-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
11-17-2017 06:17 PM
-
I like some players who play a lot of notes, although mostly I prefer players who don't.
Of the players who play a lot of notes, it's my impression that they have a kind of mental lick dictionary. That is, they know a great many licks and can apply them in clever ways, even at high speed.
I once learned a really interesting long line from a recorded solo. Later, I met the player and played the lick. He said, "oh! my old licks!". That is, he recognized it, he had it categorized in his mind as a "lick" and he didn't use it any more. Notably, I can't think of another tune in which he used that lick in a recognizable way. I think I heard pieces of it. I have heard him, live, playing long lines that I recognized -- meaning they were worked out in advance. This player is, btw, a Berklee grad and I suspect knows CST quite thoroughly.
I heard a story about one of the Brecker brothers. He'd develop a lick and write it out. Then he would shed it for a year, at the end of which he'd bring it into a public performance and be burning.
Now, I don't feel that way about Jim Hall's ballad playing. Maybe that's because it's easier to compose new melody at a slower tempo. Or maybe he was capable of making it so seamless you'd never guess it was pre-practiced.
The point I'm thinking about is that the players I like seem to be thinking melody, whether prepared or not, and are not doing things like recycling short phrases in different ways against moving harmony per theoretical considerations, although that can be great too.
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
Thing is, looking at my local scene I don't know that many true improvisers. Not in the sense that Jim was, or Sonny. It's a harsh thing top say, but I include myself in that category. Trying to improvise more, though.
-
I would like to know if Lage improvised or composed the first chorus.
It's a perfect first chorus...
-
I recently made a chart for Bossa Antigua, a Paul Desmond composition. Jim Hall played on the original track.
It was difficult at first, because I couldn't tell where the head ended. Odd to say that.
The head has a beautiful melody. It seems to go on and on. In fact, apparently, it returns to the top and then he plays an equally beautiful melody that seems to be a development of the first chorus' melody.
I'm not sure if his own chart would have had that second chorus' melody written out or not. Did the changes have two different melodies? Or was the second one an improvised solo?
It's on youtube and worth a listen.
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
-
Love that tune...totally agree.
As for "faking it." If you can hear what's tension and what's resolution in a tune...well...could that just be it? Maybe...
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
-
I have 1 (one) CD of Parker's music, someone gave it to me, unlabeled, lots of out takes and alternate takes, you can hear exactly the same licks, for bars and bars, even full solos going on over different tunes, obviously trying out which tune prefab licks would fit the best. I find it funny that experts in Jazz and Parker, like fellow forum members are, can even debate on the issue. It's just too obvious. It does not take away from the music being played, though. It's still good. Bit old fashioned, but good. That disc is in the car. My kid prefers it over Miles finds it cheerful. Miles (Steamin, Cookin ... 4 CDs), she thinks is too heavy, always asks me to turn it off and put some FM radio on. Coltrane (Giant Steps) she does not comment, just waits for me to get concentrated on traffic and switch to FM herself. Rollins ( I don"t know really what it is), I turn off.
-
Originally Posted by guido5
Which book? I have something called the Real Book Vol 3 and another called The New Real Book, but Bossa Antigua isn't in either one, which is why I made my own chart.
Another interesting thing about Bossa Antigua is the drum part. It sounds like sidestick only sort of part. Brazilians hear it as American, which is understandable. Jim's comping locks in perfectly -- and I have found it tricky to nail it the way he did.
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
3: The Real Book - Volume III: C Instruments, 2nd Edition: Hal Leonard Corp.: 0073999883022: Amazon.com: Books
-
Originally Posted by guido5
Thanks. I don't have that one, although I have one with a similar title.
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
-
Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
-
Originally Posted by Vladan
If you want cheerful, try Dizzy. Such a good fun vibes, I always preferred him to Parker.
-
Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
Yea... you do need some skills to play jazz.... at least at a level where what your playing isn't just a rehearsed performance. Nothing wrong with rehearsed performance etc... But generally... not what many would call Jazz.
Even if you disagree ... your still going to need some skills.
The technical part... is just the mechanical aspects. You can work those out anyway you choose..... BUT RESULTS ARE DIFFERENT. Most accomplished musicians can tell within a few seconds what another musicians skill level is or isn't. Which again isn't bad or wrong... but at gigs... you know what and where the music is going... or more importantly... where it isn't going.
So technical proficiency on your instrument is REAL... it needs to be addressed, worked out and developed.
The theory, explanations, feel, melodic, harmonic etc...... how ever one wants to verbally label how you perform what your playing also has very mechanical aspects. You can also work this out anyway you choose... but again the results are different.
CST... is just one of many approaches to having a mechanically organized reference for developing your ears and voice. It's not the only approach, but it's well organized and you would be foolish to not to become aware of the approach.
CST is just being aware of complete note collections... for every note attack... Like soloing with complete chords, 13th chords. And being aware of the possible organizations of choosing those complete chords.
Sure generally you don't need and would not actually play that way... and vanilla is great, but why wouldn't one want to have more choices.
Take basic Cmin pentatonic pattern.... C Eb F G Bb C... it's great, and you have 5 versions to work with etc... now replace the b7 with maj.6th........................................... ..C Eb F G A C.... you now have 5 new versions... and the patterns physically, mechanically open the possibilities for many more chord progressions, Blue note usage and access to melodic minor.
