The Guitar Artistry Of Bill Frisell

[joefarlow]

Being a big fan of the modern jazz guitar sound (tm), I was naturally curious to see what this DVD was about. Unlike trad. instructional DVds by Martino, Bruno, and others, we get snippets and chats with Frisell which are theoretically provocative. There was one section where he seemed to assert that if you held the melody strongly in mind, you are allowed to harmonize it anyway you please - even atonally, or with NO theoretical underpinnings at all!

Big IF, eh?

So what I am asking here is, who here thinks this is a VALID way to teach jazz? There does not seem to be a precedent for this.

And on the subject of valid jazz guitar teachers...(oh I will pen a whole rant on this one soon...busy, busy, no time to...) the ones who claim to be uh 'natural teachers/players', I got no time for. I even saw one of those take out a student on this very forum (the thread is still here somewhere) just cos the student said she didn't like the teacher's method, and preferred her own way of learning on her own. Yeah, such bullying at this forum, for shame.

But back to Frisell, and the open, free method of harmonisation....? Anyone?

For myself, it seems very sketchy. But then again when you are so tied down to which scale fits which chord, and all that crap, you mostly end up with the 'paint by numbers' school of jazz improv. Most cats end up there, but dont really want to, or dont really care if they do, as long as they 'cut the changes', and sound like some 80 year old geezer with a ten grand jazz box

[bako]

Videos should represent how the player/teacher conceives music. Bill is a very personal player and this open approach is reflective of that.
There is something good to be said about listening and looking beyond the most obvious choices.
Anytime that we discover interesting new sounds, we can always go back to find or create a theoretical underpinning.

When I studied with with jazz arranger Don Sebesky, he spoke of voicings that he classified based on their resonance and special color and not so much the voice leading. Perhaps that is in some way related.

[JonR]

The problem with comments from a highly experienced player like Frisell being used in a teaching context is that he is building his ideas on top of many years (decades) working with more basic harmony. He's conquered the foothills, and is making pronouncements from the top of the mountain (or at least from a long way up it). He's maybe forgotten how things looked from down below, or is at least not being asked to address them.
IOW, his ideas are underpinned with a subconscious (but full) understanding of conventional harmony. If he throws the book away, that's because he's read and absorbed it first - and can judge whether or not it's applicable. His ear is also highly trained to make sophisticated judgements intuitively. Not something most jazz students can manage.

IOW, they can be very good thoughts to present to (and inspire) advanced jazz students, say in a masterclass.
For beginners? No way, IMO.

(Just to stress: this is no criticism of Frisell, as he is not a teacher AFAIK. He's talking about how he thinks, not suggesting that all jazz students should think that way. If he were to set himself up as a jazz teacher - of beginners - I suspect he would spend a reasonable amount of time on conventional harmony basics.)

[Jonzo]

It is hard to make a judgement on that small comment taken out of context.

In the final analysis there are no rules about how you must play, and no rule that anyone must listen.

[JonR]

In the final analysis there are no rule about how you must play, and no rule that anyone must listen.

True.

Except that when the audience makes the rules, they better damn well listen .

[bako]

The process of building harmony from a template of just the melody sounds like a useful skill to develop.
It sounds potentially liberating from reacting only to the "written chord changes".
It requires listening and creativity, good muscles to engage at any stage of the learning curve.

[Dark Star]

...his ideas are underpinned with a subconscious (but full) understanding of conventional harmony. If he throws the book away, that's because he's read and absorbed it first - and can judge whether or not it's applicable. His ear is also highly trained to make sophisticated judgements intuitively. Not something most jazz students can manage.

Right on

[Vladan]

Guess that's advanced concept, assuming you're skilled and talented enough,
so not to ruin the thing.
on beginers level, if I understood it correctly, I do similar. I always keep an inner ear on, or kind of sing it silently in my mind, basic melody i'm messing arround.

[NSJ]

The process of building harmony from a template of just the melody sounds like a useful skill to develop.
It sounds potentially liberating from reacting only to the "written chord changes".
It requires listening and creativity, good muscles to engage at any stage of the learning curve.

Harmelodics? Still haven't figured that one out.

It seems all the great players rely on the melody, first and foremost. Saw Peter Bernstein master class--pretty much reiterated what is being said by Bill--always turns to the melody as his guide to the song, song form, improvisation.

