Performing relaxed? That's a great milestone jazzwee, well done!

Thanks for being supportive Rosa and TLT! I've come a long way in a short time and now -- let the battle begin for Phase II (the next 5000 hours).

OK, here's a question. I'm not trying to play jazz just now - just blues. I'm revisiting some pieces I did before joining in this group, and want to get them good for Christmas. I find myself putting accents on the offbeats, quite a lot. Is this normal?

IMHO -- you need to check yourself into the nearest mental health facility at once!

You will get a better answer as soon as Jazzwee visits here.

Blues and Jazz share the same rhythmic approaches and swings the same way (and in all varied ways). So nothing I've said about swing is any different. Just like in Jazz, all the varieties are there.

Funny you make this post, I happen to be working on Blues right now (although it is a decidely jazzy version ).

Question of the Day: So, can improvisation be taught? Or I'm just spinning my wheels here? Those of you who quit, wassup? Why did you quit?

Let's not get too panicky, jazzwee.

For me -- I have stopped posting my playing here. BUT, I am still using the knowledge that I gained from the thread. I have a fun 90 minute weekly gig playing background music.

One of my tunes that I play at the gig is Autumn Leaves. First time through, I play slow balled. Then, I repeat it and play a more uptempo, jazzy feel to the melody. Then, I play it again with improvisation interspersed with melody.

I also have fun with the Blues. "Summertime" is one I do at the gig. I can go for many choruses just improvising away.

This would NEVER have happened if it were not for this thread.

Plus, posting my attempts on this thread last year helped a lot. It was the first step to playing "out". I knew others were listening -- that was a new experience.

I feel this thread is a gem. Yes, the beginning stages of improvisation is taught well by you.

Barb

Barb, I didn't ask the question because I'm concerned about this thread

Some of us were just discussing it in a PM and I thought it was an interesting question. I think like anything else, the beginning of learning it is structured and that's the hardest part. Perhaps that's when frustration sets in and then patience is lost. I felt that too at the beginning.

Lots to think about with Chord/Scales, Chord/Scales, Chord/Scales... But years later, I don't even think of Chord against scale. It just takes a microsecond. Then there's time to think about other things like the musicality of it. And suddenly the fun level increases. Maybe few ever have the patience to wait for that moment?

Sure, it takes a lot of patience to play well, regardless of style of play. I know I am still struggling with my ballads.

Possibly, the issue here is why others are attracted to the thread in the first place. It may not be to attain a high level of jazz improvisation. They may be here just to get a taste of what it is all about.

You will never know where others will take this beginning knowledge as they go through their musical journey.

If course, if someone with the name of "Ten Left Thumbs" becomes a famous Scottish jazzer some day, we will know how that person got started.

Well, I quit early on I do still check in now and then.

Lack of patience? I certainly am not interested at the minute in the kind of structure and commitment to this particular music that it would take to follow through in this thread. But I'm not very judgemental about my learning style, or my choice of music to work on I have a *lot* to do from a piano-playing standpoint - I have band stuff to learn, I have some solo stuff I use at an adult day care center, I've been more playing by ear - I have a list as long as my arm of things I enjoy doing and learning. I don't actually think jazz will ever be at the top of the list, but I've learned a lot about music, and I recognize a lot of what I've learned here, in the music I'm playing. But, no, I'm not particularly structured in my learning style. I don't equate that with a lack of patience, tho. My brand of patience includes being enthralled for 45 minutes with a 4-measure or less phrase of Joplin

So I think this thread is really valuable. But it's not really possible to know what people are going to learn/glean from whatever we are doing, and particularly in a venue like the ABF. Heck, when I was teaching management at a college it was unpredictable, even tho I knew students were passing the tests and *could* have decided that was what they were learning. But being older, I know that's not necessarily so. In fact, on one final I asked them what they thought they would remember about the class - not what they had learned, because I didn't think we would know that for another 40 years - and one response was "there's this blond that sits next to me."

It's still the best thread going, tho

Cathy

Barb - I just should have waited until you posted - you said it better, and more concisely, than I could have

Cathy

I was driving one Saturday listening to the Jazz station on Sirius, and Wynton Marsalis was interviewing this Scottish horn player, apparently well known in Jazz.

A thought came to my head that the rhythmic aspects of jazz (which was what they were talking about), is so African based that you wouldn't think it would become second nature to someone from Scotland. And I guess that would apply to many of us where this rhythm isn't part of our ethnic background. For example, look at the popularity of Jazz in Japan.

It just goes to show it can be learned and appreciated by anyone. But maybe it also explains why swing is very difficult to "feel". Most of us have to learn this feel while others grew up with it.

Cathy, I understand the 'goal' issue and of course everyone has different objectives. It's probably safe to say that many of us try out different genres to get a feel of what pushes our buttons.

