Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner - Non Classical linear construction in jazz and general practice routine

Hi again Prints
Thanks for the name of the auto and for introducing me to Paul Bley. Wow, his solo on ATTYA as you say was light years ahead, it reminds me of the style of the very modern Jacky Terrasson. Even though I will study this solo, I might never be able to emulate it. This is exactly the type of exciting playing I like.

You make an interesting point on the strength of the lines. For my soloing at the moment, I'm trying to justify everything theoretically e.g. melodic minor, dim arp. But I am at the point where I hear the line very clearly in my head, maybe I should just play it with my RH regardless of whether I can justify it theoretically or not ?

Hey jjo
Thanks for your exercise of starting lines on a different beat. I tend to start on 1+. I will work at varying from now on for my solos.

Custard Apple ... glad you found the Bley solo (and good work at that!) ... it is amazing.

In my opinion, if you're hearing the line in your head, just play it! Justify later. Once you really trust yourself and follow that line, you'll be amazed at what comes out. Sometimes whatever comes out will be super simple. Sometimes not. But if you're hearing it, it's yours. Focus on it, phrase it, shape it, as best as you can, play it like it's the best thing in the world! Because it it!

... I'm not saying don't know anything about theory, etc. Theory is great and helpful. But that inner hearing and then the ability to translate it into sound at your instrument. THAT's what it's about!

Am totally serious! It's great to hear you say you're hearing ... !!!

I recently stumbled across Dave Frank's video master classes on YouTube. He did one that pretty directly addresses the topics being discussed here. His vids are excellent. Check this one out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVUj-a29mzI

Gary Burton's improv class is also pretty good - about the first half of this vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2txO_u2eNg&feature=related

Hi everyone

I hope you all enjoyed your Christmas.

The Gary Burton one is a lot of work. But I am prepared to invest the years in learning each of the modes over each of the 12 tonal centers.
That's why I'm learning the "easier" scales first e.g. half-whole dim scale.
I need to watch that vid again before the New Year.

Meanwhile I'm trying to make my improv over the 1st chord of ATTYA A2 sec more interesting. I prefer to play the C min 7 as rootless, so could you please suggest to me a hip mode to use over Eb maj 7 ?

custard apple ... the hippest mode over that Cm7 is the one you hear! Having said that, here's a transcription of Lennie Tristano playing All The Things You Are.

http://dmitri.tymoczko.com/files/transcriptions/tristano.pdf. You'll notice a very interesting mode over the Cm!

One way to think about a mode for that chord is to ask yourself (ask your ear ....): Where is the Cm7 chord going? The answer, of course is to Fm7. So one answer for a mode to play is what could you play in (over) that bar with Cm7? I'm posing this as a question because if think just about "how can we get to the Fm7" you might well come up with, well, a mode or a line or an arpeggio or a melody, etc. that strongly suggests C dominant 7 (where the E natural - a leading tone to F - is the important note). But's only one way and I have a feeling that there are as many answers to your question as there are readers of this particular thread!

Returning to the idea of the "hippest mode for Cmin7 is the one you hear ..." you could also transcribe JUST THAT ONE measure from a million other soloists who have recorded ATTYA. You could try every possible mode and scale you can think of ...(one at a time, chorus after chorus ... or just isolate the measures that surround that Cm7 and experiment.). If you find something that to use that isn't standard vocabularly probably all who hear you will ask (in a very good way!) "What are you doing there?"

The LF voicing .... if you need to alter it to accomodate the mode, not a problem. If you want to leave it as is even if the mode you use clashes with it, NOT A PROBLEM! You could also not play at all with your left hand in the measure (and just use a/the mode alone). Or, just play a chord and omit a line in the RH.

You'll notice in the transcription that Lennie Tristano has a really really interesting way of playing the Cm7.

Hope this helps!

