-
^ Fantastic demonstration on motif creation. That obviously has to be expanded and include longer lines. But it gives you a framework to automatically start being creative with motif generation.
You could do that with any number of notes to get motifs going: 2, 3, 4, 5.
-
01-09-2023 04:58 PM
-
Sorry Jimmy, it's a bit of an ambiguous post to read, but I know you're a smart guy so there must be something to it. Also I know myself how hard it can be to get an insight and then find it difficult to communicate.
Reading between the lines what you write kind of reminds me of 'the cellular approach', a book which lays out formulae for line building by mixing scale tones and arpeggios.
Now.... This is where you get someone come in and say, 'what , jazz lines can be made of scale tones and arpeggios, no shit Einstein!'.
I'm interested to hear more if u can communicate it, maybe with some examples.... Although my own attempts to communicate 'The Kong Approach' have failed miserably on this forum on numerous occasions!
-
Originally Posted by Litterick
-
Originally Posted by AllanAllen
Scales, intervals, arps, chromatics. Plenty of scope for methodical line building using those....
E.g. ' chromatic slide to the 3rd of the arpeggio, then a fifth up from the 3rd resolve to the 5th of the arpeggio'...
( I've no idea what that would sound like btw, just made it up)
-
^ Yes exactly. A methodical way to practice and visualize melody. If you add intervals and chromatics to the age old custom of getting scales and arps under your fingers, it gets you the majority of the way there to playing authentic jazz solo melodies because that is by definition every possible melody shape. What you are practicing is actual melody. While only practicing scales or arps is not legitimate music or melody.
Last edited by Jimmy Smith; 01-09-2023 at 05:45 PM.
-
OK. I get it.
But, seems like the long way around the barn rather than just saying 'learn the melody.'
By that I mean (as I've said before) internalize the melody so much so that I'm might discover myself absent-mindedly humming it as I'm driving. So much so that I know what melody note the tune starts with, what melody note(s) goes with each word in the lyrics by each bar and by each A, A' or B section, etc........ so much so that I'm fk'n sick of it.
Then I know the tune.
The chords are in my opinion secondary (an outrageous thing to say?), they may be very famous and everybody plays it like (____name player____) But songs can be re-harmonized any old way. And are.
If I know the melody, I KNOW the tune.
I've only got four tunes like that in my head. But I KNOW those mofo's.
Over the years I arrived at this outlook from reading a lot of comments of various players and seeing things on my own - and it seems to me to be (to use a math analogy) the L.C.D. of a fraction. Using whole numbers.... 1/2 would be the lowest you can break it down to...... rather than say 4/8th's or 8/16th's. The L.C.D. would be: Learn the melody. Really know it.
When I've done that, I have virtually no issue coming up with variations on the melody, i.e. "improvising."
But, yeah, I get the approach you're talking about. Kinda seems a bit microscope-y and looking for quarks and neutrons to me, but then maybe no more so than what I do? Just a slightly different way of doing it? I guess it comes down to finding something that works for you. I found my thing, put the melody through a meat-grinder, lol. And know it cold.
-
Well it should be combined with playing off the melody and using your ear. All good jazz musicians can and do play off the chords though.
Yes it is microscope-y looking for quarks and neutrons. Why would you want to be ignorant of how something works if you want to succeed at it?
-
Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith
With me a little of that goes a long way.
Last edited by ChazFromCali; 01-09-2023 at 06:14 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith
The downside was that I found it lacked context. E.g. the first chapter, by the end u can nail soloing over cycles of fourths.Great, but then without knowing of a tune you can apply that to, you've actually not really achieved anything.
Nevertheless I recommend you check it out, as it is exactly what I think you are getting at.
So the put down for this is 'music mannnnn, it's not about algorithms, you gotta play what you feel etc'.
Yes that is what music is about, but if you are presented with a set of algorithms to create licks and mini melodies, try them out. Compose some, keep what you like, ditch what you don't. You've written some nice stuff that is yours to keep, who cares if there is an algorithm behind it?
-
I will check it out. Yes that's true. The other thing is that you have to have crap under your fingers or you won't be capable of playing what you feel in time with rhythm.
-
Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith
I saw him at a gig here in the UK a while back. I told him I had the DVD and I really liked the way he gets so much mileage out of these simple ideas, he said ‘well I’m a simple kind of guy!’
-
Originally Posted by ChazFromCali
-
Originally Posted by John A.Originally Posted by pauln
Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith
-
Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith
I'm no longer disappointed with theory, but still think that theory needs to learn that actions have consequences, so I'm grounding it for a week and am limiting its screen time.
-
Haha. Did you read the thread? It's for practicing purposes and getting material under your fingers. So your theory framework isn't divorced from your making authentic music mindset. First practice the topics individually, then simply practice combining them using rhythmic vocab and phrasing. Theory has now been turned into actual music. I'll try to make a video.
-
Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith
I actually explore and apply harmony topics all the time, so I’m not coming at these sorts of discussions from a perspective of not wanting to learn more. To me, harmony/pitch-collections is inseparable from jazz musicianship. I come from the perspective of “what is this person talking about and can he provide an example that concretizes his abstractions?”
-
So, we practise scales, arpeggios, intervallic leaps, and chromaticism; then we put them all together with some rhythmic vocabulary and some phrasing and voila, we have music!
It's so easy.
-
Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith
-
Originally Posted by John A.
- Actual good solos from the greats and pros use bits of scales, arps, intervals, and chromatics combined creatively.
- So practice that.
- Instead of having a mindset that theory practice isn't musical. It is if you structure it this way.
- This way your methodical practicing becomes actual music.
-
Originally Posted by Litterick
-
I think what people are struggling with is your suggestion is essentially the same thing as saying "There are only 12 notes in music, just work on creatively putting them together.". This amounts to the same thing because any random phrase can be seen as consisting of a series of chromatics, scales, arpeggios and intervals. It doesn't narrow down the possibilities much.
-
Practice the topics individually. Then create exercises combining 2 or more of the topics. Say chromatic leading tone into ascending arp lick then descend with scale. Or intervallic leap into descending scale into chromatic lick into chord tones. Etc.
-
Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
Originally Posted by KingKong
anyone selling an ibanez pm120?
Today, 01:33 PM in For Sale