But based on what you've read here, do you think improvisation can be taught? Or is it just innate ability, in which case, this thread (or any other discussion of improvisation) is interesting but is a waste of time?

I think it is safe to say from the typical ABF population that improvisation isn't common.

jazzwee - there are no black and white issues including whether or not improvising is innate-only or teachable.

My *personal* experience, which is all I have to go on, is that improvisation is a particular kind of risk-taking, and while some people are more risk-taking for improv and some less (just like some people are more risk-taking for rock climbing and some less) it is also true that *not* taking risks can be a learned behavior, and has to be replaced with the risk-taking behavior. So, if one was in an environment of only reading music and not taking risks when one was young, then letting go of that 40 years later is harder than having been encouraged to take risks from the get-go. But it can be done. Again, some people will do more and some less, because life is like that. So any hints, tips, tricks, insights along the way can be, unpredictably, really helpful. Like this thread is

Cathy

I like that analogy of "risk taking". That explains a lot actually. Maybe a fear of 'sounding bad' to others.

"risk taking"

Cathy hit the nail on the head. Not many of us are willing to play "notes that are not in front of us" for all the "world" to hear. Possibly some who started here have taken up private lessons with a jazz teacher. We will never know!

I think it's more an uncomfortableness with "breaking rules" or a habit of thinking one must play just as the music is written or one is "wrong", or perhaps, having the impression that only Bach can compose and *you* can't. Fear of sounding bad to others may be distantly related, but I don't actually think it's the primary reason for not improvising. JMO, of course.

Cathy

I've never learned by reading music so I don't have that experience. So the only feeling I recall at the beginning is the "fear" part. So maybe the "breaking rules" part is a bigger hurdle, since I obviously overcame my hurdles.

Which begs the question of classical pianists being able to learn to improvise. Does the dependence on the written music impair one's ability to improvise?

I've asked our kid's piano school if they can teach them beyond 'reading music' since I have a 7 year old ready to start piano. Their answer is No. So I've begun to encourage him to improvise now, and haven't started the formal lessons yet.

My older teen has done nothing but Classical. Very skillful at piano, but frankly he's disinterested because he can't relate to the music.

Not everyone that plays classical and reads music has an interest in improvising. In my own experience the habit of reading music, and the early-learned value that sheet music reading was the way to produce music, and the fact that I'm good at reading music so it's easier to do so at this point in time, makes playing variations more slow than it otherwise might be. I suspect there's a continuum of how much it effects people who would like to be able to improvise. Playing only by sheet music or only by ear/improvising both have their drawbacks, and after awhile I'm sure sheer inertia about changing the way one plays is a factor, too

Cathy

Yes, I sometimes want to try the other side of the continuum too. When I learn a classical piece, I cannot sight read. So basically I memorize the music and then I don't want to look at the sheet music again. It's really hard for me because I don't have the years of training to rely on the music.

Now fortunately, the playing part is the same. This part of my musical skill set is something I set a goal to improve on. But there's not enough time. So I guess I just reverse the equation from a classical pianist point of view. You make your choices because there's not enough time.

my take on it.

Can improvisation be taught?
Yes of course, how else would you learn it?
That's an easy one for me

----
Which begs the question of classical pianists being able to learn to improvise. Does the dependence on the written music impair one's ability to improvise?
----
Absolutely not. I don't think so. One's interest in improvisation may not be such that one will spend the time and effort necessary, but that has nothing to do with reading music.
Only a classical pianist may find it a new challenge to play by ear or improvise. It's like starting from scratch.

Almost all jazz musicians are good readers, and can perform classical pieces well, from sheet.

The only question is whether or not one wants to learn to improvise. Not everyone likes jazz, I can understand that. There's improvisation in Rock and new age as well, but not nearly to the extent and complexity of jazz.

Reading is not that difficult imho. Though I can't do it very well, I can read Jazz decently now because I recognize shapes of chords. Classical musicians may stumble with those.
At the same time, I cannot read multiple voices.

If you've ever played Guitar Hero, it's a lot like that, only you have a lot more notes on a staff. It becomes automatic, red comes, press this button.
Same with sheet, note on middle line comes, play D.

As for your children, there are methods out there that rely strictly on the ear. Although they tend to start at a younger age than 7, but Suzuki and Yamaha are examples.
My son takes cello, and he is forbidden from reading music his book.
For younger students, I would go with a certified method teacher. Taking the more traditional approach.

I came across a Billy Taylor interview recently where he found it was a shame students now go straight to jazz school. Claiming they miss the broad music education than folks like himself received.

You really think Guitar Hero helps reading? My big kids love Guitar Hero/Rock Band. They are experts.

