A Page for Reduced Melodies of Songs

[NSJ]

Another thread made me think of the most neglected way of improvising that is hardly ever mentioned here--one based on the melody of the tune. It seems that nearly EVERY thread on improv is based on the tune's accompaniment. I.e., what scale to play over what chord.

A few years ago, I read some very excellent books by the trombone player Ed Byrne, who bases his ideas on on improv on the melodic and rhythmic components to a given song. Central to his thinking in terms of WHAT to play are: the root movement of the tune; the guide tone lines; and the tune as represented in a simplified and reduced melody form. Some skeletal notes I took years ago about Mr. Byrne's thoughts on reduced melody: Ed Byrne: "Melody Reduction is achieved by shrinking melodies to their fundamental pitches and rhythms by eliminating pick-ups, non-harmonic tones, and repeated notes, and simplifying the rhythms of these melodies by placing all notes squarely on the beat in order to secure a firm grasp of the essential compositional material upon which to create further development in improvisation….Our aim in this reduction stage is to identify the most essential melody notes in the simplest rhythmic form possible."

Which notes are non-essential?


*Pickup notes
*chromatic passing tones
*approach tones/upper/lower neighbor tones
*repeated notes


Transforming in the reduced melody to the simplest rhythmic form possible means, many times, placing the reduced melody on the beat, with each note given a value such as an entire whole note or a half note. Then, you an take this reduced melody of whole notes or half notes and compress the entire line. So, you can, for example, compress the entire melody to 1/8th the value (the whole notes become 8th notes; the half notes become 16th notes), to 1/4 of the original value, or even to 1/2 of its original value.


What can be done with the Reduced melody? The notes can be chromatically targeted and/or embellished. For example, each melody note can be targeted from (a) a semi-tone above; (b) a semitone below: (c ) a semi-tone above and below; (d) a semitone below and above. etc.



Here is an example of "Blue Moon", as expressed as a reduced melody, as attached.

[jtizzle]

One of my favorite solos is Clifford Brown on Pent Up House. He starts the solo with a highly reduced form of the melody. Genius. Pure genius.

[NSJ]

Ed posted some of his own reduced melodies on the old open "Free Jazz Institute", a few years back. I don't know if it's still up and running, but here's his Reduced Melody of "Stella By Starlight", from 2007.

[pierre richard]

who once said..."less is more"....?

this is where absolute beginners should start...

jazz takes time to digest...we all can consume large quantities but without the digestion process ,all is lost...

time on the instrument...

[3625]

An excellent thread NSJ - for me this opens up a whole can of worms, because even though this is great advice for beginners, this is an extremely advanced way to improvise which demands knowing the tune inside out & upside down. A whole new level of knowledge to place over the framework of playing the changes - an extra dimension.

More and more over recent years I've been getting into Monk (particularly Monk with Charlie Rouse). On a musical and artistic level this stuff to me represents the best of the best - and the constant referral to the melody as the intrinsic basis for the improvisation seems to be the key to it all. Mehldau states that when playing Monk, the melody should be referred to, not just play the head and then start blowing over the changes. Monk and Charlie Rouse to me serve as some of the best examples for this way of improvising.

I'm a huge Konitz fan as well - this is something he refers to all the time (particularly in his book 'Conversations on the Improvisor's Art'). Konitz has made a real science of this, as can be seen in the following article which includes a 10 step demonstration of a written improvisation to All the Things based off the melody:

Lee Konitz 10-Step Method

Lastly (sorry for long post), on guitar Bill Frisell seems like the cat for this approach. Here in this excerpt from his instructional video, he starts with a performance with his trio on 'The Days of Wine and Roses' - then afterwards by himself he explains in a nutshell, his whole approach to improvisation using this tune as an example. Essentially, as he explains, it's all based off the melody.

This is a concept I've been guilty of neglecting because it represents a whole other mountain to climb.

Tks for the Stella pdf - that was excellent, just the kind of thing I needed for this stuff, cheers.

[sjl]

I don't think this method is for absolute beginners, I think that this is the way to go. If the melody it is not at least being evoked in what you are playing, What song are you playing?

[NSJ]

An excellent thread NSJ - for me this opens up a whole can of worms, because even though this is great advice for beginners, this is an extremely advanced way to improvise which demands knowing the tune inside out & upside down. A whole new level of knowledge to place over the framework of playing the changes - an extra dimension.

More and more over recent years I've been getting into Monk (particularly Monk with Charlie Rouse). On a musical and artistic level this stuff to me represents the best of the best - and the constant referral to the melody as the intrinsic basis for the improvisation seems to be the key to it all. Mehldau states that when playing Monk, the melody should be referred to, not just play the head and then start blowing over the changes. Monk and Charlie Rouse to me serve as some of the best examples for this way of improvising.

I'm a huge Konitz fan as well - this is something he refers to all the time (particularly in his book 'Conversations on the Improvisor's Art'). Konitz has made a real science of this, as can be seen in the following article which includes a 10 step demonstration of a written improvisation to All the Things based off the melody:

Lee Konitz 10-Step Method

Lastly (sorry for long post), on guitar Bill Frisell seems like the cat for this approach. Here in this excerpt from his instructional video, he starts with a performance with his trio on 'The Days of Wine and Roses' - then afterwards by himself he explains in a nutshell, his whole approach to improvisation using this tune as an example. Essentially, as he explains, it's all based off the melody.

This is a concept I've been guilty of neglecting because it represents a whole other mountain to climb.

Tks for the Stella pdf - that was excellent, just the kind of thing I needed for this stuff, cheers.

Wow. That video by Frisell is amazing. Thanks for the find. I read an interview where he stated that of course he knows about playing changes and chord-scales and stuff like that, but what he mainly does is play the melody OVER and OVER and OVER again, listening for ideas and responses off of that. That is his woodshed. This video is proof of that. I feel vindicated with my practice routine, in a way, when he discusses the stuff that Jim Hall taught him about harmonizing lines. "You could spend your entire life working on that". That--learning to harmonize with intervals-- is something my teacher also emphasized and taught as well. On harmonizing a line with m2s--"a big sound from a small space". And that line about using the melody as a sort of call-and-reponse? In my mind, what is music other than themes and variations on themes. Here is a great thread from the All About Jazz boards where Ed Byrne chmes in--as well as Vic Juriis----

Hearing the original melody while improvising - Jazz Bulletin Board

I went to a Peter Bernstein master class and the one thing is said that remains his guide, his signpost, his compass in any solo is the melody. That is one thing he never loses. All the greats play great melodies based on the melody.

[NSJ]

I don't think this method is for absolute beginners, I think that this is the way to go. If the melody it is not at least being evoked in what you are playing, What song are you playing?

The All Time Hall of Fame quote from the AAJ thread I referenced needs to be re-stated, even if I KNOW it will always get lost in the shuffle:


"don't improvise and try to remember the melody, play the melody and remember to improvise."

[3625]

"don't improvise and try to remember the melody, play the melody and remember to improvise."

That turned my head around on the whole thing right there - Satori! Been doing the former, will now do the latter.

NSJ - glad you got right into the Frisell vid, that was a revelation when i saw that + thanks for the thread link, will check that out, cheers

[jster]

Ed's stuff looks really good and I will probably be buying some of his books this year. But reducing the melody is something that is discussed in all books on composing melodies (ie the two books that I own ). And now when I am composing, I always look at the reduced melody and often I begin with it. As you see in the two pdf's in this thread, the reduced melodies have interesting contours. You don't want to get caught writing a melody that is lame when reduced! Big no no. So be careful and always look at the reduction!

[NSJ]

Here's a reduced melody of Autumn Leaves in E minor.

[jster]

As for improvisation, how about just adding the note from the reduction to the chord symbol, when it is not a guide tone? Then you can work out from the modified arpeggios. It's been on my to do list. It doesn't seem that hard. My god, if guys can pull out crazy modes, how hard can it be to just add a note to the arpeggio? I'm eager to get into this, but it seems easier than a lot of things guys go on about. Am I missing something?

[3625]

As for improvisation, how about just adding the notes from the reduction to the chord symbol, when it is not a guide tone? Then you can work out from the modified arpeggios. It's been on my to do list. It doesn't seem that hard. My god, if guys can pull out crazy modes, how hard can it be to just add a note to the arpeggio? I'm eager to get into this, but it seems easier than a lot of things guys go on about. Am I missing something?

As you suggested, being mindful of the chord extensions as dictated by the melody is a great idea - though you gotta admit, that's a lot of extra information to be constantly mindful of while soloing, compared to just the usual - arpeggio/mode/etc. over the related chord. You're doing that, plus superimposing this complex structure we call a melody, and you're trying to keep it all going in your head.

This approach, at least the way I see it, presupposes that you've already got all the other stuff down - how to run lines through changes etc.

[3625]

Here's a reduced melody of Autumn Leaves in E minor.

far out - these reduced melodies look like medieval plain chant, which served as the template from which lots of those renaissance cats developed those complex polyphonic lines from. The more things change... lol

[jster]

The reduction is typically 20% of the melody. Depending on the tune, it is just an extra note or two every bar. I'm not going to be mindful of the whole melody, just the reduction. So, for example, the if the reduction is a whole note that is a ninth, then, for example if the chord is D7, I would just write a 9 in red next to the D7 on the lead sheet. Then I would know to play the D9 arpeggio. That might also persuade me to avoid modes that have raised or lowered 9's. And that seems pretty easy. And from what I understand of Ed's stuff, he's not that big a fan of CST, ie modes.

[wizard3739]

Great thread! IMHO, "Less Is More" needs more emphasis!

wiz

[NSJ]

far out - these reduced melodies look like medieval plain chant, which served as the template from which lots of those renaissance cats developed those complex polyphonic lines from. The more things change... lol

Very interesting analogy. Well, I do not think any of this stuff is useful unless we sing the lines.

[3625]

The reduction is typically 20% of the melody. Depending on the tune, it is just an extra note or two every bar. I'm not going to be mindful of the whole melody, just the reduction. So, for example, the if the reduction is a whole note that is a ninth, then, for example if the chord is D7, I would just write a 9 in red next to the D7 on the lead sheet. Then I would know to play the D9 arpeggio. That might also persuade me to avoid modes that have raised or lowered 9's. And that seems pretty easy. And from what I understand of Ed's stuff, he's not that big a fan of CST, ie modes.

but that extra note or two each bar over 32 bars... then memorizing a whole different set of extensions for another 32 bar tune... adds up!

Whether you use an arpeggio/guide tone method, or CST doesn't really make too much of a diff because in the end you pretty much arrive at the same point with all that, though CST is good for more modern playing perhaps. I'm mainly into arpeggios as the basis for my lines and just fill them in either chromatically or from the relevant mode. Whatever works depending on idiom

[jster]

Oh sure. But who said anything about memorizing? :P I basically can't remember a tune unless I work up a chord solo for it, which is rare. I don't know how you guys do it.

[3625]

Oh sure. But who said anything about memorizing? :P I basically can't remember a tune unless I work up a chord solo for it, which is rare. I don't know how you guys do it.

lol

Even though I consider myself a fairly experienced player, and I know tunes by heart that I've played for years etc. Memorization of songs isn't one of my strong points - some guys seem to have a real affinity for it and know stacks of tunes.

I'm more into Tristano's concept of knowing a small number of tunes really well, and getting deeper into them over years and years. Konitz is still playing All The Things and finding new ways to be creative with it

This is a great thread, I'm gonna crash now here in Oz and see what's been added when I wake up

[monk]

Kudos to NSJ for initiating a truly important discussion.

In the early days of jazz, improvising off the melody was the method that everyone employed. In the years that followed other approaches became popular, playing on individual chords, playing on the entire chord progression, playing on chord substitutions, using arpeggios or using scales.

People sometimes mistakenly assume that just because something is old that it has no value or is passe'. This seems to be a cultural weakness that we have in the U.S. and may possibly be true of other countries also. I'll let our brothers and sisters from afar comment on that. So many people seem to be engaged in such a headlong rush into the future toward the next new thing that they neglect to give any serious consideration to anything but what lies ahead.

The idea that we as musicians should know a song inside out should be the foremost thought of everyone who picks up an instrument. The prime directive of almost every beginner who wants to play an instrument is to learn songs. Those of us who began our musical lives in rock, folk, country, bluegrass or pop probably have memories of learning to play by learning songs. Then, somehow, as we become attracted to the possibility of playing jazz, we become overwhelmed by all of the "Musts". We must learn theory, we must learn dozens of scales and fingerings, we must learn drop 2 and drop 3 voicings, we must practice all these things in all twelve keys and then while we are scurrying to practice all of the things on the overwhelming, ever expanding List of Musts, we neglect to learn songs. We lose sight of the profound, intuitive knowledge we possessed when we first started: You gotta learn songs.

One of the criticisms that has cropped up with regularity over the past couple of decades is that so many jazz players rush through the head to get to the blowing and when they arrive there, they play licks and scales all over the chord progression with no reference to the melody.

Toward the end of his life, Louis Armstrong said, "All I ever did was play the melody".

[NSJ]

What's New? Reduced Melody.

[NSJ]

Here's three Reduced Melodies Ed himself wrote out and posted to the Free Jazz Institute in 2009, that I saved: Bemsha Swing, Nardis, and Nefertiti.

[jster]

The Bemsha Swing RM only has a couple of non chord tones, 9ths, and maybe one other. The first 9th, at bar 2, is an interesting choice.

The Nefertiti is way over my head. Maybe it's the lead sheet? Or probably I just don't know what Ed is up to.

What lead sheet are you working from for What's New? That seems quite different from the melody I'm looking at. It seems we are both looking at the key of C version, since you have the C on bar 1. But bar 3 is an Eb, but you've got a D. Yeah, I think you skipped a bar early on.

[jster]

If you are going to crank out a bunch of these, I think you should consider just putting four bars per line like Ed does. Makes it much easier to read and to compare with the leadsheet.