Generic Question - How do you Improvise?

[mr. beaumont]

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.

Exactly...

I mean, if that's what Jimmy was talking about the whole time-- like guys naming chords and talking about the form of a tune-- if that's the theory in question-- then yes we all use it, it's important, and definitely nobody is mad at it.

[ragman1]

Come on, Jimmy, trying to figure out what the chords are from the sheet isn't theory. Theory is the how and the why. Like a washing machine, saying there's the door, that's for the soap... that's not engineering. Theory is the engineering.

The problem with music is you've got to be the user AND the engineer. Or something like that :-)

[Christian Miller]

Exactly...

I mean, if that's what Jimmy was talking about the whole time-- like guys naming chords and talking about the form of a tune-- if that's the theory in question-- then yes we all use it, it's important, and definitely nobody is mad at it.

Sometimes it takes me a second to think of a name for what I'm playing.... I find that quite hard actually for the stuff that I have heavily internalised. I have to do it to some extent for teaching.

[mr. beaumont]

Sometimes it takes me a second to think of a name for what I'm playing.... I find that quite hard actually for the stuff that I have heavily internalised. I have to do it to some extent for teaching.

Yep. Or you know what it is to YOU but it could probably be analyzed a different way.

[James W]

Sometimes it takes me a second to think of a name for what I'm playing.... I find that quite hard actually for the stuff that I have heavily internalised. I have to do it to some extent for teaching.

Yes - for heavily internalised stuff you just think in sound, not the name for that sound.

[rpjazzguitar]

Now and then - not often enough - I find that my fingers have moved to the next chord while I'm still trying to think of which chord to play. I wish I knew a shortcut to making that happen a lot more often.

[Christian Miller]

This video is relevant to the OP

[JazzPadd]

There’s a lotta good stuff in here on the question of improvising.

My modest goal, as an amateur musician, is to have fun playing jazz with others who also love the music. That means jam sessions, which at least where I am near a not so large city in Japan, there are perhaps a dozen monthly opportunities.

So first I get an idea of what tunes people play and learn them in the most oft-called keys. Interestingly, hard bop seems to be a thing here. Also the usual GAS standards, Days of Wine and Roses (Sake to Bara), Autumn Leaves (Kareha), Fly Me, Blue Bossa. The standards are nice because when beginners join they can fit in. When there’s some pros or advanced players in the house, the hard bop tunes seem preferable. But overall repertoire varies quite a bit.

After learning the head, changes and structure for such tunes, I play along with iReal to get some fluency, find the melody and changes over the entire fretboard until it’s comfortable. Knowing many keys not needed, since the overall goal is to have fun playing together. The exception to keys is when there are singers about, so being able to navigate hand written charts quickly is usually in order. But then there’s not a lot of improvising.

That’s usually enough to get rolling with improvising and have some fun. Beyond that, I may have a few fave tunes that I’d like to call, so when the opportunity arises, I do that. Lately it’s been “Sugar,” “You, the Night and the Music,” both of which (and with “Softly”) are great fun to enjoy Cm.

I’ve never been very good at learning lines, licks, and riffs verbatim. Even in my way back wedding band days couldn’t do it convincingly. But this is where theory of sorts enters. I’ll sometimes analyze a transcription, to get ideas how to navigate changes. No patience to transcribe my own, but lotsa good ones out there. I learned from Jimmy Raney how to end phrases, and from Chet Baker about how to weave nice melodies.

When a pro guitarist is in town and offering lessons, I ask them to play together for a couple hours and call it a lesson, maybe happens twice a year. That’s been very helpful, to be able to talk about what they’re doing, although I noticed some are reticent.

I do understand enough theory to communicate with others, but I don’t really think about it when improvising. It’s mostly melody variants, getting into a groove, navigating the chord tones and going outside by ear on occasion for tension and momentum.

In sessions, I have noticed some weaknesses. For me, speed is an issue. Sometimes the above takes me in the moment to places that my hands can’t navigate. But rather than shedding picking (little patience) I try to find other places to go instead.

Given the above, I suppose the main way I approach improvising evolves around participating in a jam scene, knowing tunes, and working within my limitations, such as having little patience. But above all having fun.

[Jimmy Smith]

[Jimmy Smith]

Here's a pro advocating playing with theory. I think this aural elitism compulsion is more an amateur phenomenon.

[Jimmy Smith]

I mean, if that's what Jimmy was talking about the whole time-- like guys naming chords and talking about the form of a tune-- if that's the theory in question-- then yes we all use it, it's important, and definitely nobody is mad at it.

Why do you think Rouse wanted a working lead sheet for the tune? So he could play entirely by ear? No, so he could use his theory framework to play off the tune in addition to using his ear. Why didn't he just learn the whole tune by ear and then play by ear? I thought that's what everyone did in the golden age? And therefore what we're supposed to do? (Not trying to straw man you or any individual but people do say that. You probably wouldn't even need to leave the thread to find something along those lines.)