I encourage them because it's great training for getting good time. Don't know about the 'music' angle though. I mean it's only 4 buttons.

jazzwee, yeah, I think time is a big factor, particularly for adults who are still working, taking care of family, etc.

And yes, knotty, I think playing by ear/improvising is pretty close to starting from scratch for those of us who were strictly "read the notes." I do think there are people who read who have a broader set of skills and knowledge than just translating staff to keyboard, tho. TLT seems to me to be one such

Cathy

P.S. - Barb - I still have Silver Bells playing on repeat

What is not explained is that the group who doesn't improvise make up the majority of players. At least in piano. I would make a guess that in Guitar playing, the majority improvises. Clearly, classical training/note reading is rare in guitar.

Is there a connection?

I don't think Guitar Hero helps with reading one little bit.

I do think it is similar however. In that it becomes an automatic reaction. Your eyes move through the staff at steady speed, and when encountering a dot, the finger presses down the key. You no longer think, this is D. You just play D.
Guitar hero is like that too. But you only have 5 notes, versus 88. And all the other stuff that's missing.
Guitar players often read tabs.
Guitar Hero / Rockband is pretty good at getting kids to listen to the various parts. Understanding that there is more than one guitar at a time. The drum kit is great for time, feeling the beats.

I am intimately convinced that playing Jazz is incredibly more difficult than playing Classical. Not just different, but more difficult.
The technique is more difficult, the fingering always unpredictable and awkward, the tempos faster, and one has to actually think while they play.

Yet, classical is often more impressive. A total beginner playing classical will almost surely sound better after 6 months of practice than a jazz player after 3 years.

I'll need to come back to this on Thursday. I have a day-long appointment in the asylum tomorrow.

I hope that's just referring to a room full of Children...otherwise we'll be worried we put you in an asylum.

Children? No. Children would have been fine.

They let me out on day-release, on condition I keep taking my pills. The therapist says I have a long way to go on the subject of offbeats...

So, first off, I would like to reassure jazzwee that we do have rhythm in Scotland. In fact, one of the most rhythmically complex things I ever experienced was a performance on snare drums by the Scottish National Orchestra. (I was in London at the time, feeling homesick). We also have this fantastic thing called radio which lets you hear music from round the world.

Improvising - can it be taught, why do so few pianists take it up compared to guitar?

I've thought about this a lot, but now I'm not sure where to begin.

Lets start with the social side, perhaps the demographics of people who play piano and guitar. There is a strong tradition in Europe and N America, of sending children to piano lessons. And then there is a strong tradition of how these children are taught. You start with middle C, you learn to read music, you progress along fairly consistent lines. Of course there are exceptions, and exceptional teachers, and people like jazzwee who have learned 'unconventionally', but for most people who inhabit a forum like this, we have a fairly common background.

Now, when you've had these kinds of lessons, learning to play accurately from a sheet put in front of you, trying to improvise does involve risk. It involves putting all that aside and overcoming your inhibitions.

Guitar doesn't have such a strong classical tradition. You can play classical guitar, of course. But a lot of people have learned to strum chords, or to play from tab, without going through a rigorous classical training. You can make good music from a guitar without knowing a great deal about theory, without being able to read music. So guitarists can come to improvising without having this 'wrong note paranoia' that tends to plague pianists.

The other great advantage that guitar has over piano, in terms of making improvising easy, is that when you can play in one key, you can just move it up or down into another key. For the piano, you need to really get to grips with scales and key signatures.

When I compare, for myself, the experience of improvising on guitar and piano, I find the fact that on guitar, I don't know or care what note I'm playing, is a great advantage. On guitar I'm just listening. On piano I have to listen and think theory, and that takes time. I can't play on piano and not know which note it is.

Might post more later. Nite everyone!

LOL. I'm sure we can all LISTEN to the music. Playing it is a different matter. And Mastery is even more different.

Lots of rhythmic complexity in other music, but the offbeat focus of Jazz can be disconcerting, especially after being hammered by strong downbeats of Rock day in day out as kids.

Let's put it this way, it didn't come naturally to me. It seems so natural now but it was foreign at the beginning and probably foreign to most starting Jazz. Now I hear rhythmic details that I couldn't before. Suddenly it's all very clear.

Interesting. After changing my focus to piano, I actually have the opposite viewpoint now. I know where everything is and the shapes are well defined now. It's all about shapes I think.

Guitar is very shape based too since there are really no "key" differences most of time (unless playing open string). So key movement is no big deal.

But beyond that, I'm visually oriented to the piano now and looks like this aspect of it can be learned. There are more shapes to learn with piano because of key differences. But I'm finding that it can be overcome.

If anything, the hardest thing about piano is the percussive nature of it. Which means you have to fill in more in a shorter amount of time.