Transcribing Jazz Solos: Tips, Tricks, and Recommended Recordings

[Christian Miller]

But I'm fairly sure that there's a tendency to regard classical playing as superior to jazz. When it comes to improvisation then I'm not sure. What some jazz players can do with their skills is just as valid, just as complex, just as impressive.

For sure.

Classical musicians rather obviously tend to be better at playing classical music. So if those are your criteria, as has been historically the case for Western culture, including music education, that's what you will see.

TBF there's a clear yardstick with classical. Everyone plays the same core repertoire, those who know the rep as well as those Warsaw judges Kris mentioned will know EXACTLY how it is meant to sound due to a lifetime of experience and knowledge, you can evaluate how good people are at it.

It's much harder to evaluate Monk, say, playing his own music. (I think the same would have been true evaluating Chopin back in the day, in fact, know one knew what his music was meant to sound like till he played it.)

That said, in terms of sheer pianism, Harlem stride is not to sniffed at. Ask any classical pianist about Fats Waller. Let alone Art Tatum. Classical players will gravitate to players who have something they understand, so technique in this case. I believe Tatum inspired a movement of Rachmaninoff's Variations on a Theme of Paganini.

I do think jazz is becoming more like this. I'm not sure how much room there is for a Monk or Horace Silver.

[ragman1]

I suggest the Wiki page. References to improvisation occur several times. Because the article is long, here are the quotes in part:

'Throughout this period he continued to compose and to give recitals in concerts and salons in Warsaw. He was engaged by the inventors of the "aeolomelodicon" (a combination of piano and mechanical organ), and on this instrument in May 1825 he performed his own improvisation and part of a concerto by Moscheles. The success of this concert...'

'Improvisation stands at the centre of Chopin's creative processes. However, this does not imply impulsive rambling: Nicholas Temperley writes that "improvisation is designed for an audience, and its starting-point is that audience's expectations, which include the current conventions of musical form".

'Chopin's harmonic innovations may have arisen partly from his keyboard improvisation technique. In his works, Temperley says, "novel harmonic effects often result from the combination of ordinary appoggiaturas or passing notes with melodic figures of accompaniment", and cadences are delayed by the use of chords outside the home key (neapolitan sixths and diminished sevenths) or by sudden shifts to remote keys.'

Frederic Chopin - Wikipedia

Direct comparisons between Chopin's classical style and what jazz players do isn't really sensible in my view. However, improvisation is improvisation whoever does it.

But I'm fairly sure that there's a tendency to regard classical playing as superior to jazz. When it comes to improvisation then I'm not sure. What some jazz players can do with their skills is just as valid, just as complex, just as impressive.

Kris made the point that we can't hear Chopin actually play any more and there's truth in that. I'd also add that musical abilities seem to increase and develop as time goes on. One person does something innovative, others copy it, and, before you know it, everybody's suddenly even better than the first person.

It's to do with consciousness. We add to what we know and it seems to proliferate despite ourselves. It enters the consciousness and spreads. The individuals themselves seem to be unwitting vehicles of the change rather than innovators. This happens in every field, not just music.

So it may well be that what renowned jazz improvisers are doing now may well be in advance of what was possible in Chopin's time simply because of the effects of time and change. This is no reflection on Chopin or any other person of his era, it's simply inevitable.

[Christian Miller]

So it may well be that what renowned jazz improvisers are doing now may well be in advance of what was possible in Chopin's time simply because of the effects of time and change. This is no reflection on Chopin or any other person of his era, it's simply inevitable.

I don't really buy into this 'advance' thing. Was Chopin superior to Bach because of his more adventurous use of modulation?

OTOH is Bill Evans superior to Chopin because he added more notes to chords and had a highly complex method of reharmonisation? (Or was he terrible because he wrote a consecutive octave in Waltz for Debby?)

Hmmm. No.

[ragman1]

For sure.

Classical musicians rather obviously tend to be better at playing classical music. So if those are your criteria, as has been historically the case for Western culture, including music education, that's what you will see.

TBF there's a clear yardstick with classical. Everyone plays the same core repertoire, those who know the rep as well as those Warsaw judges Kris mentioned will know EXACTLY how it is meant to sound due to a lifetime of experience and knowledge, you can evaluate how good people are at it.

It's much harder to evaluate Monk, say, playing his own music. (I think the same would have been true evaluating Chopin back in the day, in fact, know one knew what his music was meant to sound like till he played it.)

That said, in terms of sheer pianism, Harlem stride is not to sniffed at. Ask any classical pianist about Fats Waller. Let alone Art Tatum. Classical players will gravitate to players who have something they understand, so technique in this case. I believe Tatum inspired a movement of Rachmaninoff's Variations on a Theme of Paganini.

