I've been listening to a lot of the newer pianist lately (Aaron Parks, Robert Glasper, David Kikoski.. etc) , and I feel like it's really hard to get info and insights into how they play what they are doing . I hear bebop/post-bop in their playing but they've certainly moved beyond that.. I hear a lot of Brad-Mehldau-ism which I am not very familiar of.

I feel like I've spent enough time on bebop and some post-bop stuff.. learning & transcribing Chick Corea, Herbie Hancock solos, but the concept behind these new players alludes me.

I think its easy to kind of get stuck in that bebop/post-bob mold and its hard to move on. I know all the teachers I had are great, but they've certainly not moved beyond that style, and a good part of musicians I know are just comfortable where they are dong what they do.. its not important that they explore this kind of free-playing.

So how do people go about learning this 'new jazz'?? Do you have to move to New York to really get involved in this kind of music-making?

Great topic!

Ever notice how when you are around someone long enough you start to pick up certain mannerisms, vocal inflections, body language, thought patterns, etc.?
So, yes, you have to move to New York.

-You could always ask people what they are doing/thinking/conceiving.
It's great to check out what the vanguard of musicians are doing, but that is another realm to get stuck in, it just happens to be more current than bebop.

Barry Harris would be considered a "bebop" pianist, (another reason to move to New York) but listen to him play and it does not sound stuck in that style.
The cats that are stuck (in any style) are the ones who are exactly as you described: "comfortable where they are doing what they do".

In conclusion: move to New York.

Hi, thanks for your response. I am thinking about moving to NY in the future, but I don't think I am ready yet. I had a really bad tendinitis and I had to stop playing for almost 2 years.. I started practicing 6 months ago.. and I litearlly had to start from scratch technically. It would take me some time before I can build my chops to a comfortable level.

Right now I am learning kenny kirkland's solo by ear and working on 7...etc there are tons of stuff I want to work on.. I think Jean-Michel Pilc did not move to NY until late in his life.. and from what I read Marc Copland too.. I just want to make sure I do my homework first before I move to NY.

Also.. I am able to transcribe Brad Mehldau's solos & etc, but I don't think I am quite ready to incoporate that kind of playing yet.. I really want to get some of that stuff in my hands before I move to NY.

btw its interesting to hear about Barry Harris, i would not have been able to know that just from listsneing to his recordings.

Cool topic. You should probably ask some cats that have that sound. My old teacher certainly had a very modern sound, but in our lessons he always stressed getting a very, very solid foundation.
I think the most important aspect of the guys you mention, is their rhythmic sophistication and accuracy.
Of course the best way to get into someone's playing is to transcribe it, and learn how to play it. Then you can make your own conclusions.

monkmonk

Thanks, yea you can get a lot of info from transcribing, but I think its also important to accept that some of the stuff Brad Mehldau is doing is way beyond me at this point, or to most people for that sake.

I have a recording of him with Charlie Haden and Lee Koonitz , and god knows what he is doing rhythmically. It will take some time before I can actually understand what he is doing and actually make it part of my playing.

Jerry Bergonzi has bunch of jazz books and he talks about all these hemiolas, playing 5/4 7/4 9/4 over 4/4.. once I get more familiar with that i should be able to make sense out of what Brad Mehldau is doing.

Also from my impression, everyone has different ways of playing out rhymically and harmonically.. a lot more open-ended than the more traditional stuff, so it could be more about finding my own ways to do things.

"so it could be more about finding my own ways to do things."
I think you just summed it up. However, I think it's interesting to listen to Brad's early playing. I have a record he made with Grant Stewart called "Downtown Sounds" where there are moments that he sounds exactly like Wynton Kelly. So in my opinion, Brad is coming right out of the tradition, he's studied everybody including the most important person, himself.

It's an interesting paradox, jazz is about getting really deep in the tradition while also trying to find something unique about your own experience. I think it's a big mistake to ignore the past, I also think it's a mistake to ignore your own inclinations, strengths, weaknesses, and perspectives.

