Free Jazz?

**jazzjew7890** · 07-30-2011, 02:46 PM

I recently purchased "Out to Lunch" by Eric Dolphy and I have become addicted to this album....
I really want to start analyzing, playing, and writing free jazz but I don't even have the slightest clue where to start. Listening is a big part of it but I feel that this style is so complex on so many different levels.
So where would be a good place to start in getting a basic understanding of free jazz?
This might be a completely off beat question because there is no universal formula for free-jazz but there has to be someway of understanding this music right? Or maybe I'm just crazy?

Also, another free-jazz/avant-grade album I love is Weasels Ripped My Flesh. (Yes that is a Frank Zappa and Mothers of Invention album but lets try to avoid the discussion about his odd relationship with jazz if we can.)

**cosmic gumbo** · 07-30-2011, 03:33 PM

Originally Posted by jazzjew7890

maybe I'm just crazy?

While you may seem to detect structure with some artists, in general, free jazz has no rules. Keep listening to different stuff and make up your own rules.

TH · 07-30-2011, 04:31 PM

Do you live in a city with a Free scene? Begin with attending concerts/gigs where people play free. There's a complex answer to your question. This is truly a field where the genre has no established rules but practitioners of it will often have rules and guidelines more strict than any "above the radar" jazz.
Ask a dozen players, get a dozen answers. That's why if there's a scene, it's good to get to know the character of the music as the scene develops. You'll find Cecil Taylor's rules as complex as any modern composer in the schooled orchestral genre. You'll find people in the sphere of the Art Ensemble of Chicago that will include dance in their music. You'll find people like Bill Frisell who are comfortable with players like Tim Berne, and at the same time will include free improv segments of his live performances that organically blend into tunes so seamlessly that people hear them as beautiful introductions, completely unaware that they love free improv. You'll find kids in jam bands that play without a clue. You'll find people that believe the more raucous and "atonal" it is, and the less they know what they're doing, the more they are being "free." You'll find people that are giants in the field that may sheepishly admit they were too high to remember some of their iconic recordings (I know this from personal experience

.) So it's really a conundrum. I considered opening a thread here about Free Jazz, but I realized the mix of vitriolic hatred, misunderstanding, dismissal and confusion was problematic.
I will share a thought Dave Tronzo passed to me. Free jazz is not free at all, it's the most disciplined of improvisational music because it takes everything you know as an artist and puts the responsibility of creating order on the player and the players' ability to listen.
My advice might be to find others that have the exploratory spirit, and begin by playing with others and listening to the way you compose when nothing is given. It will help you when you begin listening to people that are performing and recording the music. Stick with it. It's exciting!
David

**max chill** · 07-30-2011, 04:43 PM

I think the best free jazz is made by musicians with a solid awareness of the jazz tradition.

**whatswisdom** · 07-30-2011, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by jazzjew7890

I recently purchased "Out to Lunch" by Eric Dolphy and I have become addicted to this album....

You're addicted to one of the greatest jazz recordings ever made. But free jazz it 'aint. There is a very orderly structure to each composition. Head, solos, etc. To hear Dolphy in a free jazz setting listen to the Ornette Coleman double quartet album on Atlantic, called "Free Jazz." If you want to investigate free jazz guitar, listen to Derek Bailey. Other giants of the genre to check out are Anthony Braxton, reeds; Cecil Taylor, piano; Peter Brotzmann, reeds. One really cool guitarist to check out is Mary Halverson; she's played in Braxton's quartet and she's well regarded in the NY scene. I got her debut solo album, "Dragon's Head." Nice guitar trio recording.

**mr. beaumont** · 07-30-2011, 06:25 PM

Right, "Out to Lunch" is actually tightly composed...some of the solos might be "free" of a clear tonal center/centers, but the music is actually rather complex and the band is tight!

Free jazz...there's been more bad free jazz made than good...I agree with max chill, it seems to me the best free stuff I've heard is by cats who can play it straight too if they want...I guess that's why I like hearing a guy like Trane play free, or Joe Lovano, as opposed to Peter Brotzmann (who I'm sure somebody will post playing "Stella" straight up and swinging) who sounds like a guy having a temper tantrum thru a saxophone...

