Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum Jazz Pianist wanting to learn a bit of Baroque Piano

I had a some classical teaching, just simple John Schaum pieces when I was a child, which is where I got my basic reading ability which has been invaluable. Then I gave up when I was about 13. As a teenager, classical piano got a bit boring and I took up drums!! 10 years later I took piano back up and I've now been playing for the past 18 months- but because I found about jazz in my teenage years, I had to learn jazz piano.

Jazzwee, they are unfortunately transcriptions, I wish I could improvise but maybe one day!! I've given up on Mark Levines mode/scales method. On the other hand I do think that for jazz especially the best thing is to go to the masters and learn what they play when starting out. I've read that Mike Stern (guitarist) has a stack of transcriptions that he has done through the years of the legends.

I have to say I'm transcribing a lot and can't stop! Not just the line, but the voicings. I'm transcribing a lot of Chick. I recommend his Expressions cd if you don't have it, I have transcribed "This Was Nearly Mine" and "My Ship". I'm in the middle of "Lush Life"- incredible piece. The Transcribe software is a great tool to aid this.

Anyway on Bach, I actually bought a Alfred book of the Inventions/Sinfonias about a year ago so I may as well start there. I read on piano street that Bernard gets beginning students straight to the inventions. The problem that I have with Baroque/Classical piano is that it becomes a bit stale after a bit for me. I'm used to (as my username implies) playing a big fat, lush Alt chord or quartal chord etc. So to go to playing in a very different style takes quite a bit of adjusting! Though I can see why so many jazz pianists recommends learning classical. I do think that Bach is a genius. I can't understand what Gyro is going on about.

Hey Mr. ALT, this was what I was talking about. I wish I could do this kind of Bach-Like jazz improvisation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovqa_WG5z74

If you've only done Jazz for 18 months, it's still early. But I think there are different brain cells needed for improvisation so if you keep avoiding it will not grow. Got to do it a little bit at a time.

I think improvisation was natural in me. I was able to do some pretty basic melodies when I started. I'm not entirely clear if someone can improvise if one has never done it before. I'm not sure what stops people from doing it. Is it a "self-consciousness" thing, fear, or what? The reality is that if expectations are set lower, you can really come up with something that sounds melodic.

Maybe everyone wants to sound like Keith Jarrett. I've been playing with Jazz musicians lately in jams and you'd be surprised at how badly everyone plays after 20+ years of playing jazz. It's overplaying I think. Playing beyond what one understands.

That video is great. It reminds me of this video All the Things You Are- Keith Jarrett

Well a journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step so I realise I must start. My brother who plays guitar is planning on starting a trio, me on piano- him on guitar and also a drummer. We don't know anybody that plays bass who likes jazz in our area, so a trio without a bass will have to do. We're going to start with good old Autumn Leaves and a blues like Now's the Time- I've read the whole Jazz beginners thread.

I think my problem is fear of sounding terrible. But I know that I shouldn't have crazy expectations like that I'm going to sound like Chick, Charlie Parker or Pat Metheny straight away- just try to be melodic and be economic.

On Baroque piano, if I'm starting the two part inventions, is that Handel G minor Allemande that I put in my original post achievable as that is also two parts.

Hey Thats really cool flat13sharp11.

You know a little while ago I finished a project to record all the 3 part inventions. I put some time and effort into the whole project. I personally found value from the whole experience. At the end of it, my perspective towards tempo, phrasing, voicing, really did change and I think you can hear the difference over time.

That being said, I know some really good/successful jazz pianists do not play classical at all(though many like KJ do.) I am sometimes surprised when I hear a very accomplished jazz pianist say they don't really play classical at all.

I think ultimately its important to play the things you love, and enjoy the whole process. If you are practising something you love, you are more likely to do it consistently over a long period of time (perhaps many, many years, if not decades) and I think that is were we get the most benefit. While I also think its important not to play things that are well above your technical ability, I don't think the 2 part inventions necessarily fall in this category (though some of them can actually be very tricky technically.) Ultimately, I think only you can decide if something is above your ability or not.

If you're really willing to try the 2-part inventions first, choose number 1 (C major) and begin working on it.

After a couple of weeks, you should be able to tell whether or not it's right for you and then decide accordingly.

(C major is the second easiest, the first being #8, F major. however, that is the first one Bach would start his students with.)

Hey Mr. Alt, at the beginning it's still about the mechanical stuff to be learned which is Chord = Scale. Unfortunately there's no way around this. It took years for this to be automatic so now when a new set of changes are placed in front of me, I'm not thinking about what the correct tones are but more focused on how to make melodies. But that takes awhile.

I remember that when I would venture into something more advanced, my teacher would slap me down (nicely) and bring me back to the reality of first being able to "make the changes". This really could be as simple as visualizing the scales and playing mostly chord tones.

Transcribing the simpler stuff might be better at this point. There could be too much stuff to absorb when trying to understand a Chick with this quartal patterns on some substitution you didn't even notice. I understand the beauty of transcribing complex voicings and two-handed melodies. But remember that's for the head. When improvising, you ought to keep it simple and just think of the RH. Too many variables at the beginning.