I do think jazz is becoming more like this. I'm not sure how much room there is for a Monk or Horace Silver.

Sorry, Christian, I edited that post and re-posted it so it's jumped ahead of yours. I didn't see yours first.

I'm not sure how much room there is for a Monk or Horace Silver.

Quite. If it wasn't like this things would just stand still.

[ragman1]

I don't really buy into this 'advance' thing. Was Chopin superior to Bach because of his more adventurous use of modulation?

OTOH is Bill Evans superior to Chopin because he added more notes to chords and had a highly complex method of reharmonisation? (Or was he terrible because he wrote a consecutive octave in Waltz for Debby?)

Hmmm. No.

Things are more advanced in terms of musical complexity than they were. It's not that Evans is 'superior' to Chopin, it's that the times have changed. Everything is relative to its own time. And probably to its own genre.

[JimmyDunlop]

For sure.

Classical musicians rather obviously tend to be better at playing classical music. So if those are your criteria, as has been historically the case for Western culture, including music education, that's what you will see.

TBF there's a clear yardstick with classical. Everyone plays the same core repertoire, those who know the rep as well as those Warsaw judges Kris mentioned will know EXACTLY how it is meant to sound due to a lifetime of experience and knowledge, you can evaluate how good people are at it.

It's much harder to evaluate Monk, say, playing his own music. (I think the same would have been true evaluating Chopin back in the day, in fact, know one knew what his music was meant to sound like till he played it.)

That said, in terms of sheer pianism, Harlem stride is not to sniffed at. Ask any classical pianist about Fats Waller. Let alone Art Tatum. Classical players will gravitate to players who have something they understand, so technique in this case. I believe Tatum inspired a movement of Rachmaninoff's Variations on a Theme of Paganini.

I do think jazz is becoming more like this. I'm not sure how much room there is for a Monk or Horace Silver.

The debate its not interesting anymore, I saw you are not kidding. Ok so stick to whatever you like. I dont want to continue the debate, I dont want to injury you.

[Christian Miller]

I dont want to injury you.

lol

[kris]

I don’t understand how that means Chopin’s work wouldn’t be informed by his skills as an improviser.

I mean loads of people play bebop heads too!

Be-bop heads too...yes f,ex.12 bars blues...:-)
I'd be an idiot if I compared be-bop to Chopin...but if like ...

[Christian Miller]

Things are more advanced in terms of musical complexity than they were. It's not that Evans is 'superior' to Chopin, it's that the times have changed. Everything is relative to its own time. And probably to its own genre.

yeah it’s not so much progress as evolution I suppose. Which is kind of my point.

I’ve heard plenty of jazzers up for arguing jazz harmony is more advanced than classical, and these arguments are imo just as empty as the belief that Chopin is objectively superior to <insert jazz musicians name>. Personal taste is one thing, the belief you can back it up via argument (or threats lol) quite another.

for the record I really like working with common practice harmony including romantic. It’s closed so you know what sounds right and what doesn’t. Contemporary jazz harmony is more open ended. I wonder if Chopin didn’t feel more like this when he was improvising and writing? Anyway…

[Christian Miller]

Be-bop heads too...yes f,ex.12 bars blues...:-)
I'd be an idiot if I compared be-bop to Chopin...but if like ...

Argument by insult. Sure. Just don’t expect it to convince me :-)

So, revert to Socratic method… OK I’m an idiot… explain to me why that’s an idiotic comparison to make given the criteria you specified in the post before.

[kris]

Are we arguing? I mean we seem to be talking about two different things.

I thought I was just pointing out that Chopin was an improviser and this affected the way he composed music according to many experts, and that the nature of classical music has changed over time, and this could also happen to jazz. If I have an argument it's more that we put classical composers on a pedestal and that improvisation, once common has faded out in Western Art Music, both of which points are hard to dispute as far as I can see, and maybe we'll do the same in jazz as those musicians pass out of living memory.

If you want to say Chopin is better than Bud Powell, or something, that's a subjective opinion that I feel is neither easily proven or disproven. Jimmy Dunlop went to 'appeal to authority' immediately, which is what I would expect. Because that's were it comes from. It's not like everyone who has this opinion is a musicological expert on Chopin AND Bud Powell and can substantiate their opinion on that basis (and IMO it would fail if they tried, waste of time. Bud doesn't do extended forms. Chopin doesn't swing. These apples make crap oranges! Boom)

It is not a subjective opinion that Chopin was an improviser, and it is not a subjective opinion that many musicologists have argued that improvisation was important to his compositional process.

So I'll leave that there and give links if you like.