Then again, there's exceptions...I like Sonny Sharrock's stuff, and I haven't run across his Bop recordings...but he gets a pass, cuz he's a guitar player, maybe...

**Vihar** · 07-30-2011, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by TruthHertz

Do you live in a city with a Free scene? Begin with attending concerts/gigs where people play free. There's a complex answer to your question. This is truly a field where the genre has no established rules but practitioners of it will often have rules and guidelines more strict than any "above the radar" jazz.
Ask a dozen players, get a dozen answers. That's why if there's a scene, it's good to get to know the character of the music as the scene develops. You'll find Cecil Taylor's rules as complex as any modern composer in the schooled orchestral genre. You'll find people in the sphere of the Art Ensemble of Chicago that will include dance in their music. You'll find people like Bill Frisell who are comfortable with players like Tim Berne, and at the same time will include free improv segments of his live performances that organically blend into tunes so seamlessly that people hear them as beautiful introductions, completely unaware that they love free improv. You'll find kids in jam bands that play without a clue. You'll find people that believe the more raucous and "atonal" it is, and the less they know what they're doing, the more they are being "free." You'll find people that are giants in the field that may sheepishly admit they were too high to remember some of their iconic recordings (I know this from personal experience

.) So it's really a conundrum. I considered opening a thread here about Free Jazz, but I realized the mix of vitriolic hatred, misunderstanding, dismissal and confusion was problematic.
I will share a thought Dave Tronzo passed to me. Free jazz is not free at all, it's the most disciplined of improvisational music because it takes everything you know as an artist and puts the responsibility of creating order on the player and the players' ability to listen.
My advice might be to find others that have the exploratory spirit, and begin by playing with others and listening to the way you compose when nothing is given. It will help you when you begin listening to people that are performing and recording the music. Stick with it. It's exciting!
David

Great post David.

**Joe Strummer** · 07-30-2011, 06:49 PM

Ornette Coleman's Shape of Jazz to Come is the Kind of Blue of free jazz. Supremely listenable music that makes me want to quit playing and work harder at the same time. Dolphy is on that record.

**whatswisdom** · 07-31-2011, 01:27 AM

2 performances of rare beauty:

**exarctly** · 07-31-2011, 04:54 AM

I'm going to go ahead and say that Out To Lunch is free jazz, at the risk of disagreeing with those who say it isn't. I think there are at least two (if not many more) types of free jazz. The sort of just go play anything you want as long as you want based on nothing other than what moves you in the moment. Most free jazz I know of, does not fit in to this, though I am sure there is plenty of it out there.

But the other type that I know more of is where, yes, there is structure of some sort. It could be as simple as a melody. A melody with some sort of composed rhythmic motif. It could be as simple as, everyone will play an F# note 4 times and then base your free improv off of that.

To me what makes jazz able to be called free is the lack of distinct pre arranged harmonic changes. And usually the rhythm section can accompany the soloist however they want, but sometimes their parts are organized.

I guess you could say that this is a combination of free and not free, but I think that I would just call any jazz where the chords are not really present and the soloist is playing more from the theme of the melody (or not) than anything else to be 'free jazz' Ornette Coleman for instance is one of the pioneers of free jazz, but a lot of his music is very well arranged. At least the heads are.
So there are different amounts of 'free' in free jazz the way I see it. And to me, that makes Out to Lunch something I would say falls more into the category of free jazz than anything else.

My favorite free artist is the Vandermark 5. The arrangements are very very complex and very very interesting. And during the solos there are often some sort of composed backgrounds or motifs, but there is a ton of free playing and never any chords directly intended. This is to me what defines free. The lack of traditional harmony or changes, and varying degrees of free band improv and occasional arrangement of heads or backgrounds.

