Generic Question - How do you Improvise?

[Jimmy Smith]

How do you know they didn't talk about theory? Have you seen straight no chaser where T Monk is explaining Boo Boo's birthday to Charlie Rouse?

My teacher told me the story of when Jimmy Smith called him in the middle of the night when he was a teenager. Tony said Jimmy scared him lol. Because it was the middle of the night, he wasn't expecting it, and he really respected him. Tony said he picked up the phone and Jimmy went, Tony Monaco?! in his gruff voice, it's Jimmy Smith. You gotta play the right chords!

Lol. Tony said he didn't know what Jimmy meant and he had to figure it out. We talked about it and Tony said he meant using the right chords for the tune and manipulating your tonalities to suit everything.

[John A.]

There's being able to improvise and there's thinking you can improvise. For those who just want 'fun' I suppose anything will do. For the more serious it's hard work.

I think maybe we're using the word fun in different ways.

Work = thing I don't really like doing and probably wouldn't do if not required to by other people or circumstances.
Fun = thing I like to do and cheerfully do without extrinsic prompting.
Hard = places demands on me that I have trouble meeting due to some sort of lack of physical or mental ability; induces a feeling of stress.
Easy = can do without a sense that it is beyond me or generating feelings of stress. (does not mean "requires no effort" or "instant", but it does mean "eventually within my grasp")

Obviously, there are a degrees of all of the above, but I think of music practice, performance, and study as being in the Fun/Easy quadrant.

[humphreysguitar]

From Friedrich Wilhelm Marpurg's Treatise on the Fugue (Part One, IX):


"I think that both theoretical and practical musicians very often miss the point in their conduct with one another. An eccentric [Grillenfänger], who has turned grey by the compass and ruler and is unable to play the simplest of tunes, looks upon the practitioner of art with scornful pride. He does not touch the keyboard before contemplating that the minor sixth is the proportione supertripartiente Quintas [i.e., the ratio 8:5]. A mere practitioner, on the other hand, laughs at the theoretician with the countenance of a misguided dilettante [Petitmaitre]. He only admits entrance to those with a violin or a wet [newly composed] score in hand."

[Christian Miller]

If I thought theory was detrimental I’d have a good excuse for not being better. So that’s an incentive to be mad at theory I suppose ;-)

[mr. beaumont]

If thought theory was detrimental I’d have a good excuse for not being better. So that’s an incentive to be mad at theory I suppose ;-)

I prefer to lament my lack of "talent."

[Christian Miller]

And here I was excited to think a useful posts were coming this thread. Instead you guys are having another circle jerk over the same dead horse.

That’s completely unfair. Circle jerks are usually more fun!

[kris]

How do you know they didn't talk about theory? Have you seen straight no chaser where T Monk is explaining Boo Boo's birthday to Charlie Rouse?

My teacher told me the story of when Jimmy Smith called him in the middle of the night when he was a teenager. Tony said Jimmy scared him lol. Because it was the middle of the night, he wasn't expecting it, and he really respected him. Tony said he picked up the phone and Jimmy went, Tony Monaco?! in his gruff voice, it's Jimmy Smith. You gotta play the right chords!

Lol. Tony said he didn't know what Jimmy meant and he had to figure it out. We talked about it and Tony said he meant using the right chords for the tune and manipulating your tonalities to suit everything.

I'm not an expert on theory, but it seems to me that not all outstanding musicians have written books on methodology - jazz theory... although there are a huge number of them on the market.Jazz education seems to have only just started to develop in the 70's, I think.
Certainly all this has made jazz musicians more aware of what they play.
Lol these are just my guesses.
for example, Ch.Parker was more of a practitioner than a theorist for me.I know he never parted with his saxophone.
Then, after his death, theoretical books on his playing began to be written, etc....

[Jimmy Smith]

Jazz education proliferated and formalized after the golden age but imo education and theoretical approaches still existed back then.

[Christian Miller]

The golden age…. What made the golden age the golden age?

Gigs!

What makes the present age the present age?

Associate professorships!

[pauln]

Some here using the incorrect definitions of note and interval are now engaged in trying to define music theory.

[emanresu]

4. Trying to play a solo that speaks to itself.
5. With itself.

[Jimmy Smith]

Some here using the incorrect definitions of note and interval are now engaged in trying to define music theory.

That's really sick, pauln.

[pauln]

That's really sick, pauln.

