-
So, you don’t know any songs and you can’t name any songs that are too soft. And you don’t know what key the songs you do know are in. But you say you can play the changes just fine.
Even if that’s true you have huge gaps in your foundation and would probably benefit from a teacher.
-
05-03-2022 04:27 PM
-
Hm.
Well, whenever I play solo on a tune with minding the chord changes, trying to outline the chords... yes. It's fine whattever happens with the backing track.
But when doing it my precious hobby mode - fully by ear, eyes closed, patterns forgotten - it's another thing. Very different. Relying on mushy 7th,9th,11th chords is hard like that.
edit: by "hard" I mean, it gets numb.Last edited by emanresu; 05-03-2022 at 04:47 PM.
-
Thats the hobby-mode: 1st.wav - Google Drive
Originally Posted by AllanAllen
edit: there are no theachers for this, I've looked around
Again, don't you judge me. It's a hobby in progress. A cool one. But the proper way and the all-by-ear way doesn't want to mix at all.
Last edited by emanresu; 05-03-2022 at 05:46 PM.
-
You can still do it by ear...just, yknow...actually learn some tunes.
-
20 on the playlist of last 2 years.
-
So let's see if I can understand this... Originally Posted by emanresu
You have two modes. One is playing to changes 'properly' or 'by the book', using patterns; that is, outlining the chords. The other is your 'hobby' mode when you simply do it all by ear, and apparently you prefer that one, or you prefer the results you get from it.
But I think you're saying that you find extended and/or altered chords hard to hear clearly. You call them 'mushy' and therefore hard to play over. Would that be right?
I suppose that's right. To the unaccustomed ear they are hard, or certainly harder, to hear clearly than straightforward major, minor, dominant, diminished, augmented, or slash chords. But you know what I'm going to say... it's a matter of practice and familiarity - a whole lot of it, and some are better at it than others.
Personally, I think you just have to keep plugging on. You could get a teacher but teachers are expensive - that is, if you can find a good one. But I'm sure if you apply yourself diligently and methodically you'll make some progress. I'm afraid jazz is absolutely about subtle harmonies which are hard to distinguish if one isn't used to them. And I certainly don't claim to be very good at it myself, that's for sure.
Looking at lead sheets and backing track videos will help. YouTube vids have the chords written out as well as the audio (but even so the audio can embellish the written chords). Or you can see if the lead sheets match what recorded artists are doing.
As for what you play over changes, that's the whole improvisation issue that everybody faces. It needs study, practice, experience, and all that. It's not going to happen overnight.
That's all I can say, really. Do tunes, study the harmonies, work at it. Play the more complex chords and hear the sound of them. The more you do, and the more logically you do it, will determine your progress. Jazz is not simple. it's hard work, even for the talented.
-
nonsense, the right way to do it is to hang out on Internet forums Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
I hate backing tracks, they are invariably crap. They are also bad for your playing if you become addicted to them.
Some live musicians play like backing tracks. Aebersold-itis… the chart says this chord, so that’s what I will play (often with too many extensions right in the range you are trying to solo in.) Good musicians don’t do this.
i quite like DrumGenius and I also often practice with a metronome; or nothing and then record it and play along with it (that teaches you a lot.) Often I record comping.
-
I wouldn't say jazz is soft, if you watch a good band live, there's more stuff happening than any other style of music, it's like a war if anything..
Hearing harmony is one of the difficulties in jazz. Some people can do it by ear, probably ones raised with this music. For me, theory helped immensely in being able to tell what's going on. The moment you can hear something, and connect it to the fretboard, theory is no longer needed, unless trying to explain it to someone else.
And equally important is the second part, actually being able to follow these melodies on the fretboard. These have been my basic goals for years, to be able to hear things, and play them without thinking of anything. For me it takes a lot of work on basics, song melodies, triads, arpeggios, inversions, etc.
-
Oh, very good post. Excellent point about people raised with the music. Also about theory being useful, etc. Originally Posted by Alter
-
I have a different opinion on backing tracks. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
If they are very well recorded and correctly, it's a pleasure to practice with them.
It's not true that good musicians don't practice with backing tracks.You need to know what to practice and how to make noticeable progress in the playing ...
-
emanresu -
What Alter said (better than me).
-
It all comes down to having good hearing. Originally Posted by Alter
This is what theory and practice are for - to hear better, it is all very much integrated.
Besides, listening to recordings of other artists gives a lot.