[kris]

John Scofield has been my favorite guitarist since the early 80's.I spent a lot of time analyzing his playing/listening, transcriptions of solos etc/.He released the video 'On Improvisation'/1983/ which I transcribed note for note.
It's all in a nutshell in this hour-long video.I call it "practical theory".
I really like John Scofield's way of thinking -- he says very clearly what's going on.
Some practical advice from another video:

[ragman1]

Why do you think Rouse wanted a working lead sheet for the tune? So he could play entirely by ear? No, so he could use his theory framework to play off the tune in addition to using his ear. Why didn't he just learn the whole tune by ear and then play by ear? I thought that's what everyone did in the golden age? And therefore what we're supposed to do? (Not trying to straw man you or any individual but people do say that. You probably wouldn't even need to leave the thread to find something along those lines.)

I wouldn't have recorded the tune without knowing the chords! And the melody. Don't know what all the fuss is about. Like an actor going on stage not knowing his lines. Good lord.

'Oh, just wing it, son, you'll be great'. Yeah, right.

The best band I ever played with was American. They turned up early, scouted the venue, played through every tune till they got the feel of the joint, went for supper, then played a hot set which had the place jumping. Being with them felt safe, like you were being carried along. That's what I call professional.

Such a change from casual Brits who turned up, drank too much, got through it, wandered off again, and thought they were the bees knees. No thanks.

Theory's got nothing to do with it.

[ragman1]

Where is Stim? He joined the same day he posted this thread, his first and only post. Probably doesn't matter :-)

[Jimmy Smith]

John Scofield has been my favorite guitarist since the early 80's.I spent a lot of time analyzing his playing/listening, transcriptions of solos etc/.He released the video 'On Improvisation'/1983/ which I transcribed note for note.
It's all in a nutshell in this hour-long video.I call it "practical theory".
I really like John Scofield's way of thinking -- he says very clearly what's going on.
Some practical advice from another video:

I agree with what he said. You want to get your raw theory under your belt, then apply it towards working out ideas that are relevant to your music and tunes. Rather than only running raw theory because that doesn't lead anywhere on its own.

[kris]

I wouldn't have recorded the tune without knowing the chords! And the melody. Don't know what all the fuss is about. Like an actor going on stage not knowing his lines. Good lord.

'Oh, just wing it, son, you'll be great'. Yeah, right.

The best band I ever played with was American. They turned up early, scouted the venue, played through every tune till they got the feel of the joint, went for supper, then played a hot set which had the place jumping. Being with them felt safe, like you were being carried along. That's what I call professional.

Such a change from casual Brits who turned up, drank too much, got through it, wandered off again, and thought they were the bees knees. No thanks.

Theory's got nothing to do with it.

It's very interesting...
When did you play with an American band and what?
Perhaps it's just a vivid imagination...?

[kris]

I agree with what he said. You want to get your raw theory under your belt, then apply it towards working out ideas that are relevant to your music and tunes. Rather than only running raw theory because that doesn't lead anywhere on its own.

Chet Baker-I read somewhere that he only played by ear.
Richard Bona-similary,has an excellent musical memory.
do they need a theory?

[kris]

Where is Stim? He joined the same day he posted this thread, his first and only post. Probably doesn't matter :-)

Does it matter?
Maybe he's currently having a gig at a jazz club?
He invented a very interesting thread.

[Jimmy Smith]

Chet Baker-I read somewhere that he only played by ear.

Richard Bona-similary,has an excellent musical memory.
do they need a theory?

Well you need to re-read. He had a bit of education.

Baker received some musical education at Glendale High School, but he left school at the age of 16 in 1946 to join the United States Army. He was assigned to Berlin, Germany, where he joined the 298th Army Band.^[6]:?170? After leaving the Army in 1948, he studied music theory and harmony at El Camino College in Los Angeles. Wiki

Accomplished musicians use varying degrees of theory, but the majority do use it.

[kris]

Well you need to re-read. He had a bit of education.

Baker received some musical education at Glendale High School, but he left school at the age of 16 in 1946 to join the United States Army. He was assigned to Berlin, Germany, where he joined the 298th Army Band.^[6]:?170? After leaving the Army in 1948, he studied music theory and harmony at El Camino College in Los Angeles. Wiki

Accomplished musicians use varying degrees of theory, but the majority do use it.

Ok.
It doesn't change the fact that he played by ear.
He played brilliantly.
I also knew a musician who went to school and played only by ear. An amazing phenomenon. Theory did not exist for him and he was an outstanding jazz musician.

[Jimmy Smith]

What is your point? Chet had some music education and we may or may not know for sure that he played more on the intuitive side of things. So what?

Musicians who successfully play only intuitively are extremely rare.

[kris]

What is your point?

Music is a beautiful art and amazing musical talents are born.
They often go beyond the framework of any theory.

[Jimmy Smith]

Music is a beautiful art and amazing musical talents are born.

They often go beyond the framework of any theory.?

I don't discriminate between musicians' approaches lol. I judge them based on their music, not how much theory they use. The majority use theory, so I wouldn't ever advocate that not using theory is a superior approach.

[kris]

What is your point? Chet had some music education and we may or may not know for sure that he played more on the intuitive side of things. So what?

Musicians who successfully play only intuitively are extremely rare.

It's an interesting topic.
What theory did Chet learn in school?
and to what extent did it help him create brilliant solos?

[Jimmy Smith]

I don't know to what extent he used his music knowledge any more than one who says he was feral. I don't see why I should have to defend absolute truths that most successful musicians use some sort of theory knowledge.