If you want to play jazz... you need to work on more than just learning tunes.... you need to learn how to play tunes.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Listen to live performances... sometimes it take a few choruses to get the organization right, or to he point that it sounds and feels right. There are reasons why something sound melodic... like a balanced melody, a great solo etc...
-
Originally Posted by Reg
CST... is just one of many approaches to having a mechanically organized reference for developing your ears and voice. It's not the only approach, but it's well organized and you would be foolish to not to become aware of the approach.
When I bang on about CST, it's - of course - from a personal misgiving with the approach and how I feel it confused and intimidated me. Now this is not the fault of the approach - more how it was communicated to me, but I wonder if others haven't encountered similar confusions. If I'd gone to Berklee, sure. But I hadn't the funds, the ability nor the inclination to go when I was 19. I'm not the only one.
20 years on I am now as of 2018, teaching Jazz Guitar at undergraduate level. Hmmm. Well, I HAVE to know CST and use that language whether I like it or not.
Secondly, a lot of CST style factoids (which do not necessarily originate, from for instance, the Berklee syllabus) are in circulation and are confusing.
Usually when the original sources are read carefully there turns out to be more nuance. For instance Levine talks about Bud Powell using the harmonic minor scale, late in the Jazz Theory book, but almost as an aside, while it was literally the first thing I noticed players doing on 7b9 chords when I started digging properly into bebop... (My adoption of the BH way of constructing language followed on a lot later when I realised it just fitted perfectly with that music.)
That's an issue of emphasis. If Levine was writing a text about bebop common practice it might have been featured more prominently. I can't say he doesn't know his stuff.
I've made my peace with CST as a system if only because I've always known about it theoretically, it's just actually using it in my music has been an on-off affair. I'm glad I spent a while really bedding in the basics and learning a bit about bop, so now it just gives me options, and is no longer seems dictatorial or prescribed. Again this is really a matter of emphasis in teaching.
I also think CST functions best - and again this might seem flipping obvious to people, but that's not the case for everyone - in combination with a knowledge of diatonic harmony. For instance, I always like to give the example of something like Stella, or a Jobim tune, where you have very often a simple mostly diatonic melody that is harmonised in a very rich way, and that these diatonic melody notes what CST would call tensions in the chords.
I can't see how one could be a jazz musician without understanding the diatonic side of it. I think again this is something which is really obvious on piano. The same can be said of CST actually, and bebop lines. On guitar, it's confusing.
Which is why you emphasise the importance of learning the fretboard. Most modern players aim to to 'keyboardise' the fretboard. OTOH - there's some great guitar style things that can be lost going too far down this route. I also feel many of the players I admire have/had a really guitaristic way of going about things.
So as always, I'm going to check out the music. Bill Evans is currently schooling me on all that Russian 1/2-whole stuff he likes to play :-)
CST is just being aware of complete note collections... for every note attack... Like soloing with complete chords, 13th chords. And being aware of the possible organizations of choosing those complete chords.
Sure generally you don't need and would not actually play that way... and vanilla is great, but why wouldn't one want to have more choices.
Take basic Cmin pentatonic pattern.... C Eb F G Bb C... it's great, and you have 5 versions to work with etc... now replace the b7 with maj.6th........................................... ..C Eb F G A C.... you now have 5 new versions... and the patterns physically, mechanically open the possibilities for many more chord progressions, Blue note usage and access to melodic minor.
If you want to play jazz... you need to work on more than just learning tunes.... you need to learn how to play tunes.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
+1
Trying to figure out how to put this, practice and playing needs to be the inverse of each other. Practice breaking things into small pieces, then study and practice over the bits. When working on playing or when actually playing think of the big picture. In more practical words practice your II-V's, short, long, cycles, from tunes. But when practicing/playing a tune now hear/feel those long phrases, start hearing/feeling rhythmically and using those little II-V's becoming the melodic resource for the long phrases. Another way to look at it is how you think do with the guitar and without the guitar in your hand. You practice your II-V's, but when you set your guitar down listen to the backing track or CD without the guitar you start hearing the long lines and phrases. We want to get to where our playing with the guitar in our hands is the same.
I started down this path when on tech practice. Learn the fretboard wasn't coming together like I hoped. Then I stopped focusing on big fingering systems and positions (but I had done that work first). Then I started focusing on smaller pieces one octave or less for scales, arp's, everything. Then the whole fretboard came together instead of me trying to adjust to fit a big fingering system, I had the small pieces to make any type of path around the neck I needed. Again practice small to play big. I'm trying to work on that for chord work and improv and seeing the value in traidic thinking. Hoping to make thinking small triad to play bigger sounds.
Sorry for the Saturday morning, haven't had coffee yet brain dump. Hope some of that makes sense to someone. Now time to make some coffee.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
Confidence goes a long way. A terrible line played with panache can sound better than a good line played timidly.
-
Originally Posted by docbop
-
I have decided I haven’t actually got enough of my life left to start studying CST now. I think I’ll just “keep on buggering on” much as I have done so far (to quote Winston Churchill).
-
Originally Posted by grahambop
Application is a whole 'nother ballgame.
A duet piece for guitar and cello
Today, 12:52 PM in Composition