When you solo over a song, are you playing a chord progression or the song?

[Christian Miller]

You mean the "I want to learn some jazz, man, because I really think it'll help my (insert non jazz genre here) playing" guys?

Usually they want to sound like Guthrie

I do try to tell them I can’t play like Guthrie, but it doesn’t seem to put them off.

I throw Holdsworth at them. I consider it a compromise haha. Maybe I should be more of a hardass and demand they learn 50 bop heads or something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mr. beaumont]

You need to hit them with my "Jazz is like Satanism" comparison.

"Dabbling is fine but you'll always be a poseur. If you want the full benefits, you gotta go all in."

[pamosmusic]

Usually they want to sound like Guthrie

I do try to tell them I can’t play like Guthrie, but it doesn’t seem to put them off.

I throw Holdsworth at them. I consider it a compromise haha. Maybe I should be more of a hardass and demand they learn 50 bop heads or something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Whenever someone tells me they want to learn jazz I ask verbatim:

“Do you want to play autumn leaves with a swing feel, or do you want the jazz toolkit to use on whatever?”

Most of the time it’s the toolkit. By which they usually mean “arpeggios.”

[Christian Miller]

You need to hit them with my "Jazz is like Satanism" comparison.

"Dabbling is fine but you'll always be a poseur. If you want the full benefits, you gotta go all in."

Very good!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

Thinking about the ‘learning stuff without reference to tunes’ things - I suppose many teachers do have a worked out syllabus of scales and so on that need to mastered, especially at the higher levels such as at music schools. There was that video of Julliard student playing through one of these for example I posted a year or two back. This was an assessment he needed to pass to be eligible to take lessons with a non guitarist. Basically assessing raw instrumental knowledge and technique. So kind of separate again, even though the patterns relate to jazz improv. But it seemed essentially to be very similar to a classical assessment?

It’s obviously necessary to study this stuff - or at least it considered necessary by most educators - but again this isn’t about teaching improvisation or jazz per se.

I can see value in it. I don’t currently do this with students, but perhaps I should. Arps are usually the weak area.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spook410]

Not everyone likes jazz all that much. At least not all of it. I don't usually listen to Ellington unless I'm learning one of his songs. And bop.. fingernails on a blackboard. However, to become a better musician, learning jazz tunes and paying attention to how they work is required. That includes incorporating melody into improvisation. Sometimes anyway.

Why be a better musician? To access the things I do like (e.g Ralph Towner, Metheny/Haden, Yellowjackets). Arguably, jazz like, but it's not Charlie Parker.

side note: Facility on the instrument is required along with how scales and arpeggios fit in context. Don't see how this is avoidable. I suppose a good teacher would make the difference between facility and actual music clear.

[Christian Miller]

How about instead of calling it jazz we just call that set of skills ‘learning to play music by methods other than just noodling around on the blues scale’

Probably won’t catch on. But I’m not in marketing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bediles]

Depends on your weaknesses. The player that doesn't know exactly what they're doing or the names for stuff but mostly learned through mimicry, lifting and gigs is deficient in a different set of skills than the theory/rudiments first approach person.

Also, Learning a bunch of technical elements (juliard/berkee tech requirements) will only make you a better guitarist. However, Many folks Learning that stuff are already quite musical as they are doing it in a post secondary setting. Maybe reductionist (as it's said all the time) but the most bang for your buck is lifting and gigging or at least playing with people. Gives you some tangible goals outside of 'I just want to be good'. The technical is not required to play good music but musicality is a requirement.

At the same time, you probs need chops bro. But seriously, you do.

I should ask around to see if folks felt like the technical requirements of their degrees helped them develop as players. They probably would find it hard to pinpoint the impact.

[AllanAllen]

Depends on your weaknesses. The player that doesn't know exactly what they're doing or the names for stuff but mostly learned through mimicry, lifting and gigs is deficient in a different set of skills than the theory/rudiments first approach person.

Also, Learning a bunch of technical elements (juliard/berkee tech requirements) will only make you a better guitarist. However, Many folks Learning that stuff are already quite musical as they are doing it in a post secondary setting. Maybe reductionist (as it's said all the time) but the most bang for your buck is lifting and gigging or at least playing with people. Gives you some tangible goals outside of 'I just want to be good'. The technical is not required to play good music but musicality is a requirement.

At the same time, you probs need chops bro. But seriously, you do.