Ethan Iverson has written a little about this.
"I performed the first strain of "Carolina Shout" for ten jazz piano students the day before -- and not one of them recognized it!"
http://thebadplus.typepad.com/dothemath/2008/06/tbp-in-june.html

For a "modern" sound, be sure you are fluent with all the modes of melodic minor and the modes of major for that matter (Phrygian, Aeolian, Lydian). Also all 9 Upper Structures (see Levine's The Jazz Piano Book). Apply these as "tweaks" to standards for a modern sound.

monkmonk

Its funny you mentioned that.. I feel like I am going backwards and forwards at the same time when I ma learning things. The last 3 solos I transcribed were David Kikoski, Kenny Kirkland, and Oscar Peterson. It's important to have the roots/tradition, but I've seen people who spend their time perfecting only that.. I just focus on music that moves and interest me now.

Jazz+

thanks.. I have the Levine book and I am familiar with those ideas. I've stolen some of the modern concept from Chick Corea, Kenny Kirkland.. etc but I am more interested in what some of the newer players are doing, like Brad Mehldau, Aaron Parks, Tigran Hamasyan, David Glasper, ..etc they have such different vocabulary & lines, and its not really something you can find in books... we at least not yet.. I guess I am hearing all these 'cutting edge' stuff out there and want to figure those things out.

I listen to those players you mentioned, also Taylor Eigsti, and I am not so sure their vocabulary is that much different than what Hancock, Jarrett, and Corea have done.

I do agree that they have roots in what Herbie, Keith, and Chick has done, but I definitely think they have their things own things going on too. I see them as the 'next step' so to speak.

I know that Tigran has a lot of Aremnian influence which gives him his unique sound, and rhythmically Brad does things that I don't hear in other players.

I can't really give details as to how they are different, but to me I am more interested in listening to them nowdays than Keith Jarrett, Bill Evans or Chick Corea.

That's not a fair gauge! Total monsters like Haden and Konitz could make Tiny Tim sound like Stephan Grapelli!

To take your playing to a higher level, when you're transcribing and learning these stretches, transpose them. Play them in every key, using your ear first, and the transcription second. Take it bar by bar if you have to. Pick a bar and modulate chromatically, repeating the same phrase through all 12 key centers. You'll be surprised at how quickly this will improve your ear/eye-hand, transposition coordination, as well as teach you how to propogate and spin one tiny motif into a whole new universe of ideas.

To take your playing to a higher level, when you're transcribing and learning these stretches, transpose them. Play them in every key, using your ear first, and the transcription second. [/QB][/QUOTE]

A super exercise! Do you do this as an accuracy exercise, should you be shooting for original tempo? How do you know when to move to the next phrase?

BJones

thanks for the suggestion, I remember doing that a long time ago with Bill Evan's solo on Autumn Leaves.. I only did like 2-3 chorus but it was quite a work out.. I think the kenny kirkland's solo will be short enough that I won't be overwhelmed... besides I've already worked some of the stuff in different keys already.

monkmonk,

I think its more of a key/transposition exercise, so that whatever licks/ideas you play will become familiar in any key. so I guess the concentration should be on familiarity esp in weird keys, than speed..

It's a combination of a lot of things.. you ears might be able to pick up some where the notes are in the new key.. your theory knowledge will help that too.. and if you worked out different ideas/licks in all keys, some stuff in the solo should be familiar to you already.

A super exercise! Do you do this as an accuracy exercise, should you be shooting for original tempo? How do you know when to move to the next phrase? [/QB][/QUOTE]

You'll know, because at that point it won't matter whether you're playing it in the original key you learned it in or standing on any other step of the 12-rung ladder. Your world will be exactly the same and you'll exercise the same mastery over it despite your vantage point. The perspective will only very slightly change physically key to key because of the configuration of the hand vs. the keyboard.

You can retain the same relative fingering with less crossovers, retain classical fingering with typical crossovers, or mix and match as comfort dictates, but the technique is secondary to learning that all 12 keys are really one.

This in itself will add a dimension to your music that will far transcend "jazz devices", patterns and repetition with modes and scales. It will free you from thinking along one line.

Exercises that require more ear than technical training must be initiated slowly. At the atomic level. You want to leave nothing to chance. You want to be in control of all the elements.

Start these transpotitional type ear exercises slowly. Down tempo. Even if you can play them at tempo in the original keys. Of course being able to play them at tempo is your goal, and being able to play them proficiently from the first rung will give you a leg up as you ascend and descend the transpositional ladder.

Don't be afraid to scat as you play and as you do, pay particular attention to phrasing! Duplicate not just the notes, but their envelope and durations as well.

