary separately and told to speak or write. You are given examples of words combined together using grammar. A child learns one word at a time, and then phrases.

Now, there are elements of improvisation where pure creativity seems to be happening and some will do this, or have more ability more than others. For example, it can be a very simple, or rhythmic idea that may be used a bit like a pause, or breathing space such an "um", "ah", "er" in speech. Another element is the spontaneous use of licks ie combining them innovatively to create a solo, or changing them rhythmically, or even altering the notes within them.

There are players who claim to improvise in the pure sense of the word using their extensive knowledge of scales. Alan Holdsworth was one of them. However, I think you'll find they had to practice their scales in order to know them, and a scale is a lick in the sense it follows a predefined order.

I know of no 'pro' players who—when pressed—ever claim to be doing anything else, at least for the most part. The myth may have come about in the early days as a way of protecting livelihoods. You either had it or your didn't.

[Ukena]

Some of the advice here sounds to me like Steve Martin's advice on how to be a millionaire. He said,

"First – get a million dollars."

[emanresu]

"just practice" is not the best suggestion.
"practice smart" is better but tells nothing much either.
"learn a lot of songs" "do transcriptions" "play arps a lot". Thats the standard working combo.
The OP's question was really specific. And the answer "practice a lot" is not.

[Mark Kleinhaut]

"just practice" is not the best suggestion.
"practice smart" is better but tells nothing much either.
"learn a lot of songs" "do transcriptions" "play arps a lot". Thats the standard working combo.
The OP's question was really specific. And the answer "practice a lot" is not.

to be explicit, solid players can modulate tonal centers effortlessly without planning or thinking about. It’s an immediate reflexive process to what’s going on, whether part of the song form, tangential to the form, or completely out.

[emanresu]

to be explicit, solid players can modulate tonal centers effortlessly without planning or thinking about. It’s an immediate reflexive process to what’s going on, whether part of the song form, tangential to the form, or completely out.

Yeah. But there are certainly ways to make it happen sooner than 10 years of that all-aproved standard method.

[Mark Kleinhaut]

Yeah. But there are certainly ways to make it happen sooner than 10 years of that all-aproved standard method.

I missed the 10 year part. I’ve seen some get there way faster for sure.

[Marinero]

Jazz comes from the ear. Theory is cool for educating the ear, and it’s helpful sometimes to have analytical tools to refine concepts and grow. But actual playing music has nothing to do with knowing a bunch of chords and scales. Learn tunes. Memorize them and really know them. Play them in multiple keys. If you learn a tune like Donna Lee inside and out you will have enough raw material to play hundreds of tunes- it’s pack solid with essential vocabulary straight from Bird. It takes many hours of doing simple things. Hundreds of hours. Thousands of hours. Spending that amount of time on a tune like Donna Lee is more valuable for PLAYING Jazz than every other book on jazz ever written combined. Once you can play all those books will be fun to explore. Before you can play they will all be torture, enough to make any sensible person quit.

This is the answer that 99.9% of working musicians will tell you. . ." Learn tunes. Memorize them and really know them. Play them in multiple keys." (MK) So, when I first started playing guitar at 11 y.o., I learned as many songs as possible since I wanted to start a band. Once I knew enough music to play a couple of sets, I found a drummer and another guitar player and we started a group and practiced in our garage 4-5 days a week after school. In less than a year, we had our first paying gig($25.00 for three--early 60's) at the local Catholic Church Dance night for pre-teens/teens. It was the regimen in those days that every song had a guitar solo and there was always a designated "lead guitarist." So, how did we solo with no music theory? By ear. Some solos worked; others didn't. But, it was how you gained a reputation in your neighborhood and it's how your band got jobs. How is this different from Jazz? It's nothing other than(in performance) Jazz is a much more complex musical idiom than R@R/Soul/R&B but the principle is the same. Learn the songs. Use your ears. Why do you think so many young players today are so boring and predictable . . . because they approach music like a math equation . . . not a creative Art form. Here's a blast from the past . . . I wonder if Chuck knew about the Dorian??? Enjoy.
Marinero

[Filmosound 621]

Chuck is playing through a 1961 vertical panel Gibson GA-200 Rhythm king amp.

