JW,

here's an example of what I mean:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfGHxzKeHvM
at 5:30

O.P playing Solo Round Midnight. No metronome there:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7yazIH4rAI

extended runs, pauses, quick passages, that kind of mastery, that's what I'm talking about.

By the way, I will gladly share the gem from my teacher, but first, I wanted to hear all of yours.

[X] Can we agree that continuous large leaps are not melodic?
[X] Could we say that playing constant dissonance is not melodic?
[ ] Is the lack of variety non-melodic?
[X] Is the lack of space non-melodic?
[X] Does the use of only eighth notes make it non-melodic?

No variety cannot really work for me, because one can make a very strong statement using nothing but a pentatonic scale. Blues players for example. Muddy Waters, quite simple, but amazingly melodic. In fact, one can be very melodic on diatonic instruments.
But if variety includes intonation, accents, dynamic, rhythm etc... then yes, I guess...

One of my absoolute favorite videos. He plays in strict time here. These guys use the term Rubato to the letter. "Rob Time - Pay it Back". This is how I was told to do it. It takes so much skill to do it doesn't it?

You have to really be able to switch from any note value instantly. When it sounds rubato, it maybe that he shifts from 4/4 to 6/4 or even triplet quarters.

At least that's what I gathered from Barry Harris. You can a lot more with shifting note values if you're in strict time. The moment you waver like Coctail then I think you're limited to runs as filler and hard to get back to swing.

Like I said, I was never taught to ever do rubato (in the loose definition) so I just sensed it was something I wasn't encouraged to do. But I'm all ears to what the proper approach should be.

Good answers Knotty and I'll tend to agree with most of it. Although, I think it may be possible for portions of playing to be melodic with just one note length value (like eighths), as long as space is properly applied. I was thinking of Chick's playing here. Remember, that a melody is a "phrase" so we're not talking about the solo as a whole.


Which brings me to add to the list:

[ ] Do the lack of Chord Tones make it non-melodic?



Now My answer to this might be, "What are the chord tones?". The underlying harmony can be different from the expressed harmony (like an additional harmonic layer), so I'd probably check this box as long as that's understood. If we're only talking about the listed changes, then I wouldn't check the box. Which in summary means to me that a good melody implies some harmony.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTfLwOeJsiA

I don't know if Jarrett does a proper approach but the way he goes into time and then leaves it behind, stretching it and delaying it, is captivating.

Regarding melody there are so many things to think about. yes you need variety but not too much. How the ideas are develops is important, some repetition is necessary so the melody is not just introducing new ideas all the time. Phrase length is very important. The shape of the melody is important, where it rises how it falls. The overall pitch limits are important. How the line relates to the harmony is vital, especially in the resolutions and cadences. That is just for starters.

That’s exactly what has been perplexing me. How do Bill Evans and Keith Jarrett play their ballads rubatos, yet their bands keep rhythm with them ?

It would be nice if we can conclude with some tips on arriving at being melodic. If it is something that can be consciously practice, then we will improve.

In the Jarrett intro there is no fixed pulse, but once the bass and drums start the time is there, I can hear it in the solo lines. So there are 2 different types of rubato going on, one where the underlying puilse is fixed (when the trio is playing) and one without a fixed pulse (the intro).
Sometimes the trio also plays without there being a pulse (or sometimes with them all having different pulses) but that is even harder to pull off.

If you mean melodic as in like a vocal line then the obvious way is just to sing along with your phrases. If you can do that then they must be melodic.

So they have some sort of signal among themselves?

Yes, that is a good method. The singing forces the spaces and phrasing.

But think about that from the note selection side it limits the choices.

I find it difficult to sing non-diatonically. Like notes from a diminished scale, especially random ones. Does that mean those are not melodic.

If I play what naturally comes from singing, it will be dominated by diatonic notes, stepwise movements and thirds, and maybae fifths. It's no wonder that dominates in pop music.

Some melodies like quartals from Tyner, Giant Steps from Coltrane seem to be more mathematically derived? Not something someone would naturaly sing.

Jarretts intro is out of time and then when he starts on the tune the drums and bass pick up on the speed he is playing. The playing of the tune is the signal.

But that's the idea isn't it, to just choose 'melodic' notes?



Yes, if the definition of melodic you are using is that to be melodic it must be singable.