Happy holidays!

oh wow Prints, your Lennie Tristano example is very hip indeed. Thanks for telling me about this awesome live recording with Lee Konitz, and for the transcription. So Lennie is treating the C min 7 as a C7 and applying the altered scale ? As you say the sound is really really interesting.

I also like your other ideas:
1. Study just the C min 7 usage of the masters
2. Thinking C7 can provide smooth voice leading to the following F min 7.

btw I've also started using your mantra "Play what you hear and justify later".

For solo piano, how often do you omit the LH chord for a given measure (and just play the RH) ?

hi custard apple. ... the part i saw that looked really interesting in the LT solo was the first time the Cm7 chord shows up. he deals with it by not playing anything! that's measure where the Cm7 goes is blank! it's a rest!

also worth noting in that transcription is there's a ton stuff over the changes more or less a half-step away from where it should be.

about leaving out the LF when playing solo. that's a really interesting question. ... you can play a whole entire solo piano improv w/out using the LH. (or using it only slightly). there's a bill evans solo version of All The Things You Are where his left hand barely plays anything. ....

you might also try pushing the notes of a chord down w/LH but really softly so that if possible the keys go down but they don't sound. then just hold the chord like that and play your lines. and listen to amazing resonance!

... something i read in the miles davis autoB that explains some stuff in herbie hancock solos is (to MAKE UP an example ... ) play a C7 where it usually goes in some given progression. then at the point the C7 SHOULD resolve (to F major or Fmin ... whatever) just KEEP playing C7! hold off on the resolution as long as possible. so ... instead of playing 1 bar of C7 followed by one bar of Fm7, your playing one bar of C7, and then 3 more beats of C7, and then resolve that finally on the 4th beat of where the Fm or Fmaj should be. herbie used to do that kind of stuff with (very) altered scales to emphasize the dissonances and the resolution. if you think about it, all that is is just playing w/harmonic rhythm.

but having said all of this ... playing what you hear is so essential. so it may be that sometimes you'll hear stuff that very complex and complicated and if that's so it's fine. if on the other hand the stuff you hear is simple, that's ok too!

hope this helps!

Checking in late, here . . . not intentionally, but it does give one the opportunity to read and consider the thoughts of all the others. The original question had to do with linear construction – harmonic content, directionality (Is that a word?), and rhythm.

Unfortunately, Phil Markowitz does not elaborate upon exactly what he means, and thus kiedysktos’ question. I am unfamiliar with the work of Mr. Markowitz, and therefore need to make some assumptions, just like everyone else here.

I concur completely with this:

So, here’s my take on linear construction : It is something that is built horizontally, rather than vertically. This would NOT be limited to step-wise, or chromatic movements. Indeed, large leaps in intervals do nothing to keep a piece from being “linear” in concept.

If we are considering melodies, we are constructing LONG melodies, as opposed to fragments. If we are working with sequences, they will be strung together to form those LONG melodies. I would think that phrases would be extended and flowing, rather than clipped. Improvisational ideas would be over-arching, rather than compartmentalized.

Why would one devote 50% of ones practice time to developing these linear constructions? Because we now suffer from several generations of “jazz musicians” who learned their “craft” by playing scales and licks.
“ Fmaj7 – oh yea. Here is where I play just the F major scale. Oh, wait, I saw on the Forum that I might get a really cool sound by playing the relative minor. Let’s see - D minor (natural) scale. OK. let’s try that.”
“ Gm7 - now this is where I play some Dorian mode, or is it Mixolydian? (I always get the two confused.) I do remember someone mentioning that if you want some nice color, include the minor ninth interval, so that would be -- let’s see -- Ab, there.”
“Oh, wait! That Gm7 is followed by a C7(b9) . This is an ideal time to use one of those cadences on which I have been working. What do they call it? Oh -- II – V7 – I -- that’s it. I have a few licks memorized for just this purpose. Let’s see: transpose to the key of F . . .”
“Wow! I got through it, and played all the “right” notes.”