-
Sorry, gotta clarify here - please reread cos I didn't say that good musicians don't practice with backing tracks (I can only comment on my own practice and I may not be a good musician, plus I know quite a few good musicians who do use them and that would be rather RUDE) but rather that good musicians don't play LIKE backing tracks. They listen. Backing tracks obviously can't do that. Originally Posted by kris
I have a different opinion on backing tracks.
If they are very well recorded and correctly, it's a pleasure to practice with them.
It's not true that good musicians don't practice with backing tracks.You need to know what to practice and how to make noticeable progress in the playing ...
I don't see why it would be a problem to practice with pre-recorded backing tracks provided its not all you do... Personally I don't like them and they form little part of my practice regimen which is mostly with a metronome, or I practice comping for myself or building up my own backing tracks via a DAW or looping which in my opinion is a much more holistic practice activity that teaches me more than simply firing up an old Aebersold or whatever (some of the Aebersolds are pretty good tbf). I do sometimes use backing tracks to demonstrate things.
Where backing tracks might have value is in teaching jazz feel. You could play along with recordings (a time honoured approach) or I very much like Drum Genius because its based on real drums played by masters. If you play with a computer backing track you are never going to get that human feel. You'd be better off playing with a good Aebersold but these are not as flexible. If you want to practice with unvarying mechanistic clock time, use a metronome. (And work yourself harder by taking the beats out so it clicks every other bar or every four bars - Time Guru is an app that does this for you.)
If you need something to record with or just to demonstrate something fair enough.
This aside, bear in mind I am a professional musician who frequently plays with other humans so my aims may be different to others. But what's good for my playing - developing more solid time, being able to comp well and so on - is the hard work I undertake to prepare myself for real world playing situations, and may be different than what other people use their playing for, which may be more relaxation or a creative outlet. If backing tracks bring you pleasure I promise not to be a dick about it.
Anyway here's the article leading UK guitarist and educator Mike Outram wrote on the subject, which sums up my views.
What You Will Learn From Band In A Box - ElectricCampfire.com - Creative Jazz Guitar Lessons
-
+1 Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Sorry.I didn't understand it properly.
ps.
I have a friend - an excellent saxophonist who only trains with Aebersold - he plays sensational.
Thanks to Aebersold, he learned several hundred tunes.
-
@christian miller
Just curious, what is the reason that you are using backing tracks in your videos on YouTube?
BTW, thank you for those, especially that one about “Speak No Evil”
-
"You will not learn anything about feel from Band in a Box Originally Posted by Christian Miller
You will not learn anything about rhythm from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about melody from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about harmony from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about history from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about playing with people from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about music from Band in a Box
So there. "
Yeah, but how much will I learn about rhythm, harmony, feel melody, history etc if I just practice to a metronome?
Sure, I know, better to play with people, or at least recordings, but it gets expensive hiring a backing band to play 500 choruses of ATTYA for my own amusement.... and as for playing with recordings, it's hard to improvise over the top of other people when they're ... um ... improvising ...
I say stop making people who practice with backing tracks feel they're doing something wrong, they're not. It's a stepping stone between practicing with a metronome and practicing with recordings. If they do enough of each, they might be ready for a real band one day.
So there...
-
You're welcome... Originally Posted by boo
Yeah this is one of the examples of using them for demonstration as I discussed above - a necessary evil.
So going back I used LearnJazzStandards channel (which is I think Band in a Box?) backings just for demonstration purposes.
More recently, I'm leaning towards using loop pedals etc where I need to partly because it's easier to do the audio (otherwise it's my computer speakers coming back through the mic). It's also a good excuse to practice my comping and bass playing lol. I think Barry Greene also makes his own tracks on a DAW, but which requires a bit more technical wherewithal, but it is good practice in both senses.
I should really do a video on this topic. I basically never practice with backing tracks. I think I wasted about five years using them a while back.
-
Yea... soft generally comes from lack of skills. (not always). But most musicians have very vanilla ears...Even when they push and expand musically what they are performing.
By skills, I'm implying technical and performance. I guess the other direction from soft would be hard, as far as terms work. So part of not being so soft... and moving in a hard direction LOL.
Anyway personally... most musicians tend to see and hear chords and melodic material in isolation. Even with an understanding of musical functional context. Functional understanding basically comes down to being aware of how something works in a context. With music... how chords, notes and rhythm .... work in a musical context, a Form.
Soft, again personally and moving past technical and performance skills.... Soft come from the vanilla syndrome. Not being able to hear and play with multiple musical organizational references.