It is no accident that most standards are virtually diatonic melodically. They are generally what we think of when we use the term melodic. When beebop came along then this was a reaction against the diatonic singable melodies of the past. Ever tried singing Donna Lee? It's not easy! At that point the relationship between 'melodic' and 'singable' breaks down and melodic lines became more complex. Since that point jazz solos are not usually melodic in the singable way anymore.

Interesting point Beeboss, you now make a distinction between singable melodic and jazz soloing. But yet we here the comment frequently that says "make your lines melodic". Since there seems to some agreement that some non-diatonic intervals (like diminished) does not fall in the singable category, does that mean that the statement "make your lines melodic" has a completely different meaning in a jazz context?

If so what is it?

I have a teacher who's well known as a composer so coming up with great melodies is his forte. Yet, he would focus on teaching unexpected intervals (intervallic playing) in soloing. You see my dilemma here? Since hasn't said anything specific about this, I would just guess that a variety is the key. But that really throws out the baby with the bathwater as far as singable is concerned.

Heck, I did an augmented scale exercise on ATTYA at the beginning of this thread, I couldn't sing that...

So here's a recording of Giant Steps done quite slowly.

Giant Steps
http://www.box.net/shared/qrrcxaf2uh

I'm guessing around 130-140bpm. No metronome though. I was concentrating on just playing simple melodies and keeping my place and time. Sometimes I lost it, especially towards the end.

I changed the rhythmic feel throughout. Just whatever came naturally at the moment.

Don't hesitate to critique!

Hey JW,

This isn't meant as a criticism, but do you normally slow down when you progress through a tune? I normally speed up which is probably worse, so I find it interesting that you actually end the last portion of the the soloing slower than when you started!

I liked some of the lines, and especially the ones where you consciously started on a different beat. I also noticed lots of aug 4 stuff happening (I suppose by nature of the changes?)

So it appears you are also avoiding chromaticism too. Is that something you are going to be building up to, or is something you've tried to avoid?

Also, it also appears that your right hand when soloing is not taking any responsibility for adding to the chord voicings, meaning the left hand was the accompaniment, true?

Overall I think there's some cool stuff happening in that take. I had the impression that you were imagining playing with a rhythm section in a way, so I didn't get the feeling you were making a true solo piano performance on this take. If that's the case, are you planning on tackling this as a a solo piano piece too? I think that would be quite an undertaking.

Great job, and nice to hear your progress!

I don't hold with this 'make your lines melodic' thing. If the great players agreed with that we would not have had charlie parker and coltrane. I can understand why it is important in the early stages as you you have to be able hear the melodies you are playing and so it's a good idea to start with something quite simple and singable. Also there is a tendency to play too many unnecessary notes that most improvisers fight against and concentrating on melodic principles is a good way to counter that. But ultimately I want a solo to be expressive and intersting, exciting or soulful. I do not really care if it is melodic or not. The meoldy is the point the solo starts and not the end point of the solo.

Good job on giant steps JW. I'll second everything that sceptical said.
I know it's tempting when learning to stretch yourself and learn new things new tunes new keys, but there is also something to be said for practicing stuff well within your ability (a blues for example). That way it is easier to concentrate on aspects like groove or playing interesting lines that incorporate new ideas -basically this is still stretching yourself but in a different way. Ideally it's good to practice in both ways. Variety is the key.

Scep/Beeboss,

Thanks for the comments guys.

On the tempo, usually I have the opposite problem, I speed up by the time I get to the end. So if I slowed down that's an improvement I'm not good at maintaining a pulse without a metronome. But it's really worse because of the red-dot syndrome.

I did a specific exercise here and that was to concentrate on melodies, time, tone -- basics. I didn't play the usual intervallic stuff that I was actually practicing. My teacher wanted me to lay out a foundation first before I target something else.

Yes I can play it quite faster, but I really wanted to see if I can do it within my reach. I hated playing it faster and (a) having my articulation/tone sound bad, (b) having my fingers lead me to note choices rather than my ears.

Believe it or not, I actually spent weeks practicing playing more of the usual modern jazz styles. I mentioned diminished, lydian, and quartals. But I didn't do it here, except a little at the end because I had a specific goal of thinking melodically.

In a way this isn't about playing Giant Steps necessarily. I'm concentrating on developing some skill and using this as a platform. When I practice this, I'm usually going in range from right about 130bpm (typically playing triplet sizteenths) to about 240bpm. Typically somewhere in the middle. I don't hardly ever play it slow so this was actualy a challenge.

And yes Scep, I'm interested in doing it as a solo piano piece though that wasn't what I was doing here.