This is the way jazz is taught to the masses. This is the way jazz is learned by most. And, unfortunately, this is the way jazz sounds, all too often. Focusing upon what scale, or mode, or lick one needs to play over the chord that is sounding right now leads to trite, hackneyed, and generally UNinspired playing. Focusing upon inventing a melody, or a large portion of a melody, or a nice fat sequence that can become a melody, and that fits over the harmonic PROGRESSION , leads to much more interesting improvisation, and certainly more continuity.

I would also be willing to delve into the linear aspects of harmonic structure, but will probably suffer enough back-lash from this post to keep me busy for awhile.

Ed

That's a very interesting example which you provided, printer, of using the LH to emphasize delayed resolution. My rhythm is still not good enough during improv to apply this concept, but I look forward to using it in the future.

But for now I can experiment with not always playing the LH chord, especially in a tune such as ATTYA where there are 4 instances of repeated major chords.

> at the point the C7 SHOULD resolve (to F major or Fmin ... whatever) just KEEP playing C7! hold off on the resolution as long as possible. so ... instead of playing 1 bar of C7 followed by one bar of Fm7, your playing one bar of C7, and then 3 more beats of C7, and then resolve that finally on the 4th beat of where the Fm or Fmaj should be

Dave Frank mentions this at the end of his "freedom at last" video lesson of playing it outside the changes. He somewhat confusingly calls it "chord diminution or extension". In this case he doesn't mean extending or diminishing the harmonies, but extending or diminishing the amount of time the chord is held.

right. Lennie showed me this extension/dim thing at a memorable lesson once. He was reluctant to show it to me but did. it was pretty mind-blowing at the time..

It's something that Mozart gets up to quite a lot.

Thanks for your post a lot! I think you nailed it. That's what Barry Harris said listening present pianists: "Poverty. Lots of notes, but lack of the right ones"

You said as much in the vid Dave and I'm not sure I understand the reluctance? It seemed like one of the more straightforward ideas you presented. Modal assignment seemed like a more sophisticated trick to me. If you are playing at a level where you can pretty easily pull that one off then holding a chord for a few extra beats should be cake. I do it all the time but in my case it's because I'm failing to keep up...

It had more to do with me I think than him. I hadn't been studying with him all that long with him at the time, and back then most of us were playing on changes and trying to master the form, so from a teaching standpoint it was kinda early to be messing with that.
He presented the chord ex/dim thing like he was showing me a secret handshake of the Masons or something)

DF

I like the quote from Barry Harris - HE nailed it!

Those who endeavor to “teach jazz”, if that is even possible, have always struggled with how to impart everything that needs to be transferred from master to apprentice. Obviously, the best way is, and always has been, a one-on-one, in-person teaching, where the master helps his student build knowledge and skills precisely as needed.

Somewhere along the path, the educational technicians realized there was a market for learning to play __________ (fill in your favorite type of music.) In true math or science fashion, they set about breaking down the playing of music into its component parts. During this deconstruction and analyzing, then reassembling the various parts process, much of the soul of music disappears. It is even worse for jazz than for many other forms of music, since the improvisational heart of jazz is not written down, and is not intended to be duplicated note-for-note. Even the very notation of jazz depends upon the sadly inadequate Western-European system that serves classical music fairly well.

But the educational technicians, aided by many famous jazz players, did take up the challenge of teaching improvisation. We have chords and we have scales - concrete and definable. If we can teach the student to play the notes of a certain scale while a certain chord is sounding, that will be a good start. More advanced? If we can teach the student to play a certain substitute chord when they see a basic harmony, now we are accomplishing the goal - jazz playing for the masses. “Double-time feel”? No problem: Have the bass walk, and the drummer doubles his hi-hat. Now we are really cooking! And . . . it is all systematized and clearly defined -- all from a textbook.