I've no idea what you may mean. Am I wrong about it?

[Jimmy Smith]

Yes, I don't know what kind of argument that is to say if people don't follow your semantics then they're discredited. If you want to clarify for the forum how notes are not in fact notes then fine.

[ragman1]

You mean like the tritone being able to summon demons?

Exactly, although I believe the devil's interval existed before they opened Berklee

[Christian Miller]

Apparently the devils interval thing is bollocks

good story tho

apparently it’s people taking the statement ‘mi contra fa, diabolus in musica’ a bit too literally. As this was mostly in the 19th century (those romantics) can’t blame the internet for everything haha.

[Christian Miller]

Exactly, although I believe the devil's interval existed before they opened Berklee

nah it was just caveman banging rocks together. Luckily they came along and paved the way to Snarky Puppy.

[ragman1]

I think of music practice, performance, and study as being in the Fun/Easy quadrant.

Fun = thing I like to do and cheerfully do without extrinsic prompting.

Easy = can do without a sense that it is beyond me or generating feelings of stress. (does not mean "requires no effort" or "instant", but it does mean "eventually within my grasp")

Can't argue with that :-)

[rpjazzguitar]

I have hosted sessions for years.

The key to getting good players is to have the session be both fun and challenging.

Better players aren't going to come back (to my sessions at least) if the music is easy for them. So, my book has some things that would be challenging for almost anyone.

It's also essential that it be fun, but that's maybe more the social environment or the group's emotional approach to the session.

[kris]

I can't understand why it's constantly being reminded that jazz musicians are mad at theorie.
It's actually closely related.
Again, you can learn theory much faster than playing jazz.
I once had a student who was very good at learning theories from scratch but had trouble playing a simple jazz piece.
The question is why?
The answer is simple; he was very impatient.
He was not aware that in order to play, he need to combine this theory with practice - that is, daily exercise.
In the end, he gave up because he thought the exercise was taking up too much time.
Besides, playing jazz music at a certain level takes years of work.
What lies behind these words is a more complicated answer.

[Jimmy Smith]

^ That's been my experience. Working out the actual music has always taken more work than learning theory concepts. That doesn't mean theory is dispensable, it just means the music part takes more work. Listening to the greats, listening to mine, scrutinizing what I can do better. Trying to quantify how I can improve. There have been a few instances where learning theory concepts have boosted my playing. Usually the playing trails behind the theory tho. I have continued to steadily learn theory throughout my life, but again, usually the playing is what takes the most work or takes precedence.

Here's Monk and Rouse using theory to work out Monk's composition Boo Boo's Birthday at 1:10:42

Also following that scene is Tommy Flannagan and BH among others describing Ruby My Dear with theory.

[Jimmy Smith]

That's theory. Monk had a score written in notation only from what I could see. And they were figuring out the chords for Charlie so he could formulate his part. There was an instance where they said it goes G-7 to Db7 and Rouse said that's vis a vis? Meaning it's like a 2-5? I'm pretty sure that's all theory. How could it possibly not be? And then you say you don't understand why I say people are mad at theory.

[Jimmy Smith]

It's starting to bother me.

You're not a touring musician...
In my environment, I don't know musicians who would be mad at theory.

I have no idea what you mean by that post. You're fine with theory, yet my post, which is true, agitates you to the point where you attack my credibility. Ok....

[kris]

I think you have too much time... and I have to practice the program for the next concert.
Good luck

[John A.]

That's theory. Monk had a score written in notation only from what I could see. And they were figuring out the chords for Charlie so he could formulate his part. There was an instance where they said it goes G-7 to Db7 and Rouse said that's vis a vis? Meaning it's like a 2-5? I'm pretty sure that's all theory. How could it possibly not be? And then you say you don't understand why I say people are mad at theory.

People here don’t understand why you say they’re mad at theory because it’s a silly expression you made up that does not reflect the state of mind of a single person who interacts with you. Your harping on this term is puzzling.


As to the specifics of those scenes, naming the notes and chord changes in a tune and reading a chart strikes me more as basic musicianship than theory (which I see as more abstract and analytic ). To people who’ve had both training on the bandstand and explicit formal study of theory noting that a melody runs a scale or using Roman numerals for chord doesn’t really seem like “using theory”.

I guess the more theory you know, the less on-the-fly music talk seems like theory. But you could argue the specifics in those scenes the other way.