I have one of these for sale, it is in Hamburgo, Germany.

[Christian Miller]

This is the answer that 99.9% of working musicians will tell you. . ." Learn tunes. Memorize them and really know them. Play them in multiple keys." (MK) So, when I first started playing guitar at 11 y.o., I learned as many songs as possible since I wanted to start a band. Once I knew enough music to play a couple of sets, I found a drummer and another guitar player and we started a group and practiced in our garage 4-5 days a week after school. In less than a year, we had our first paying gig($25.00 for three--early 60's) at the local Catholic Church Dance night for pre-teens/teens. It was the regimen in those days that every song had a guitar solo and there was always a designated "lead guitarist." So, how did we solo with no music theory? By ear. Some solos worked; others didn't. But, it was how you gained a reputation in your neighborhood and it's how your band got jobs. How is this different from Jazz? It's nothing other than(in performance) Jazz is a much more complex musical idiom than R@R/Soul/R&B but the principle is the same. Learn the songs. Use your ears. Why do you think so many young players today are so boring and predictable . . . because they approach music like a math equation . . . not a creative Art form. Here's a blast from the past . . . I wonder if Chuck knew about the Dorian??? Enjoy.
Marinero

Well there's the thing - Chuck may not have known about Dorian, but he knew Dorian. just like Charlie Christian.

It's convenient to have a label for it that everyone knows, but in the end it's the sound...

[Jimmy Smith]

My teacher Tony Monaco gives me theory exercises to work out. He doesn't say jazz comes only from the ear and not from theory. He uses theory and his ear. They work hand in hand. I think I would believe him a little bit more than the jazz forum elite. He's extremely melodic and musical too.

[Rsilver]

He uses theory and his ear.

I think you use theory at practice time which gives you associations of various technical approaches over chord changes. This then gets incorporated into your musical imagination which is applied at performance time where you use your ear. Just my opinion.

[Jimmy Smith]

True but using theory ideas isn't necessarily eliminated in performance nor is it misguided to think that way to a degree.

Tony will run through demonstrations of tunes for me and point out theory ideas that he's thinking..

[Marinero]

" He doesn't say jazz comes only from the ear and not from theory. " Jimmy Smith

Who said this????
Marinero

[Mark Kleinhaut]

" He doesn't say jazz comes only from the ear and not from theory. " Jimmy Smith

Who said this????
Marinero

I think I said that. I’m sure Monaco knows what he’s talking about, so it’s probably just a difference if semantics. What I try to get across is that theory trains the ear, but the ear is still the source of making music. Can you make lines purely from the math and interval patterns? Of course you can and they might even sound slick and hip- but pulling that shit live on a gig without the ear for guidance is pure jive. Do that in the practice room to expand the ear- fine. But it ain’t music until you actually can hear it.

[Rsilver]

What I try to get across is that theory trains the ear, but the ear is still the source of making music. Can you make lines purely from the math and interval patterns? Of course you can and they might even sound slick and hip … etc.

I agree with Mark. Here’s the problem: it’s hard to play from theory and by ear at the same time. They are both trying to take up the same space in your mind. So you have a dom 7th chord and you are pulling out your cool super locrian runs and suddenly you have a pure musical idea that you don’t recognize — what is it? That would sound cool! But you are stuck thinking scale x, y, or z, and the odd original musical moment has passed you by.

I hate to appeal to authority on this, but I once asked Jim Hall if he thought about scales or other musical constructs while he was improvising and he said, quite sternly, that that is not cool. You can’t be listening to your fellow players if you are wandering around in your head looking for theory to apply.