So, where is the problem? Many (MANY) players who grew up with this sort of hands-off training, got stalled while they were still learning. They completed the elementary method book, thought they had conquered jazz, and are now ready to be playing it. They never made the next leap:
[1] Melodic melodies, that have some soul and actually say something meaningful. They extend way beyond scales and exercise-like eighth notes.
[2] Chords that are substituted with taste, and that serve to make the harmonies “progress”
[3] Rhythms that accentuate the flavor of the piece in question, and that buoy the melodic and harmonic elements
[4] Combining these musical elements in new and creative ways

I have a feeling that Phil Markowitz, with this metaphor of “linear construction” is attempting to help those who are stalled make that next leap to playing meaningful, creative, and soulful jazz, instead of fragmented, compartmentalized, boxed-in exercises.

I could be wrong.

Ed (LoPresti): Have you actually encountered students who, when improvising, play scales? In various jazz discussions, I frequently hear the criticisms you level at chord-scale theory (often targeting Berkeley where it was supposedly developed), but I've never encountered a player that seems to suffer the ills it should cause.

My teacher certainly taught me basic chord-scale theory, but it was always explained as a pool of notes to draw upon; never was it suggested that you play a scale or anything like it. Furthermore, I was also taught things such as emphasizing the 3rd and 7th, using enclosures, not to mention listening to tons of music and transcribing and playing actual solos.

I go to a jazz camp each summer, and sure, some of the very, very beginners will play scales for an improvisation. But all the more advanced players rely on chord-scale theory, and yet all of their improvisations are attempts to play melodies; I never hear scales used in some mechanical way.

So I agree with everything you say about the need to learn how to produce melodies, but I'm curious as to whether there is really a probably out there?

I learned this too and the example used was Tristano. I was told Evans and Bud Powell apparently used it a lot too. I just heard this referred to as "over the barline" changes.

Haven't put it to use yet but glad to have been reminded of a very old lesson. I guess I was not ready when this topic was introduced. In one ear and out the other...

My teacher actually used it in a recording of ATTYA and so I have some practical reference to it.

By the way Dave, I missed this on your video. Maybe it's time to watch that again. I must not have been paying attention at that moment.

In fairness, jjo, I do not recall ever hearing any improviser, even students, playing a complete 6, 7, or 8 note scale or mode consecutively. (Unlike Joy to the World, which has become an internationally popular . . . you get the idea.) What I do hear often is the use of scale fragments, chord outlines, and exercise-like pattern repetitions, IN PLACE OF an extended melody. Obviously, there is nothing wrong with using any one of those elements occasionally, and in conjunction with other melodic ideas; and ESPECIALLY if the scale fragment, or chord skeleton, or pattern-of–alternating-thirds enhances or completes the melodic idea.

But what frequently happens is that the improviser strings together a bunch of these devices - scale, chord, exercise, mode, chord, etc., and the entire solo sounds fragmented, contrived, and exercise-like. The faster the tempo = the greater the desire to fill every microsecond with sound = the higher the reliance on the devices. Further aggravating this problem is the more recent trend of jazz composers to utilize static harmonies, and for long periods. I can play Dorian on G only so many ways!

Personally, I learned to improvise by ear - by careful listening, and by trying different things. (This method has its limitations.) The chord -> scale theory you mention is a means of categorizing and teaching jazz, and obviously a very good one based on its wide-spread use. I have absolutely no problem with that method, or any other method that proves to be effective. My problem is with the students who use the method to “learn jazz”, but then fail to go beyond it. The study method has become the goal. They are stuck in chord -> scale theory, and their improvising reflects that limited state of development.

I can not recall EVER criticizing Berklee. (But then I have trouble remembering what I had for lunch!) Indeed, I have a very high regard for that institution – especially the “old Berklee”. One of the finest players I had in my big band was a Berklee graduate. He could sight-read ANYTHING, and he could play the most amazing solos! A real, full musician.

... charlie parker playing rhythm changes ... the first measure is a pickup ... disregard the chord notations.