I don't really see an argument there. I would argue perhaps that we put classical composers on pedestals because we are taught to do that, and I could see the same thing happen in jazz.

The fundamental question was did Chopin know the word "improvisation"?
If so, what did that mean at his time when he was alive?
variations on the tune?
It's not improvisation.

[Christian Miller]

The fundamental question was did Chopin know the word "improvisation"?
If so, what did that mean at his time when he was alive?
variations on the tune?
It's not improvisation.

If interested could read some books and musicological research on the subject. I’ve got to teach a class of kids which round a guitar goes.

[lawson-stone]

The first thing I ever transcribed, oddly enough, was Chet Baker's solo on "But Not for Me." It was a very fun little project, just the right blend of challenging and straight-ahead. Then I tackled Kenny Burrell's solo on "I'm Old Fashioned" simply because I love how he plays that tune. The revelation was that he builds that solo around just 3 or 4 ideas. I also noticed a pattern I called "Launch and Cap" namely he would take a really nice figure or idea which I called the "cap" and he would run up to it a variety of different ways (the "launch"). He did it so skillfully and musically that I never noticed it until I transcribed the solo. Overall, it's not a fast solo, not hard to play except for a couple of spots where it was so quick I just couldn't figure it out. That was 30 years ago, I likely ought to go back and try it again!

I then went back to Chet Baker and took off several choruses of "Summertime" from him, learned how he will often use the 6th and 9th playing over a minor chord. Not exactly Einstein level insight of course, but for a beginning play prone to drop into pentatonics, starting a line on the 6th can be liberating!

[ragman1]

I’ve heard plenty of jazzers up for arguing jazz harmony is more advanced than classical

Depends which classical and what kind of jazz harmony. That's far too general a statement.

[kris]

Argument by insult. Sure. Just don’t expect it to convince me :-)

So, revert to Socratic method… OK I’m an idiot… explain to me why that’s an idiotic comparison to make given the criteria you specified in the post before.

Then do yourself a transcription of 2 bars of Chopin's Ballad.
And, for example, 12 bars of blues played with one hand by Bill Evans.
I'm curious how much time you spend on it and whether there will be errors.
Chopin's music contains a lot of rubbatos -- oh, one more facilitation.
I'm waiting for results.

[CliffR]

Finding the DNA of Ravel and Chopin in the music of Bill Evans | Colorado Public Radio

[ragman1]

Actually, that's the gist of a previous point about time and evolution. Find the DNA of Bill Evans in Chopin... :-)

[ragman1]

Finding the DNA of Ravel and Chopin in the music of Bill Evans | Colorado Public Radio

Well, yes, except he's chosen three pieces which are almost identical and presumably presented them as a generality.

Very nice, though :-)

[kris]

Actually, that's gist of a previous point about time and evolution. Find the DNA of Bill Evans in Chopin... :-)

+1
Post of the year...:-)
congrats.

[CliffR]

Well, yes, except he's chosen three pieces which are almost identical and presumably presented them as a generality.

Very nice, though :-)

Nevertheless, the point remains that the comparison is not 'idiotic', or even uncommon. This is one of very many hits that show up if you type Chopin and Bill Evans into google.

[mr. beaumont]

I don't have much to add to the argument, but I will mention this--as it might mean something...

My brain doesn't do "classical" music really. At all. But I really love Chopin and Satie's solo piano stuff, and I can get into some of the orchestral Romantic period stuff...and that's about it.

So is there a reason this appeals to the jazz lover's brain?

[Christian Miller]

Depends which classical and what kind of jazz harmony. That's far too general a statement.

Well in the sense that you can argue Bach was an unusually advanced contrapuntalist, or Bill Evans or Herbie Hancock was an unusually advanced reharmonist sure.

[Christian Miller]

I don't have much to add to the argument, but I will mention this--as it might mean something...

My brain doesn't do "classical" music really. At all. But I really love Chopin and Satie's solo piano stuff, and I can get into some of the orchestral Romantic period stuff...and that's about it.

So is there a reason this appeals to the jazz lover's brain?

Satie has a lot in common with modal jazz… static chords. He writes unresolved major sevenths too which is kinda jazz.

Chopin… well he’s one of the foundational influences on Choro and Bossa music, so maybe it’s familiar from that perspective?

but really who knows? The currents of personal taste are mysterious and that’s part of the fun.

anyway, this is nice

I really like the album

[kris]

Well in the sense that you can argue Bach was an unusually advanced contrapuntalist, or Bill Evans or was an unusually advanced reharmonist sure.

Herbie Hancock - he's still alive...
Long live Herbie.

[kris]

I know Chopin's work because of my wife's profession.
I haven't heard a single blue note in the master's music.
I guess I'm deaf and stupid.