I should ask around to see if folks felt like the technical requirements of their degrees helped them develop as players. They probably would find it hard to pinpoint the impact.

I didn’t go to music school, but shedding the major scale helped me develop more than anything else. No more guessing what note I wanted, I just go for it.

[pamosmusic]

I should ask around to see if folks felt like the technical requirements of their degrees helped them develop as players. They probably would find it hard to pinpoint the impact.

Wait really?

I feel like the technical stuff helped a lot. Learned how to practice more effectively, started organizing scales, being able to play things in more ways, having more bebop stuff under my fingers, with classical guitar just opening up articulation in general as an area of focus.

It’s kind of hard to separate that technical stuff from musical stuff too.

There are lots and lots and lots of blind spots and short falls in music schools, and arguments to make about its cost, but like … if the only criteria is whether it made me better, then …. Yes?

[Spook410]

A bit of off topic drift.. I was a music major at a large big box college for a year. Class piano was useful. Nothing else was taught in a way that would lead a young and uninformed student to being a better performing musician. Seems they were more focused on creating classical music educators and secondary school band directors. Certainly needed roles but not what I was looking for at the time. Good thing given the life I would have gotten myself into had I been a more capable musician. Fortunately the engineering college worked out.

[Christian Miller]

Depends on your weaknesses.

God forbid we have any vulnerabilities haha.

Music school nominally tries to turn out well rounded professionals. This is not the sum total of music education of course but that’s another story. It also not the end of the story of the aspiring pro, merely the start.

You can’t be great at everything of course. There too many things. Maybe addressing your weaknesses can be less important than exploring your strengths.

I struggle with this. I want to be great at everything because I’m an idiot.

The player that doesn't know exactly what they're doing or the names for stuff but mostly learned through mimicry, lifting and gigs is deficient in a different set of skills than the theory/rudiments first approach person.

I do think knowing what you are doing is highly overrated. To what extent do any of us know what we are doing? It’s layers all the way down. Trust me haha, I’ve been down there.

The main thing is to do the thing of course. Categorisation of schemata - pattern recognition - is certainly relevant to practical musicianship. Much of the rest is sophistry imo. The medieval cats used to teach it was all to do with the zodiac. Now we have other dogmas.

Otoh I think schooled musican often underestimate the ability of untrained people to spot patterns - which is all music theory is. True intelligence as opposed to being spoonfed the answers by teachers. (I’m not saying all schooled players are the latter, but the blank incuriosity of many students in music education is odd to me.

I suppose who cares so long as they play good. But perhaps we institutionally produce dependant students. I would always rather blame the teachers.)

But, Music isn’t rocket science.

As far as jazz goes most lack immersion. That’s the principle issue and I actually think any jazz educator/practitioner would tell you that. “Ooh the decline of the apprenticeship system innit awful. Ooh yes it is Gary, no one swings no one knows any tunes and they all play the same licks, right I’m off to teach chord scales 101.”

When immersion wasn’t an issue, formal education was less important. School has stepped in to fill the void. But school has its own institutional oddities, blind spots and preoccupations of course when compared to the community of practice.

So be it. I think most jazz educators know this stuff. They have to work within the system but most of them are musicians in their blood. And that’s a Good Thing.

And yes you should probably learn your scales. If they haven’t got this together by undergrad level, some sort of remedial exercise is probably necessary. Boring as shit tho. (Also your student is likely doing some music outside of guitar lessons.)

Also, Learning a bunch of technical elements (juliard/berkee tech requirements) will only make you a better guitarist. However, Many folks Learning that stuff are already quite musical as they are doing it in a post secondary setting. Maybe reductionist (as it's said all the time) but the most bang for your buck is lifting and gigging or at least playing with people. Gives you some tangible goals outside of 'I just want to be good'. The technical is not required to play good music but musicality is a requirement.

At the same time, you probs need chops bro. But seriously, you do.

Bro do you even lift haha?

Man, if you had any idea lol. Anyway.

Actually I do sometimes wonder if musicians focus on craft because art scares them? I think I myself would have to admit that. Craft is to some extent objectively assessable… and I have craft - more every day - but what have I done artistically? Scary question.

The ‘not very technical good but somehow amazing’ jazz musician seems to be rarer and rarer these days. Art is not purely a product of skills.

And actually I think the AI Revolution is going to define this very sharply in the next few years. It’s coming for us.

