-
Originally Posted by grahambop
Dear Stim, what I said to Tal even though he didn't ask me :-)
As a matter of interest, I am intending going to Specsavers shortly as my current specs are broken. This must be one of those mysterious coincidences sent by the universe to remind me....
Last edited by ragman1; 02-28-2023 at 07:23 PM. Reason: insert fatally wounded spec pic
-
02-28-2023 06:50 PM
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Don't worry about it, just general confusion. It's been a long day
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
It's only natural that the answers are vague and contradictory. In a recent thread I wrote that honestly, what it feels like to me is that I telepathically push my musical ideas to my hands, and listen carefully to confirm they produced what I wanted to hear. That is basically describing the method taught by Harold Hill in The Music Man, "The Think System"!
-
^ That's really silly. The more proficient one becomes at music, the less able they are to explain it? That isn't true. Everything can be explained after the fact. And a lot of it comes from predetermined frameworks beforehand. Of course there are many instances where creativity is more the guiding force, but this isn't the rule as if music is all mysterious and one is better at it if they don't know what they're doing. It's a language that can be explained and taught like any spoken language. Even if many people don't understand it as such.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith
how much more there is to know of what I don't
know, including what I know of how I know what
I know but also what I know of how I don't know
what I don't know, yet someday I know I'll know.
-
What's up with this theory...I've said that several times.
A jazz musician must be able to hear well and work on a musical workshop - be technically proficient.
The theory is not difficult to master - it can be mastered in a few months.
I'm not sure if you understood it correctly.
-
To become a good improviser is to become a good story teller. To learn how to build a solo, how to present and develop points and arguments, draw pictures and describe things..
Then specifically for the Jazz idiom, one has to learn the music and its language, which involves listening to hundreds of albums and artists, learning some chords, scales and arpeggios, working a lot on listening and interacting, and learning the theory required to make sense out of what's happening.
Lots of work, but it should be more fun than work! And it's as simple as learning a tune, learning the melody, and playing around it. Then you go from there..Last edited by Alter; 03-01-2023 at 04:37 PM.
-
^ I agree. That can be tough to attack broadly. I like to listen to clips I like and try to quantify what makes them so effective and then practice integrating those specific things.
-
It can be as simple as this:
Learn the melody
Learn how to embellish the melody
The end result will always sound good.
-
Originally Posted by pauln
Improvisation is the culmination of the internalization process that is the result of all the prior musical activities. Sometimes the internalized skills result in more freedom and confidence, other times you have more habitual, often deeply buried patterns to fall back on.
My understanding of OP's question is, he is looking for a practice process that he can trust that would get him there. What I mean by "contradictory and vague process" in the post you quoted (which I should've worded better), is musicians descriptions of their practice path, not what they are thinking when they improvise (which is much harder to elaborate).
-
Originally Posted by John A.
I worked a lot on fretboard internalization over the years to develop a unified view of single lines and chord voicings across the fretboard. It's been fun but it has also involved a lot of hours of disciplined work (and still does to a lesser extend).
This is the approach where you put in a lot of work early on and increasingly reap the benefits later on. The earlier hard work allows you to have easier access to musical possibilities, variations, applications etc on your instrument with very little mental effort. That's when the musical development grows more efficiently and the process is more fun. Maybe there is a way to amortize that dry, hard work more gradually but it's harder to come up with a reliable practice plan that works that way.
-
It becomes fun when you achieve some fluency. And even that's not guaranteed :-)
-
Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith
Of course, there's things people call theory that I don't think are "theoretical" at all. Fretboard knowledge isn't theory. I don't think there's anything "theoretical" about scales or building chords either, but maybe some folks do.
I'll say it again...almost ALL of the time the song itself gives you all the information you need.
-
Maybe we should come up with a less divisive name than "theory" for a certain category of musical knowledge, lol.