One caveat: I think you can talk to yourself while improvising, in a self-coaching way: more bluesy! less bluesy! more outside! less notes! etc (but don’t be too hard on yourself)…

[Jimmy Smith]

I think I said that. I’m sure Monaco knows what he’s talking about, so it’s probably just a difference if semantics. What I try to get across is that theory trains the ear, but the ear is still the source of making music. Can you make lines purely from the math and interval patterns? Of course you can and they might even sound slick and hip- but pulling that shit live on a gig without the ear for guidance is pure jive. Do that in the practice room to expand the ear- fine. But it ain’t music until you actually can hear it.

I agree. Obviously the ear or the musician's inspiration is the creator of the music. Music isn't created by inanimate information. But to say the ear is the source of jazz isn't really accurate. 99.9999999% of musicians wouldn't come up with crap for decent jazz without using some theory. It's more accurate to say the ear and theory is the source of jazz.

I agree with Mark. Here’s the problem: it’s hard to play from theory and by ear at the same time. They are both trying to take up the same space in your mind. So you have a dom 7th chord and you are pulling out your cool super locrian runs and suddenly you have a pure musical idea that you don’t recognize — what is it? That would sound cool! But you are stuck thinking scale x, y, or z, and the odd original musical moment has passed you by.

I hate to appeal to authority on this, but I once asked Jim Hall if he thought about scales or other musical constructs while he was improvising and he said, quite sternly, that that is not cool. You can’t be listening to your fellow players if you are wandering around in your head looking for theory to apply.

One caveat: I think you can talk to yourself while improvising, in a self-coaching way: more bluesy! less bluesy! more outside! less notes! etc (but don’t be too hard on yourself)…

That isn't true that you can't think of theory or constructs or devices while improvising. Where did you get that idea? How do you think Monk played his complex harmonies that suit his mood? Do you think he was aurally singing out 6 note voicings in his head every single time? You must be joking. He's using a combination of theory and his ear/music instincts. They're not polarized.

[Mark Kleinhaut]

I agree. Obviously the ear or the musician's inspiration is the creator of the music. Music isn't created by inanimate information. But to say the ear is the source of jazz isn't really accurate. 99.9999999% of musicians wouldn't come up with crap for decent jazz without using some theory. It's more accurate to say the ear and theory is the source of jazz.

That isn't true that you can't think of theory or constructs or devices while improvising. Where did you get that idea? How do you think Monk played his complex harmonies that suit his mood? Do you think he was aurally singing out 6 note voicings in his head every single time? You must be joking. He's using a combination of theory and his ear/music instincts. They're not polarized.

I recall some lessons from years ago with the late great Ted Dunbar where he addressed these issues. In a nutshell, he said the analytical intellectual brain can’t process “theory” at the speed of live performance, and it was our subconscious minds that need to take charge of the performance. The high brain teaches the low brain “offline” or when we practice. When we perform, it’s best to just get out of the way. So, when Monk was performing, he probably wasn’t thinking about anything at all, or nothing about music theory.

[rpjazzguitar]

Every great player had his path to greatness -- and for each of them, there's another equally great player who did it some other way.

There are great players who know and utilize theory and others who don't.

I doubt there are great players who don't have great ears and time sense.

That said, I think Mark has it right.

Things divide up into practice vs performance and slow vs fast. You start slow in the practice room to develop the ability to play without much conscious thought at high tempo on the bandstand.

As far as the OP about expert players, I think intermediate players can do it on tunes they know well. From there, they can advance by knowing a lot more tunes well.

[Jimmy Smith]

So the theory allows the player to internalize all these great structures and free himself up to focus on being creative at performance time, but it's not theory when he's performing. Ok.

[Mark Kleinhaut]

So the theory allows the player to internalize all these great structures and free himself up to focus on being creative at performance time, but it's not theory when he's performing. Ok.

see, I’ve been saying all along it’s semantics! We agree