In their effort to fill a bar with as many notes as possible, sometimes musicians lose touch with the character of each note. The most important element of jazz. The spin of each note. The spin is what creates the phrase and differentiates the notes of jazz from all other music.

Duplicating the spins of each note, their complete envelope profile with your voice as you play will put you far more in touch with this most important and usually neglected element.

Work with each note this way and let each one have it's own evolution and life within your phrases before getting rid of them and moving on to the next one. Approaching this slowly will have a tremendous carry over effect at even very fast paces if you study the diference in this type of playing and "feeling" at slower tempos before moving on.

The truly great players can do as much with 5 notes as others can with 50. Miles for one.

BJones,

thanks for the long post/suggestion.. gosh I wish I had more of this in school.

You're very welcome. It's a whole different path of approaching improvisation. For most, improvisation is set patterns, modes, and reliance on a library of cliches, riffs, etc., etc., but approaching creativity from this vantage point will lead you to moments of pure instant composition and playing in the moment.

The idea is to get what's on the inside to sound on the outside, do so with maximum ease and as little distraction as possible, and if there just isn't enough on the inside to draw from, to put it there and fill that empty well.

Excellent post, BJones. Thanks again

I think the thing that i generally not covered in many jazz methods is as Ran Blake writes, the primacy of the ear.
Theres obviously no quick way to develope your ear, it's slow, and sometimes quite painful, but ultimately worth it. I would bet that the players we've been talking about could sing every line they play, every line in their harmonies, every rhythm.
They weren't born with that kind of knowledge, my bet is that they built it up, piece by piece overtime. Starting with the bottom, most fundamental components.
I think, developing an ability to play different styles requires a highly developed ear, both rhythmically and harmonically.
The "empty well" is a great metaphor and how do you fill an empty well? Drop by drop. As BJones said, you can only fill your empty well starting with the ear, if you can't imagine it there's no way your going to be able to play it.
With that in mind, concentration exercises are really really useful for improvising musicians. For example concentrating on the sound of one note in a key.

Another "intangible" that just isn't stressed enough is "enjoyment". The joy in acheiving communion with your instrument. The affinity you have with the sound you create by sitting at the instrument and becoming one with the keys.

I've seen many students and musicians that have tangible, technical musical skills that they've painstakingly honed, and yet they're playing lacked this element of afinity with their own music. As though they really didn't enjoy what they were playing, and were just going through the motions.

It may as well have been practiced music, like a classical pianist who diligently works out the notes of a difficult etude but beyond that, plays it as though on automatic pilot.

The primary reason to be a musician should be because you love the music, and oddly enough, to many, it never becomes significantly more than just learning how to push the right levers, like any other dexterous manual task.

A musician who wants to acheive total communion with his instrument should ache to play, the instrument a "phantom limb", calling to them when he or she is away from it.

BJones,

That's a very interesting point, and it was interesting to see how most college students quit, because music no longer became enjoyable for them. There was a lot of irony in the fact that the students who excelled tend to become mechanical and uninspired. That's one of the reason I hated school, I didn't want to play like them.

I remember bringing a friend of mine to a jam session, it was his first year of playing, he could barely get around the instrument, but he had good ear, he played the language, and he played with attitude and heart.. and it was ironic to see everyone in school being impressed with how he played.

Unfortunately for him, the discipline of trumpet playing was too much for him, so he quit..it's hard to spend all that time in discipline practice and find it in you to just let go and enjoy music at the same time.

I think Bill Evans said that the proffesoinal musicians must fight to preserve the naivette that an non-musicians naturally posses in music..

I guess that the challenge you face when you spend hours and hours practicing..

My teacher always taught me that the love of sounds is what will inspire me. Learning to listen to each sound is a truly difficult task, but in the sound is limitless inspiration.

That is so true. The sound you are creating, not just the notes, but the entire "sensurround-sound" of it peremating your space can inspire you and shape the direction of your play.
The sound of the instrument and the ambience of the room, parameter like echo and reverb, timbre, etc. shape and direct your play, the sound giving rise to what you are playing and what you will play next.
I find that my style changes dramatically, even my spin on my stretches, their counterpoint, and complexity dependent upon the sound the instrument is producing in the room.
I play a brilliant yet dry sounding piano like a Yamaha C3, differently than a Steinway model B, with a far more austere sound and deep bottom end resonance. And again, an upright different again, cetain things just not working the same in sound production.
I also play a Hammond B-3, and kick my own bass, and again, the play may take an entirely different route than my piano work.
It's all sound direction. Playing the sound.