Example, tunes in Bb... you see and hear a Bb chord going to Eb and back to Bb... maybe like... O lady be Good
What would you play.... I know I have lots of choices, 1st off.... you should be using chord patterns, at least most of the time. And the style you decide to perform in would help with your choice of what chord patterns and how to expand the harmonic organization, same thing with your solos.
The trick to doing or performing with this approach is being able to get past memorized performance... kind of like being able to play chord or melodic licks with different rhythmic and harmonic organizations.
Most can expand with rock and roll blues or blue notes, references or styles... which is still vanilla, but the process of expanding with rock and roll blues is an example of expanding harmonic references. Moving from Soft to ?
I tend to use that Vanilla etc... terms.
Take tunes and play them in different styles... learn how different styles imply different harmonic organizations.
Learn Chord Patterns...
-
If you think practicing with a metronome is comparable to practicing with Band in a Box you are doing it wrong. In my opinion, metronome practice should stretch and school your sense of time rather than providing a comfy cushion for soloing on. It's hard work. Originally Posted by princeplanet
"You will not learn anything about feel from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about rhythm from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about melody from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about harmony from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about history from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about playing with people from Band in a Box
You will not learn anything about music from Band in a Box
So there. "
Yeah, but how much will I learn about rhythm, harmony, feel melody, history etc if I just practice to a metronome?
OTOH if you want to learn changes, you are best off IMO learning to play the changes of the song in chords and then chord tones with a metronome and no harmonic info - force yourself to express the harmony. Then if you do go back to using a backing track, you'll be able to play the tune a lot better.
BTW it's by no means universal that metronome practice is a good thing - there are a few dissenting voices, but mostly the older generation. I tend to think it's good.
In general if your aim is to improve as a player there are many better practice activities you can be doing. Mike has about a million he can suggest, his courses are great if you are looking for something to do.
If that's what turns you on, as I say I won't be a dick about it. If you enjoy it, do it. But I would say playing and practice are two very different things.Sure, I know, better to play with people, or at least recordings, but it gets expensive hiring a backing band to play 500 choruses of ATTYA for my own amusement....
For me, I tend to get sick of the sound of my own playing after about three choruses, so I seek refuge in transcription and practicing new material. I suppose if you play to exhaustion, you might be forced into finding new stuff, so maybe it is a good thing to do?
It's a tricky one. I understand not everyone has other musicians to play with, as I say above. So I would say - if you want to improve, ditch the backing tracks for practice and do other stuff, and use them for playing only? Does that seem like a reasonable compromise?and as for playing with recordings, it's hard to improvise over the top of other people when they're ... um ... improvising ...
I say stop making people who practice with backing tapes feel they're doing something wrong, they're not. It's a stepping stone between practicing with a metronome and practicing with recordings. If they do enough of each, they might be ready for a real band one day... IMVHO
-
"You will not learn anything about feel from Band in a Box what crap.....ask jimmy Bruno...BB even hired pat martino and mike moreno...lots other bignames..
-
Interesting take. FWIW I actually do practice things I know without backing tracks, because I can hear the harmony in my head and I can sort of tell how extensions and alterations sound against the the "imagined" harmony in said head. But here's the thing, how I got to that point was by drilling as many ideas as I could think of against thousands of choruses of backing tracked tunes. Without doing that first for a long time there was no way of really hearing more obscure but cool voice leading in my lines. I needed to hear the tension / release thing against some sound, not just trying to hear it in my head when I couldn't really. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
So if anything, for myself at least, I'd say it makes more sense to practice with backing tracks, and play tunes I can hear in my head without them. But probably not before...
Hmm, there are too many ways to skin the cat i suppose, and I'd never insist what works for me should work for others. Hence I find it a little offensive when even experienced educators like to insist that there's a one size fits all solution to learning Jazz. You've read "Thinking In Jazz", all the greats found different paths up the Jazz mountain, and while they had no choice in their day but to have to play with recordings and people, my firm bet is that many of them would have loved the opportunity to use many of the various learning aids we have today if they were available back then.
If a teacher today thinks their student's progress is stunted due to practicing with backing tracks, how can they be sure it's not due to any one of thousands of other possible reasons! (including inappropriate or ineffective teaching methods)...
-
Band in The Box is the best software for learning jazz.
This is also some kind of metronome but it's more fun to practice .
I have known this software / BB / since its birth.
-
Is this the sort of thing you'd call soft?
-
jazz is the kind of music where in the same song everything can happen, from soft to brutal, and sometimes it can take just a few seconds !
Reply With Quote
John McLaughlin and Joe Zawinul duet Zawinul’s...
Today, 10:50 AM in The Players