I should ask around to see if folks felt like the technical requirements of their degrees helped them develop as players. They probably would find it hard to pinpoint the impact.

I think there’s value in it. I think any measurable
practice activity gives you a direct feedback on how good you are at it in as objective terms as possible is incredibly valuable for one’s mental health. You ever do eight hours and not be able to say what you practiced? I have. Yes. Measurable outcomes. Great!

But - I think we are talking at cross purposes.

What you are talking about is not about jazz it’s about mapping and operating the instrument. It’s very important not to confuse the two things.

In the mean time - practice your shit on some tunes yeah? It’ll come in handy :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Christian Miller]

Anyway, a bit of a riff.

of course, learn your bloody scales.

But learn some tunes too y’all. And apply the stuff through tunes. The aim is to become a musician in your chosen area, of course. Apply material with that aim.

I don’t really understand what the disagreement is tbh. I suppose some people need to be told to practice scales and arpeggios. But I don’t see that this is ever at the exclusion of also doing music.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[voxo]

hi Prince..i did have a gig..Paltalk chat music section...was a great jazz player there from Japan..and a great player From Holland...rest them were mostly blues/rock types...was nice to have some feedback...pleasant moments.

[Spook410]

At the same time, you probs need chops bro. But seriously, you do.

Not like they need me to point it out, but on the topic of chops have you heard Christian Miller and Pamosmusic recordings? They are not only bright to the point of obnoxious (j/k) but they are very, very good players.

Actually, there is a point you pass where it isn't about chops anymore. A place where I'm sure some of the advanced players around here are at. Chops are for people who are simply players. Repetition. The what.. not the why. Eventually you seek insight and want to get into Gershwin's head. Part of why knowing and playing original melodic bits is useful.

[pamosmusic]

… bright to the point of obnoxious

If memory serves, this phrase appeared verbatim on several of my elementary school report cards.

[bediles]

Wait really?

I feel like the technical stuff helped a lot. Learned how to practice more effectively, started organizing scales, being able to play things in more ways, having more bebop stuff under my fingers, with classical guitar just opening up articulation in general as an area of focus.

It’s kind of hard to separate that technical stuff from musical stuff too.

There are lots and lots and lots of blind spots and short falls in music schools, and arguments to make about its cost, but like … if the only criteria is whether it made me better, then …. Yes?

The technical stuff helped me too. I read what I wrote again and I think I was riffing on the fact that likely looking back you remember the albums or solos you really got into that transformed the way you play as opposed to the 5 maj7 arp shapes you learned. But at the same time, one of the best stright ahead players in toronto moved back to town like 8 years ago and preached rest stroke picking and that certainly changed some people's playing in a big way.

[bediles]

God forbid we have any vulnerabilities haha.

Music school nominally tries to turn out well rounded professionals. This is not the sum total of music education of course but that’s another story. It also not the end of the story of the aspiring pro, merely the start.

You can’t be great at everything of course. There too many things. Maybe addressing your weaknesses can be less important than exploring your strengths.

I struggle with this. I want to be great at everything because I’m an idiot.

Looked back at my 2015 summer practice plans a few months back and I had whole albums to transcribe on there along with a long laundry list of techinical guitar stuff, arrangments, tunes for gigs. It was so hilariously ambitious and not practical.

Im still shit at solo playing, dred duo with a horn and have been meaning to get to to it for years. There's only so much time and I also want to be good at most things.

I do think knowing what you are doing is highly overrated. To what extent do any of us know what we are doing? It’s layers all the way down. Trust me haha, I’ve been down there.

Some early instruction I got about the 'rules' really f'd me up for a while but I think another personality or skill set would have thrived with these rules. I feel less need to justify every note now but those habits die hard.

The main thing is to do the thing of course. Categorisation of schemata - pattern recognition - is certainly relevant to practical musicianship. Much of the rest is sophistry imo. The medieval cats used to teach it was all to do with the zodiac. Now we have other dogmas.

Otoh I think schooled musican often underestimate the ability of untrained people to spot patterns - which is all music theory is. True intelligence as opposed to being spoonfed the answers by teachers. (I’m not saying all schooled players are the latter, but the blank incuriosity of many students in music education is odd to me.

I suppose who cares so long as they play good. But perhaps we institutionally produce dependant students. I would always rather blame the teachers.)

I went to a school where you had to produce and record original music as your final project. Most folks didnt want to waste that cheap studio time and access to free musician labour.