Let's talk about spin.
I've never heard jazz musicians talk about "spin", do you mean the rhythmic placement of notes? Or is it something more complex, like articulation, duration and rhythmic placement?

Spin is more prevalent, moreso notable in the piano work of Lennie Tristano, to a significantly larger degree, than any other pianist.
It's like the "english" put on a cue ball, or "over-rotation" put on a bowling ball that causes the reaction of the object.
Regardless of duration or number, each note should have it's own life within the phrase, as the spin of each of these, particularly in relation to each other, shape the intent.
For example, you could say a sentence composed of 10 words, and by dynamically stressing and either shortening, prolonging, or hesitating differently, the person receiving this message would have a different take, a different meaning, even though the words remained the same.
Lennie played stretches on the piano with true "horn-like" phrasing. While others relied on swinging; rhytmically shuffling eight notes into tied triplets (the first two triplets tied together).. daaaaaa da daaaaaa da daaaaaa, etc., Lennie created swing, which is nothing more than the rhythmic syncopation between two rhythmically different lines where one is usually a steady pulse, without resorting to shuffling tied triplets.
How? By giving each note within his stretches it's own "spin", what synthesists would call the envelope parameters, or ADSR (attack, decay, sustain, release). The onset and wave shape of each note. He imparted a different spin or flavor to each successive note. A different dynamic, duration, and release point, having notes pop in and out of the background fabric, even while just playing a stretch of straight eight notes.
Lennie created propulsion by spinning each note differently. Lennie could play a stretch with a repetitive sequence of say 5 notes, repeating the sequence 5 times, and not have that sequence sound the same way a second time within it's 5 sequential renderings.
This is a tremendous improvisational device, and you usually only hear it done by horn players, who have infinitely more conrtol over the nuance of each note than a pianist, and done by synthesists as well (or those on certain electronic keyboards).

Where propulsion (swing) was created by shuffling:

Daaaa da Daaaa da Daaaa da Daaaa ... really rather static in itself,

Lennie created his propulsion with spin, for instance, for what I can best illustrate here, dynamics (where 1 is ppp, 10 is fff and all the notes remain straight eights):

9 5 5 9 1 5 3 5 5 10, 3 3 7 3 5 10 5 10, 10 5, etc.

and "gradient dynamic evolution":

1 2 3 5 7 9, 1 2 3 4, 10 5 5 3 2 1, 9 5 3, etc.

each number representing the volume imparted on the note, the crescendos, de-crescendos and accents giving lines extroadinary diversity!

This type of play results sometimes in metric ambiguity if the listener loses the ground bass quarters, or sense of "1" listening to the shifting empahses of the melodic line. For instance, one might begin to get a sense of "three" if the spin is:

10 7 5 10, 7 5 10 7, 5 10 7 5.

Here's an excellent and very vivid example of this type of play:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00123HXMM/ref=dm_mu_dp_trk4?ie=UTF8&qid=1232761856&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00123HXJK/ref=dm_mu_dp_trk1?ie=UTF8&qid=1232761856&sr=8-1

Lennie and his students excell at this type of style of "swingless" jazz, leading many jazz people through the decades to accuse the entire Tristano school as being "bloodless, too cerebral and unfeeling", I imagine mostly because the shuffle was not predominant in their playing, the shuffle that most become to expect from "jazz", or the "heat" that is not "cool school".

Thank you BJones, that is fascinating!

Are those numeric examples arbitrary or fairly authentic?

Just a rough example. The note unspecified, I just assigned a numerical value for the dynamic of each successive note, 1 being softest (ppp), 10 being the loudest (fff).

In standard classical piano literature, the nomenclature/symbols:

<
>

for example:

mf > > sFFFz < < m < < pp

are used to indicate dynamic changes of the ensuing lines.

In giving each successive note it's own distinct dynamic profile, as in this type of swingless jazz we're discussing, it's daunting to represent this type of constant dynamic ramping and shifting accents accurately and legibly on paper, especially when notating 8th and 16th notes, and trip 8ths and 16ths. Trying to put this type of accurate dynamic information on paper could make for very, very cluttered notated bars!

Ironically, while listening to Monk, I've often thought, "I wonder what Monk could do with the technique of a world class performing pianist?".

Martial could very well be close that answer!