I remember seeing an Anderton's video where Lee holds a common dominant 13 (drop3) voicing and says something along the lines of "Someone showed me this chord, I have no idea what it is but I like it". Then Chapman looks over to see what shape Lee is holding but he has no idea what it is either. Not only they don't know what the chord is called but clearly (and more importantly) don't know how each note in a grip relates to the chord intervallically either (which note is the third, seventh, "6"th etc).
Now, I'm not saying this type of knowledge is necessary to be a good musician blah, blah. I'm just being agnostic about it for the sake of this discussion. But this is the sort of musical and instrumental knowledge with take for granted on this forum. Most musicians seem to consider this type of knowledge theory. Maybe we should call this type of thing "applied musical knowledge" going forward because I think most of the theory debate on the forum is about the semantics.
-
I agree with the above answers, but would add memorizing and recall as two separate things. You could learn a 100 licks, but not be able to use (recall) them in real time. Common problem. Some claim they hear the lick just before they play it.
To avoid your playing sounding like regurgitated licks, it might be useful to do a little planning, or mapping out beforehand. To me a good solo is a contrast between high notes and low notes, rhythmical contrast, dynamic contrast, having melodic highpoints, a beginning, climax, and end.
A device I use to connect all the dots (literally the frets) is visual. Often, recall comes from being in a particular location on the fret board. An idea begins in proximity to where the previous one ends, while being conscious of the above. There is nothing wrong with playing at the bottom of the neck and then leaping to the top if you're going for contrast, but if it's because the only lick you can recall is making you do it ...well, may be a little more prep is needed.
-
Originally Posted by Victor Saumarez
Trying to pull up exact licks is a recipe for disaster, because if you make a mistake, you've painted yourself into a bit of a corner...
The other thing I always think about is listening to the alternate takes on classic jazz albums...you'll often hear some similarities in solos. Improvising doesn't mean you can't go in with a plan.
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
Acquiring the skill and knowledge it takes to get better technically and creatively requires time and structure and can pose challenges. But I sincerely do not experience that as work, and hesitate to use words like "discipline" because that makes it seems like toil and punishment. I can practice/play/study for almost endless hours and not feel the time passing or any desire to stop, which I cannot say for any of the other activities I do that actually are work. I think that's close to a universal attitude among people who stick with jazz (or any form of music, TBH). If it feels like toil, something is wrong.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Yes, you'll sometimes hear solo performances being closely repeated on different nights. That's if you can get away with it and your band leader is tolerant of it. Interestingly, on the recent Wes documentary he openly admits to playing Charlie Christian solos on gigs when he was younger. I reckon this was more common than we think.
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
-
Originally Posted by John A.
Some of the skills that helped me the most (working on different time feels, rhythmic independence, working on application of concepts on different part of the guitar, internalizing fretboard, learning difficult progressions etc. etc.) actually require a lot of concentration and can get exhausting after an hour. These are also the types of things you don't get rewarded for immediately. That's the part that requires drive and discipline. Because you need to work on them regularly with a concentrated affort and gradually develop the skills. But being driven and disciplined in order to develop a skill at a high level is a blast.
Maybe all these skills came effortlessly to you but I know many good musicians also worked this way and still do. I think Bruce Forman said that when he "really" practiced, he could only do it for a short amount of time.Last edited by Tal_175; 03-01-2023 at 02:01 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Victor Saumarez
A solo has like, a shape to it. And you can have that in your head as a preconceived notion. It's not playing a similar solo note wise, or someone else's solo, or like that...it's more like a map, if that makes sense?
Or the song itself is the cities and counties and stuff, and your solo is the roads...there's different roads to get to the same place but you might still want to stop in St. Louis for lunch on your way to Tulsa...
Or analogies are stupid.
-
Originally Posted by John A.
I think maybe we're using the word fun in different ways.
-
Originally Posted by ragman1
From Bar Chords to Bebop
Today, 02:33 PM in Improvisation