And yeah, music students can be arrogant reagardless of the stream. Young, good at something, lots of accolades in a magical jazz land.

But, Music isn’t rocket science.

I also have a STEM degree which I got as much younger person and I remember the realization that muscians (the profs) were not scholars in the same way. Of course there's more academic pursuits in music but it was an interesting realization that my skill set wasn't going to help much. Less puzzle unraveling and more time on the instrument/exposure if that makes any sense.

As far as jazz goes most lack immersion. That’s the principle issue and I actually think any jazz educator/practitioner would tell you that. “Ooh the decline of the apprenticeship system innit awful. Ooh yes it is Gary, no one swings no one knows any tunes and they all play the same licks, right I’m off to teach chord scales 101.”

I studied with a guy for a year who studied with GB who didnt lift and and was also too chord scale for me too. Seemed to work for him.

But yeah, teaching a reductive method that been derived and seemly works from the point of view of someone with perfect pitch who didn't need to lift. Doesn't work for most people. You're welcome.

When immersion wasn’t an issue, formal education was less important. School has stepped in to fill the void. But school has its own institutional oddities, blind spots and preoccupations of course when compared to the community of practice.

So be it. I think most jazz educators know this stuff. They have to work within the system but most of them are musicians in their blood. And that’s a Good Thing.

School was the beginning of the apprenticeship for me, otherwise I would have had no entry into the scene or the music in general. I was exposed to Jazz though a few family members a few years before I went but didn't grow up with it at all, unfortunately.

I don't know how you weaseled your way in outside of the school path/gateway. What a world!

Actually I do sometimes wonder if musicians focus on craft because art scares them? I think I myself would have to admit that. Craft is to some extent objectively assessable… and I have craft - more every day - but what have I done artistically? Scary question.

The ‘not very technical good but somehow amazing’ jazz musician seems to be rarer and rarer these days. Art is not purely a product of skills.

And actually I think the AI Revolution is going to define this very sharply in the next few years. It’s coming for us.

Fair enough, about the AI. Have you ever written lyrics? I don't know how people can do it and not cringe at everything. Sometime the more you know the more Thales judgement creeps it which is the enemy of creativity. And Yes, art scares people, either they are too shy to put themselves out there or have nothing to say. Creativity can be cultivated though.

I think there’s value in it. I think any measurable
practice activity gives you a direct feedback on how good you are at it in as objective terms as possible is incredibly valuable for one’s mental health. You ever do eight hours and not be able to say what you practiced? I have. Yes. Measurable outcomes. Great!

But - I think we are talking at cross purposes.

What you are talking about is not about jazz it’s about mapping and operating the instrument. It’s very important not to confuse the two things.

In the mean time - practice your shit on some tunes yeah? It’ll come in handy :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yep

[Spook410]

If memory serves, this phrase appeared verbatim on several of my elementary school report cards.

Was it 'bright' or 'right'.. so hard to remember.

[Christian Miller]

Looked back at my 2015 summer practice plans a few months back and I had whole albums to transcribe on there along with a long laundry list of techinical guitar stuff, arrangments, tunes for gigs. It was so hilariously ambitious and not practical.

Im still shit at solo playing, dred duo with a horn and have been meaning to get to to it for years. There's only so much time and I also want to be good at most things.



Some early instruction I got about the 'rules' really f'd me up for a while but I think another personality or skill set would have thrived with these rules. I feel less need to justify every note now but those habits die hard.



I went to a school where you had to produce and record original music as your final project. Most folks didnt want to waste that cheap studio time and access to free musician labour.

And yeah, music students can be arrogant reagardless of the stream. Young, good at something, lots of accolades in a magical jazz land.



I also have a STEM degree which I got as much younger person and I remember the realization that muscians (the profs) were not scholars in the same way. Of course there's more academic pursuits in music but it was an interesting realization that my skill set wasn't going to help much. Less puzzle unraveling and more time on the instrument/exposure if that makes any sense.



I studied with a guy for a year who studied with GB who didnt lift and and was also too chord scale for me too. Seemed to work for him.

But yeah, teaching a reductive method that been derived and seemly works from the point of view of someone with perfect pitch who didn't need to lift. Doesn't work for most people. You're welcome.



School was the beginning of the apprenticeship for me, otherwise I would have had no entry into the scene or the music in general. I was exposed to Jazz though a few family members a few years before I went but didn't grow up with it at all, unfortunately.