So I'm not quite done. Sorry it's boring for you guys because you all want to play different tunes. But this is a workshopping thread so I'm happy to demonstrate my struggles.

Scep, teach me how to approach this idea of having the RH contribute to the voicings while soloing. Of course I'm doing that in the head, but I'm always taught that during soloing to just have a sparse LH and concentrate on playing the RH like a horn.

So that approach you're talking about is not readily apparent to me. Do you do it as a polyphonic type of solo? Or do you just fill in with inner voicings during quiet moments?

I may have done it a couple of times I think. But not consciously.

Very nice, Jazzwee. Thanks for sharing your music. You'd make Coltraine proud !

Glen

Speaking of solo piano, I have a music friend who's concentrating on solo jazz. He plays Kapustin's Intermezzo in strict time:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iMuKMJmsrs

And some very interesting comments from him on why he plays it with swing rather than rubato:

http://www.chrisdonnellymusic.com/Blog/Blog.php/interpreting-kapustin

Check out his My Foolish Heart too..2 great versions.

Thanks Glen!

Posting this in public view gives me a chance to critique myself and I'm finding specific things to work on. One major one is that when I change rhythms, there's a hesitation as I try to switch from 6/4 to 4/4 to 12/4. I like what I did rhythmically in the 2nd half better so I'll be focusing on that.

Since the time problem is the most difficult to solve, it seems it's tied to moments of change so that seems to be when rhythmic concentration lapses.

I'm going to just practice rhythmic transitions with a metronome but still staying on this tune. We'll see if I make a dent...

Wiz, you know Chris Donnelly? Good player.

This Kapustin stuff sounds like a way to play jazz-lke throught written music. But it's not improvised so to me it's classical music with swing...

>>This Kapustin stuff sounds like a way to play jazz-lke throught written music. But it's not improvised so to me it's classical music with swing...

that's a little strong.

I'm not sure what you percieve as strong since I like classical, particularly piano classical.

But to me these are two different experiences. There's a particular grittiness in the imperfection of jazz and the ability to make it sound 'practiced' when it is played for the first time. That surprise is not there in written music so then you switch to studying the interpretation and technique.

I think you were the one who said before that it's easier to sound good early on with Classical than with Jazz. Quite true. So to me there's a bit of awe to someone who can sound really good with true Jazz because the ability to come up with something good instantaneously is mind boggling.

While an etude in classical evokes technical skill, I'm not excited at all by an etude in Jazz. In fact, I'm not sure I understand the purpose of an etude in jazz. It's like practicing to play the same thing over and over? Isn't that by definition, no longer Jazz?

In case there's misunderstanding here, I would also like to make the case that the notes in Jazz are no different than the notes in classical. I quote from Barry Harris, "Bach was the 1st Jazz musician...". So that being the case, written music that sounds like Jazz is thus Classical music with swing. Gershwin to me is Classical. Thus, classical with swing.

But that's just my opinion and it's just a classification issue. It doesn't imply a like or dislike. However, this is a Jazz thread so I'm just giving a 'jazz' related commentary.

Yeah I just realized that it's all composed, sounds cool though. Kapustin said he was never interested in improvising, but I like his playing and songs.

Gershwin sounds more jazz to me, I guess you could call it old-fashioned jazz, like Duke Ellington or Nat King Cole.

Been trying an old Hoagy Carmichael tune, Stardust. Listened to Harry Connick Jr's version with Ellis Marsalis on piano. He's very under appreciated, but a damn fine player. Harry's pretty good too, but ppl know him for his singing.

There was a Marsalis tribute concert for the dad a while back, all the brothers played, and Harry. Good show.

I was playing Confirmation today. On a bit of a Parker craze at the moment, revisiting tunes I haven't played for ages. The head is not really very piano friendly but its a great sequence.
I was experimenting with some things that I wouldn't try on a gig, esecially the sort of double time bits. No way I would play the head on a gig either. Leave that to the saxophone.

http://www.divshare.com/download/12167756-1ad

That was a fun listen Beeboss. I really enjoyed that and will download it to my Iphone. I actually haven't heard you play bebop so it was an interesting side of you. Nice evasion there on the head! LOL.

Those sixteenths are like crazy fast. Whew! Your fingers are amazing.

What other Parker stuff are you planning on doing? Donna Lee?

Bebos
I’m going to download it into My Playlist too. Thanks for sharing this electrifying stuff. I’m watching Ken Burns’ The History of Jazz DVDs. Maybe you were born in the wrong era and should have been playing this at the Birdland club.