[TH]

I really agree with the thoughtful comments of previous posters. On the OP's discomfort with Bill's seeming abandonment of order and his osensible advocating of harmonic anarchy, I suppose anyone can say anything these days, and it can mean license to mean anything. We did just have an election didn't we?
But seriously, I do have a few humble opinions on his humble opinions (and Bill is, if nothing else, always humble.)
First of all I think it's telling that the DVD is called Artistry of Bill Frisell. Not theoretical revelations of a revolutionary you must now follow. He's speaking as an artist. As an artist, he has taken his staggeringly considerable body of theoretical knowledge, a knowledge of traditional harmony (listen to his Wine and Roses solo), his experience as a player (hand picked and first choice by Paul Motian, and also having played with a who's who of jazz) and managed to craft a poetic niche in a rich genre based on rigid structures. As an artist, his task is not to follow the rules, first and foremost, but to use them to understand their underlying function and to make choices in service of creating a personal statement. That's what that DVD is about; an insight into a complex process that liberated an artist from mere craftsman.
Now if you don't like his music, if it doesn't speak to you, you're in the wrong room and there are many more. It's only one room of many.
Melody is a fulcrum for improvisation for Bill, and when I listen to his solos, I'm aware of an uncanny, but seemingly perfect use of harmonic elements that support a statement. I might ask "how do you DO that?" and he may very well explain it in a personal and unorthodox method; a product of his own evolution. I will point out that he's not the first to suggest that the structure of a solo is not structurally bound-Coltrane-Greensleeves...
When Bill was working with Paul Motian, we were talking and he was still finding his sea legs with this long lived trio, this was in the early 80's I guess, he'd create marvelous etherial sounds and compositions each time he soloed, but each was so uniquely different from all previous solos on that particular tune. I commented to him on that and he showed me Paul's lead sheet. It was a line of notes, no rhythmic indications, no harmonic indications, and certainly no II V I's. Well, when you find the essence of music night after night in a situation like that, I think you earn some kind of mastery of the craft that is unforseen by the genre as a whole.
It's not that he is advocating random jamming. Quite the opposite. He is giving insight into what pieces of the block of marble he removes and in what order in order to answer the question "Mr. Michelangelo, just HOW did you do that?" For Bill, it comes from listening, being open minded, knowing all your theory and not being bound by it. In short, being an artist. I dare say there is poetry in his version of the craft.
His music is the prerequisite of watching the DVD. If you know it, and want to know how he sees his craft and his art, I'd say it speaks for itself.
What he says also seems like a relevant germ of advice even for a beginner. It seems a truthful point of perspective, something some other DVDs may not address.
Only one opinion from the peanut gallery here...
David

[Gearhead]

Well said, David - totally agree with you.

[shrp11]

Why would anyone NOT want to listen to the advice of someone as well-repsected and talented as Bill Frisell? You take what he has to say, or teach, along with all the other thousands of hours of information you accrue over the years and you glean from it, sometimes much later in life, what's relevant and what isn't - sometimes those two things flip by the way

That's the beauty of learning.

[jster]

Great quote, great comments.

For those who doubt what Frisell said:

1) Can anyone provide an example where somebody keeps the melody firmly in mind and yet the reharmonization fails?

And to Frisell, I would ask a couple of things:

2) If we reharmonize but don't keep the melody firmly in mind what happens then? Vanilla?

3) What is it to keep the melody firmly in mind anyway? In order for his statement to really tell us anything, he has to define "keeping the melody firmly in mind" independently of just reharmonizing in a way that we judge it successful. Should we sing it in the shower beforehand?

And to all you Frisell experts out there:

4) Can you think of any interesting examples of this on Bill's CDs?

[robertm2000]

Videos should represent how the player/teacher conceives music. Bill is a very personal player and this open approach is reflective of that.
There is something good to be said about listening and looking beyond the most obvious choices.
Anytime that we discover interesting new sounds, we can always go back to find or create a theoretical underpinning.

When I studied with with jazz arranger Don Sebesky, he spoke of voicings that he classified based on their resonance and special color and not so much the voice leading. Perhaps that is in some way related.

Don Sebesky? I'm impressed! He is one heck of an arranger who knows his stuff inside and out, and knows jazz as well.

Matter of fact, he did an arrangement that I found out about the first time I was on this board and which blew me away. And I found out about John Pizzarelli then too.

You can bet your boots or anything else that what Mr. Sebesky says is worth listening to.

[JakeAcci]

Attachment 4919

Not from a CD but I hope this might be a thought provoking example anyway. If you know the harmony to this piece, and if you've listened to Bill play this night after night when he solos, you will know that the harmonic choices he makes do not always fit the given changes of the piece. Especially when he's playing a melody line of the solo, adding tension or chordal colour in the construction.
Now in some circles this may merely reharmonization, so be it. My point is that to play this way is a practice of ATTITUDE. Not servitude to changes, but the ability to use, understand and allude to the original harmonic dictates and make it your own. This is not a rote solo nor one you'd hear again. It's his artistic statement.
This is a live recording, and I feel Bill's point in the dvd is especially relevant for the spontaneous composer, the improvising soloist.
For all those who say this is not how Wes would have played it, no. Let's just let this be an example of how one guitarist interprets jazz guitar.
David

Great clip, thanks.

[Melodic Dreamer]

Not to change the subject guys, because this is an interesting read.

But...... How is the booklet that comes with the DVD?
I've only seen this dvd on youtube. I have thought about buying it many of times just to have, but I have always been curious to what the book contains.