**jazzphan** · 07-31-2011, 04:58 AM

i'm not exactly sure that people can really define what free jazz is but i have think it would've somewhat started with McCoy Tyner and John Coltrane...so much to be learned....the very strong sounding voicings in 4ths to make lasting vamps, the sweeping saxophone lines, not to mention the overall cohesion of the group (with jimmy garrison and elvin jones). lots of soul in the albums of that period i.e. "a love supreme" or if you wanna go out there "sun ship"

TH · 07-31-2011, 06:15 AM

It's a very exciting time we live in and I'm glad this thread seems to have some good open minded ideas to it. Look at history, movements have always come out of ideas, fresh ideas that have given birth to something unseen, unheard of, unthought of and have come out of a very real necessity to fill a void. Often these new movements have been seen as individually initiated, but in truth they have been realized out of communities; and individuals that didn't have to labour under the shadows and rules of an older paradigm. These movements all enjoyed a time of freedom before outsiders gave them a name, identified characteristics or "rightness" and definition and announced individuals who were elevated as genre police.
At the inception of every movement is a wave of pure inspiration and the coalescence of energy from the deductive thinking of a group. Inductive thinking and labeling only comes afterwards from the outside; from critics, self proclaimed authorities and people that don't actually "get" the process that made it to begin with.
Bebop at its start was much freer than what it eventually became. It included a lot of experimentation on so many more levels before it was a genre. Parker's music was much more than the collection of approach notes, embellishments we study, much more than the line of phrases we transcribe: it was a study of space and motiv that was honed night after night (who listens to and studies the stuff from Benedetti's collection? Some of it is out... look at that as a collective and the forest emerges from the trees.) Monk's music was a study of space, shape and dissonance, and though we play his tunes in a modern way, very few actually attempt to know his sense of framing, or want to approach, no less understand his spirit. The spirit of bebop before it had a name. Herbie Nichols, a great composer I feel kept the essence of that music alive is still relatively obscure because it's convenient to look at movements as limited in range and scope.

All of this is to say that right now we are experiencing the flux, nebulous experimentation, pre-labeling excitement and truth of spirit that comes from searching for antithesis. Before we get locked into a "free jazz" synthesis, those of us that can, should make music by our own rules. We must have the highest standards of the thesis, that means serious theoretical and practical chops, but what we make can be something truly new and can carry with it the seeds of a new music.

Where I live, there are small venues where musicians perform nightly in this spirit. They are all musicians of the highest order. They perform for audiences of 6, they perform to packed houses, and they also perform for the music. Many of them won't call this music jazz anymore. (Hell, Ellington wouldn't call it jazz.) That's the point. We're not trying to be reactionary, it's just free because the gravity that holds it together is coming from within. It wouldn't be wrong to think of it as pre-genre music.

Sometimes there will be music that challenges the audience to understand. Sometimes it may even become a standard or an Ellington tune. Sometimes it doesn't work. But it's why we became improvisors. ... and if some people want to debate whether it's real jazz or not, free jazz or not, jazz in any way or not, or what is jazz, that's in another realm completely. That's the realm of the left brain. What's going on in real time, well, you gotta be there.
David

**Jazzaluk** · 07-31-2011, 08:42 AM

Damn those "outsiders"!! ... what do they know!!? BTW, how do I join the "insider" club? Their police seem to be so much more intelligent.

TH · 07-31-2011, 08:58 AM

That's the trick. It's often below the radar, but clubs, venues, some academic institutions or festivals will be magnets for communities. You find like minded musicians and you put something together. You by a music school? Put up a flyer or check out the bulletin board where others with a similar interest might want to get together. Craigslist? In New York there're so many little festivals, you show up and talk to the person next to you; the scene is so small and tight that it doesn't take long to be "in the river." Seattle I'll bet has a similar set up, Philly has events in converted firehouses and the like, Boston has clubs dedicated to just this kind of music.
Find people that might share your enthusiasm, maybe work with art communities, work grass roots and find an overlooked space to do it. Do it regularly and create a scene. I think "free jazz" has a long history of this kind of organization. DIY. Do It Yourself. Where I am, I've organized a drawing session and musicians play live free improv as models pose and artists draw. It's really great. Just thought of it and did it . Now I've got connections in the visual arts community and the music has taken on a whole new perspective.
What do any of you guys do?
David

**exarctly** · 07-31-2011, 11:45 AM

David, I really enjoy reading your post above. I particularly like the way you remind people that it is the spirit collaboration that keeps the music moving. Sometimes the mainstream tries to give all the credit to just one hero (Parker, Coleman), and does not acknowledge how much it was a community of people that made something.