I don't know how you weaseled your way in outside of the school path/gateway. What a world!



Fair enough, about the AI. Have you ever written lyrics? I don't know how people can do it and not cringe at everything. Sometime the more you know the more Thales judgement creeps it which is the enemy of creativity. And Yes, art scares people, either they are too shy to put themselves out there or have nothing to say. Creativity can be cultivated though.



Yep

Sorry long post, much of what I agree with.

Random thoughts
- Good point re Stem toolset.
- Lyrics, yes. Not well, but I have.
- i bet if you had a stretch of duo gigs you’d get it together. Gigs are the real teacher. Otoh you also get booked for what people know you for, so there’s a positive feedback mechanism to specialise at least a bit. (That js for a large scene, maybe less so away from big cities.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lawson-stone]

… not to be too enamored of a dialectical process, and also to try avoid dualism and reductionism… my limited experience suggests that in jazz there is often a synthesis of Apollonian and Dionysian forces… I assume the idea of the spirit of a song would have to engage with these contradictory focus. How much “archeology” that needs to take place is an open ended question and based on particularities. Spirit suggests something that has an element of fluidity, with an acknowledgement to history.

I have noticed a desire for specifics in this thread to be asked for. There are also specific elements to creativity.

Man you just went all Merleau Ponty on us.

[lawson-stone]

I majored in philosophy in college and and read tons of Nietzsche, some Heidegger, and a fair bit of Kant. Nietzsche's overall tone and iconoclastic shtick was kind of fun, but it seemed so scattershot that I was never really sure what he was getting at. Heidegger, oy vey. Could be worse, though. I mean Hegel. Gadzooks. That guy is a freakin' neurotoxin cable of inducing coma with a single sentence (that goes on for 27 pages without a verb until the end).

John I have to say, you just gave me a couple more reasons to like you.

[lawson-stone]

Not everyone likes jazz all that much. At least not all of it. I don't usually listen to Ellington unless I'm learning one of his songs. And bop.. fingernails on a blackboard. However, to become a better musician, learning jazz tunes and paying attention to how they work is required. That includes incorporating melody into improvisation. Sometimes anyway.

Why be a better musician? To access the things I do like (e.g Ralph Towner, Metheny/Haden, Yellowjackets). Arguably, jazz like, but it's not Charlie Parker.

side note: Facility on the instrument is required along with how scales and arpeggios fit in context. Don't see how this is avoidable. I suppose a good teacher would make the difference between facility and actual music clear.

But a lot of us do like it, and really, liking it is why I decided I wanted to learn to play it. Life is short. Why in heaven's name would anyone want to learn to play music that they don't actually like? I don't know how incorporating elements of a music that I don't like makes me better at anything. "Oh I think I'll spice up this line by dropping in this section that comes from music I really hate?"

I play jazz because, well, I LIKE jazz. I try (and fail) to play bop because to me it's NOT fingernails on the blackboard. Why would you spend 5 minutes on such music if you really feel that way?

[ccroft]

...Why in heaven's name would anyone want to learn to play music that they don't actually like? ...

I'd say there are a couple of possible reasons, but you won't ever be able to play it as well as the folks who do love it.

One reason: gigs. I've played a few where I wasn't wild about what we were doing.

Also: Jazz is a big world. I try to work on some tunes that I don't exactly love because if I don't learn them I won't be able to find people to play with in my little town. I'm kinda ambivalent about pretty much the whole GASB. It's good music and all, but it's not what I really want to do. I would like to be better at it though.

I did an audition a couple of years back where they called Autumn Leaves. I said I've never played it. They looked at me like I was totally nuts, like 'why are you here?!'. But it's true. I spent years playing late and early Miles, hard bop, mid-sixties stuff and into 70's fusion. We did play Naima, but they weren't into A.L.

In the view of the guys I was auditioning for, if you don't know Leaves, Days of Wine, etc backwards and forwards, then you can't call yourself a jazz player. So I've been getting those together for when I retire and have the time to go to jams.

I can almost say the same about bop. So I work Donna, Joy Spring, etc. I do love Joy Spring! Who doesn't?

[Christian Miller]

Tbf spook didn’t say he didn’t like jazz, he just doesn’t seem very taken with straight-ahead/bop stuff.

Which to some is saying the same thing lol (not me.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk