Good Advice ... Learn Tunes.

[Jazzaluk]

I've always believed that tunes can teach you all the theory that you need to know. But I'm no pro ...

[andyhoey1]

Doesn't get much simpler than that does it.

[franco6719]

I've always believed that tunes can teach you all the theory that you need to know. But I'm no pro ...

+200

Thanks for reminding me not to stray from a path that was working for me anyway.

[JonR]

I've always believed that tunes can teach you all the theory that you need to know.

Me too! Nice to see pros confirm it, of course.
Personally, I just learned tunes because that was what I wanted to play! I never took lessons, and didn't care about theory. That's how I learned to improvise: because playing tunes gives you a whole vocabulary of melodic phrases, and the grammar of how intervals and chord extensions work.
Studying theory - separated from tunes - is no answer.
Much later i did take jazz lessons, and - like franco6719 - found it tempting me to stray from my tried-and-tested path. Academic jazz theory was intellectually interesting and appealing, of course, but - thankfully - didn't damage my playing too much.

[oldane]

I agree. The songs are the heart and soul of it all. What I have done through the years is learning a lot of songs. AFTER that, studied theory to a certain extent, as it helps me to categorize what is going on in the songs, so I can easier recognize say chord sequences which is repeated in many different songs.

Persons with an exceptional ear can play it all just by hearing it, but those of us who are less gifted may need some structure. Lester Young was said not to know anything about harmony, but he had a most excellent ear. I'd venture to say that he did in fact know about harmony - must have to play like he did. He had just figured it out by himself by learning the songs and didn't use the "academic" words for it and didn't have a need for flashing his more or less formal knowledge.

When learning a new song, I find it helpful to have a lead sheet, as the music notation works like a graphic presentation of it (like say a block diagram in a scientific presentation) making it easier to figure whats going on and to remember the tune. So my best theory book has been my fake books.

I have played guitar for 45 years and also played sax and clarinet for some years, but have never got around to use modes as the basis for my playing. I know what modes is about, but that's it. But then, I don't play modal music. I'm firmly rooted in the classic "All American Song Book" (Kern, van Heussen, Rodgers/Hart etc.), which is not about improvising over single chords, but about creating a melodic flow on harmony which begins somewhere, passes via somewhere and ends somewhere. If anything, as the years have passed, I have been more and more preoccupied with voice leading. Does it sound good. Does the chord progression have a graceful, logical and "seamless" flow, or does the chords appear as seemingly unrelated chunks of sound. My chords have become simpler, smaller and with fewer high extensions.

Many modern players have learned to play modally with blazing speed in a technically brilliant manner. But to be frank, that kind of playing often leaves me cold. John Coltrane was quoted saying, that he was trying to make his playing prettier as he was afraid it sounded like academical exersizes to the listener. That's preceicely the way I feel with some of the modal playing going on (not with Coltrane, though). Many of those players sound like they all had the same teacher and text book.

Questions like "can you play this or that mode over this or that chords" never interested me. Why not just try it and hear if you like it? As Duke Ellington said: "If it sounds right, it is right."

Charlie Parker maintained that any note could be played anywhere in any chord progression if the phrase was done right. Miles Davis rejected that idea and said that one could definitely not play a flatted fifth in the so-and-so bar of a blues. A little later at Birdland they heard Lester do it, and it worked fine in the context, so Davis got this "I told you so" look from Parker.

But that's only me - others will no doubt beg to differ.

[max_power]

Many modern players have learned to play modally with blazing speed in a technically brilliant manner. But to be frank, that kind of playing often leaves me cold. John Coltrane was quoted saying, that he was trying to make his playing prettier as he was afraid it sounded like academical exersizes to the listener. That's preceicely the way I feel with some of the modal playing going on (not with Coltrane, though). Many of those players sound like they all had the same teacher and text book.

I agree with you to an extent, but this Coltrane quote is taken a bit out of context. Coltrane felt that way because at that point in his career a lot of the explorations in his playing were in fact based off of scale patterns and exercises.

[Stackabones]

Some folks are good at theory and analyzing tunes, and others are musicians.

[mr. beaumont]

I still think you should never discount any knowledge you can get your hands on (and brain in)

Not everything will work or click for everybody.

Learning tunes is crucial, IMHO, because it gives you a framework to hang the other stuff on. It's also part of the fun stuff about playing music, which for most of us, is why we do it in the first place.

I don't think you can learn everything from learning songs...at least on your own, in a "bubble." But if there was only one way of practicing, I'd tell folks to learn songs, learn the melody inside out and learn the chords to the song in as many places as humanly possible.

Then soloing is "connecting the dots." Okay, it's not that easy, but the idea's there...

[Jazzaluk]

There are frequent questions on this forum about how to develop a voice or a style. IMO tunes are the best way to do this. In addition to providing a vehicle to understand theoretical concepts, they also provide a medium and context for interpretation, which is key to developing a style and a voice.

[Davit]

Me too! Nice to see pros confirm it, of course.
Personally, I just learned tunes because that was what I wanted to play! I never took lessons, and didn't care about theory. That's how I learned to improvise: because playing tunes gives you a whole vocabulary of melodic phrases, and the grammar of how intervals and chord extensions work.
Studying theory - separated from tunes - is no answer.
Much later i did take jazz lessons, and - like franco6719 - found it tempting me to stray from my tried-and-tested path. Academic jazz theory was intellectually interesting and appealing, of course, but - thankfully - didn't damage my playing too much.

How long did it take you to learn to improvise from tunes. What tunes helped you the most?
Do you have an example of your improv? Thank you.

[oldane]

I agree with you to an extent, but this Coltrane quote is taken a bit out of context. Coltrane felt that way because at that point in his career a lot of the explorations in his playing were in fact based off of scale patterns and exercises.

Yes - and that was in fact my point, but I may not have put it perfectly clear. Soloing based on scales/modes and exercises is what often leaves me cold. However, Coltrane doesn't leave me cold, because he also had this immense and burning emotional power. BTW, I have the qoute from the liner notes of the "Giant Steps" album, which was recorded in his "sheets of sound" period, which may also be the period you are referring to.

[Jake Hanlon]

love this, it's awesome.

Last semester I had the privilage of teaching a Theory class for 2nd year Jazz students and spent probably half of it teaching them harmony through standard tunes, getting them to see that the more tunes you know and understand the more that knowledge is universally applicable. My students in my guitar student all learn 1 or sometimes 2 tunes a week in addition to whatever else I am having them working on

I probably know 100 tunes to the point of not needing to read them at all and probably another 50+ that i've forgotten the melodies too or maybe the bridge and with a lead sheet will have them again in a chorus. This year i'm aiming to add between 50 and 75 more tunes to my list. Lately it seems like a lot of people i'm listening too are playing standards i've never learned or even heard and that is very exciting for me.

learning tunes is fun also, I always really enjoy it.

[Jake Hanlon]

How long did it take you to learn to improvise from tunes. What tunes helped you the most?
Do you have an example of your improv? Thank you.

This is a very good quetion Davit, I would like to offer a point of view about this.

While it's true that all standards can offer you something in terms of building your overall Musicianship there are Standards that I use a great deal in my teaching in order to help students learn some Jazz truths about how to improvise, especially over changes and in a very complete sense. Most of these tunes offer special combinations of common progressions, or forms that can help a Student progress through those challenges.

Most standards are composed of three forms of resolution

1. the ii-V-I or the dominant > tonic. this comes in many forms, it takes a while to understand them all and all the subtle subs and traditional changes that happen to them

2. the iv - I or more commonly seen as vii bVII7 I called either the "backdoor 2 5" or "subdominant 2 5". SOmewhat more obscure in how it can be used, is a chord progression that comes up all over standards all the time.

3. idim7 > I, the tonic diminish to tonic major cadence is seldom seen just as Cdim7 > CMa7 but goes through many instances of subsitutions and is used to dress up the two above examples.

Learning standards like Stella by STarlight, Emily, Night and Day, Solar, Have you me miss jones all contain challenges that are formal, feel, and contain these harmonic tendencies

when you're learning tunes we all tend to start with autumn leaves or whatever, and there is nothing wrong with that. Autumn Leaves can give you a very good base if you can play it well, although the composition itself on a harmonic level is rather simple. Learning to get deeper into harmony in order to improve your improvisational vocabulary requires tunes with more complex harmony.

[JonR]

How long did it take you to learn to improvise from tunes.

I've been playing guitar a l-o-o-o-ong time but, as I remember, I was improvising (kind of) right from the start. (I was self-taught.) I just copied what I heard, as well as I could (which wasn't very well to begin with).
It never struck me that improvisation ought to be difficult: I learned the chords and I learned the tunes (the vocal melodies, because I liked playing tunes). I could read music, so I could play melodies from songbooks, I didn't need to do it by ear. When it came to trying to pick up solo phrases by ear, that was a lot harder, but I could tell how melodies were based on the chords, so it was easy to follow that principle when improvising.

What tunes helped you the most?

Hard to say. I just learned any tune I found. It started with guitar instrumentals (Shadows etc), then Beatles and Bob Dylan tunes, and folk, blues, and vintage 20s jazz-pop songs. But anything basically.
IOW, I wasn't interested in improvisation as such - in learning to be a good improviser. I was interested in playing songs (both rhythm and lead, even bass), and in doing whatever it took to get them to sound right. If that involved playing a solo, I'd play a solo. My point here is that this was never a problem for me, I was never confused about how or what to play - presumably because of my background playing melodies. I never learned scale patterns, as such - but of course I picked up how scales went through the study of melody and chords.
In terms of guitar technique, my main interest (after the initial Shadows phase) was ragtime/blues fingerstyle. That - like most folk styles - involved a degree of improvisation within a well-known set of parameters; stylistic devices one was expected to adapt as one liked. IOW, not really "tunes" as such, although melodies were often involved.

Do you have an example of your improv? Thank you.

Some examples here - Jon Riley | Gratis muziek, tourneedata, foto's, video's
Check the blog link for descriptions of the tracks. (There are different degrees and styles of improv on each track. "6 minutes in June" is entirely improvised, no pre-composition.)
(It's OK I don't expect anyone to be amazed...)

[Davit]

JR Thank you for your lengthy and insightful reply.I love your music.Really inspirational. I hear so many things in them from classical guitar to blues folk and jazz.Really nice.

[Davit]

This is a very good quetion Davit, I would like to offer a point of view about this.

While it's true that all standards can offer you something in terms of building your overall Musicianship there are Standards that I use a great deal in my teaching in order to help students learn some Jazz truths about how to improvise, especially over changes and in a very complete sense. Most of these tunes offer special combinations of common progressions, or forms that can help a Student progress through those challenges.

Most standards are composed of three forms of resolution

1. the ii-V-I or the dominant > tonic. this comes in many forms, it takes a while to understand them all and all the subtle subs and traditional changes that happen to them

2. the iv - I or more commonly seen as vii bVII7 I called either the "backdoor 2 5" or "subdominant 2 5". SOmewhat more obscure in how it can be used, is a chord progression that comes up all over standards all the time.

3. idim7 > I, the tonic diminish to tonic major cadence is seldom seen just as Cdim7 > CMa7 but goes through many instances of subsitutions and is used to dress up the two above examples.

Learning standards like Stella by STarlight, Emily, Night and Day, Solar, Have you me miss jones all contain challenges that are formal, feel, and contain these harmonic tendencies

when you're learning tunes we all tend to start with autumn leaves or whatever, and there is nothing wrong with that. Autumn Leaves can give you a very good base if you can play it well, although the composition itself on a harmonic level is rather simple. Learning to get deeper into harmony in order to improve your improvisational vocabulary requires tunes with more complex harmony.

Thank you for your post and advise.I really appreciate and I will start by Stella and see how I'll do

[JonR]

JR Thank you for your lengthy and insightful reply.I love your music.Really inspirational. I hear so many things in them from classical guitar to blues folk and jazz.Really nice.

Thanks, you're very kind.
I should say that I'm some way short of professional jazz standard. (I've played with enough pro jazzers to know that!) I've only ever been an amateur musician, and I was concerned to keep it that way for as long as possible, for two reasons: (1) I never thought I was good enough (or serious enough) to go pro; (2) I liked that I didn't have to make my living at it, and could play what I liked when I liked (with whoever I liked). I was lucky enough to be able to make a living in another creative sphere (illustration).
However, a few circumstances, a few years ago, persuaded me I could (and ought to) give it a go, at least to begin teaching guitar professionally, which is now how I earn most of my living. I get some extra from gigs, but less than I used to.
This is all just to help you judge the value of my advice!

[oldane]

While it's true that all standards can offer you something in terms of building your overall Musicianship there are Standards that I use a great deal in my teaching in order to help students learn some Jazz truths about how to improvise, especially over changes and in a very complete sense. Most of these tunes offer special combinations of common progressions, or forms that can help a Student progress through those challenges.

Most standards are composed of three forms of resolution

1. the ii-V-I or the dominant > tonic. this comes in many forms, it takes a while to understand them all and all the subtle subs and traditional changes that happen to them

2. the iv - I or more commonly seen as vii bVII7 I called either the "backdoor 2 5" or "subdominant 2 5". SOmewhat more obscure in how it can be used, is a chord progression that comes up all over standards all the time.

3. idim7 > I, the tonic diminish to tonic major cadence is seldom seen just as Cdim7 > CMa7 but goes through many instances of subsitutions and is used to dress up the two above examples.

Learning standards like Stella by STarlight, Emily, Night and Day, Solar, Have you me miss jones all contain challenges that are formal, feel, and contain these harmonic tendencies

Several books has tried to put these repeating and common harmonic progressions into systems, seeking to aid the musician to remember tunes easier and better be able to identify progressions by hearing them.

To mention two:

Conrad Cork: Harmony with Lego bricks. One may or may not like the authors way of giving well known progressions new memotecnic names (some of them are named after the tunes in which they appear, some are given names that illustrate what happens). Personally, I'm a little hesitant to use a language which is only understood by those who have read this book. But I can't object to the basic idea. The reader must also mobilize a certain amount of patience as the author uses many words and often sidesteps into personal opinions on this or that - some is interesting, some is not. One interesting subject he discusses is the different way of approaching harmonic progessions in classical music and jazz. A CD with sound samples of the "bricks" can be ordered for free from the author, who is very accomodating and helpful.

John Elliott: Insights in Jazz. Elliott carries Conrad Corks system further by boiling Corks many words somewhat down and adding a number of extra harmonic "bricks". His writing style is much more concise and to the point than Corks (but thereby also more dry). His book comes with a CD with sound samples of the "bricks" as well as more than 100 standard tunes analized in the "brick" way. The author runs a Google Group where one can discuss and ask about the subject and exchange opinions. John Elliott is participating actively in the discussions.

The question is, of course, if one really needs such systems, or if one actually learns to identify and recognize these repeating patterns by learning and playing a lot of standard tunes. In the end, it may well be a matter of personal preference and temper.

[randalljazz]

two more such books, minus the jargon:



Amazon.com: Hearin' the Changes: Dealing with Unknown Tunes By Ear: Jerry Coker, Bob Knapp, Larry Vincent: Books



The Harmonic Language Of Jazz Standards

Amazon.com: The Harmonic Language of Jazz Standards: Marc Sabatella: Books

[JazzFanatik]

I think having a balance of using your ear and understanding theory makes a great musician...everyone has their own opinions but i played by ear for a while, when i started to learn theory it opened up my eyes AND ears to things I would have never considered before.

It certainly won't hurt you...but to each their own!

[tytlfamily]

All great advice.......my chops are getting better just hanging around here

[franco6719]

[quote=randalljazz;144174]two more such books, minus the jargon:



Amazon.com: Hearin' the Changes: Dealing with Unknown Tunes By Ear: Jerry Coker, Bob Knapp, Larry Vincent: Books



+1. Don't know the other one.