**jazzjew7890** · 07-31-2011, 12:30 PM

If everything was created from nothing then why can't music be created from nothing. Its all in the spirit of invention and community. Thanks everybody there were some great posts

**mattymel** · 07-31-2011, 01:03 PM

+1 on "The Shape of Jazz to Come". Classic. I think this record really started it all. 1959! (if I'm not mistaken). Incredible. Ornette had it right here. Predates anything else.

Definitely check out what Mark Ribot is doing in the free realm. He's probably the only guitarist I've heard that I liked. Not just making noises. Again, he can play straightahead too. Anyone that can't is BSing when they play free IMHO.

**Markyboy** · 07-31-2011, 01:30 PM

My favourites are Dolphy's 'At The Five Spot' and 'In Europe'!!
I also love Ornette Coleman's 'Something Else'... is this already Free?
I think there was something special in the water in '59-the Grand Cru-year of Jazz: Miles Davis - Kind of Blue, Charles Mingus - Mingus Ah Um , Dave Brubeck - Time Out, Ornette Coleman - The Shape of Jazz to Come,John Coltrane - Giant Steps

TH · 07-31-2011, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by mattymel

Mark Ribot ... He's probably the only guitarist I've heard that I liked.

Have you checked out Bill Frisell's work with Tim Berne? Hard to find anything on YouTube but this gives you a little idea.

There is some amazing music going on when you're into the no-charts free improv scene but so much of it is undocumented and unrecorded. And probably will remain so because record companies won't perceive a market. It's very much alive and a "live" music.
David

Joe Morris is also a guitarist doing some very important free improv.

And Berne Nix, a master of motivic development. Always full of surprize and always hangs together.

He played with Ornette and Prime Time.

Speaking of which, Mick Goodrick is not thought of as a free player but people don't realize how much time he spent with Dewey Redmond, Paul Motian and Charlie Haden, showing that free is not always "fire in a petshop."

As I've said, I've seen and heard much from these players that is more representative of their talents but live performances are not documented on the whole. Go out and check it out yourself, the music needs it.
David

**ncs** · 08-01-2011, 11:07 PM

"Out to lunch" is a great album - I agree! ... But it ain't free jazz...
Even Ornette's "Free Jazz" album had still a pulse and is easy to listen to (at least for me - had a period when I mainly listened to free jazz). Coltrane's "Ascension" for example is a little bit harder stuff...
But I agree with Max Chill: I can follow musicians who made their way through different styles even if they perhaps play free. But I cannot follow musicians who hardly can play an instrument properly and say that they are playing free jazz. There are also examples of musicians who switched from dixieland directly to free jazz, just to "express" themselves. Also in jazz there are charlatans....

**whatswisdom** · 08-01-2011, 11:27 PM

Song X is my favorite Metheny album. I thought I'd throw that into the mix given that it's one of the more free playing of his recordings. I've never heard Zero Tolerance for Silence but I believe it's awful. Free? The recording he made with Derek Bailey escaped me too. Anyone hear that one? It would certainly qualify as free by virtue of his collaborator. Back to Mary Halvorson. I think she deserves to be more widely known. Dragon's Head is one of my picks from last year. See post #10 if you're curious.

**cosmic gumbo** · 08-02-2011, 12:27 AM

I'd like to hear Mary Halvorson's version of The Catfish Strut.

**Joe Strummer** · 08-02-2011, 12:41 AM

Originally Posted by Markyboy

I think there was something special in the water in '59-the Grand Cru-year of Jazz: Miles Davis - Kind of Blue, Charles Mingus - Mingus Ah Um , Dave Brubeck - Time Out, Ornette Coleman - The Shape of Jazz to Come,John Coltrane - Giant Steps

It Was a Very Good Year.

**whatswisdom** · 08-02-2011, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by Joe Strummer

It Was a Very Good Year.

1956. Jazz Advance. Cecil Taylor. Changed everything and influenced many great players.

TH · 08-02-2011, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by whatswisdom

1956. Jazz Advance. Cecil Taylor. Changed everything and influenced many great players.

1960 Cecil Taylor, Archie Shepp, Dennis Charles and Buell Neidlinger. They still had some form connections with songforms but the free was in full bloom. For me this was free that swings!!