There's a difference I think between the technical practice that Classical provides and the needed brain cells to do automatic improvisation. Classical training I beiieve will prevent technical limitations from executing what's in your ear. But the reality is that at the beginning stages, what the ear can grasp is so basic anyway that for me, my technique is growing in step with what my ear can handle.

In the end though, this ear training has to start and maybe Gyro has a point in just "digging in". But not in his random approach. Whether you like it or not, you have to understand the scales internally. So don't dump your Levine book yet.

Start on the improvising soon man. A little bit everyday. Can you at this point find all the chord tones, particularly 3rds, when playing Autumn Leaves? That's a simple enough start.

I know what you mean about it been too complex to start out, my problem is I love the modern players like Chick, Keith, Herbie etc. What I've been focusing on lately is solo piano, but want to prepare myself for playing with other musicians.

I've heard about the chord tone approach, I heard Pat Metheny recommending this approach in that you should be able to hear the changes in the solo. It'd be no problem finding the thirds in AL.

My problem with the scales is like in Mark Levines book about learning modes say in major harmony 7 modes x 12 which gives you 84 scales already to start learning, without starting on melodic minor harmony etc. I admit it sounds so boring! It made me think that surely there was an easier way to learn to improvise. I'm sure Bird and Diz didn't learn loads of scales- it was more aural in how they learnt by listening to the masters before them.

My fear is sounding like this saxophonist St Thomas (my brother is playing bass in the background and didn't really enjoy playing with him) in his solo he just seems to be playing a random bunch of notes and it doesn't sound melodic at all. I can't see how it relates to the changes at all. The other musicians are very good.

I have brought Hal Galper's Forward Motion a while ago, but haven't really looked through it yet which may also give me some good advice about soloing?

When playing classical, it really makes you appreciate Keith as he has mastered both fields which is pretty insane when you consider that Classical or Jazz alone is a lifetime pursuit in itself. His Bach might not be to purist's taste but it sounds pretty good to me.

I've actually started Invention No 8, as I heard this was the easiest to start with. I've got the first page going but think I'll collapse from then on!

b13#11, what I'm going on about is that you choose to skip an ocean of classical repertoire, from the Classical Era to the Early 20th century, and instead go for an archaic style of composition (and not even the best the Baroque Era has to offer) that is irrelevant in today's musical environment (no one plays like this anymore) and wasn't even written for the piano, believing that it will somehow do something for your playing of modern jazz. Please enlighten me as to your reasoning for this choice.

And why stop at the Baroque Era? This type of contrapuntal music predates Bach by a century or more. Why not go to the source, so to speak, if you think that counterpoint is the end all for keyboard playing?

Bach

This clip shows a modern jazz master in a practising session learning Goldberg Variation 1. If he practises it for technique then there obviously must be some benefit from it.

I believe you can hear a big Bach influence in Keith Jarrett's rendition of Old Man River from about 5:10 -5:42. From gospel style he goes to playing in a fugal style! Unbelievable. I'm sure you can see now why I want to attempt a little Bach.

Mr. Alt, I love the same modern jazz players you do. So I wouldn't stop trying to understand them for solo piano. And I'm not talking necessarily about playing in a group. I'm just talking about first developing the brain cells to improvise and that requires a bit of isolation. I've seen people use these method books where some complex bass-line is being played while the RH follows some lick.

But at what point does the brain get focused on the singular activity of creating a melody? And in real-time?

Part of it is comfort that your hands are always in position. And this doesn't mean modes BTW. Forget the modes. That's just an analysis. Just at the beginning, think of the Scale and then the chord tones in it. AL is just the G scale. If you know where the thirds are in it of each chord, you're already half way there.

But let me tell you what I perceive from my own experience. You will find that when you hit those well known and common notes like chord tones (something you will hear Bill Evans do a lot), it sounds different to your ears. I'm not talking swing here.

The next big mystery in jazz is phrasing. This is the mix of melody making and space. I think, in my own mind at least, that this makes the biggest difference in thinking that we don't sound good. That's why my teacher first made me play long notes (quarter notes and half notes) to think melodically first and add LOTS of space. And often these long notes are just 3rds or a pickup+3rd. And just let it ring and have a lot of space. You'd be amazed at how good it sounds like in All the Things You Are.

The mistake we all make is thinking that we can handle the streams of 16ths or even 8ths from Chick Corea. Technically maybe we can handle it. But I'm not sure our brain can think musically yet at the beginning.

To summarize a book like Forward Motion, we just need to hear the entire harmony in our ears as soon as your LH fingers touch the chord shape. When you get to that point, then you get to pick and choose which tones in your ears are to be used. Instead of thinking 12 tones all the time, it could be as few as 5 note choices and initially maybe even just 3. Those are enough to sound good if think of the construct of phrasing.

Then when you get to Chick's level you can use up to 12 tones but he knows when he can do that.

So the first step, I was taught was think long melody notes first ala Miles Davis. Hard to do on a percussive instrument so maybe you start off with an EP sound first. But he's a phrasing master.

I'll definitely get started on the 3rd's practise. I have BIB on my mac which will give me a feel with musicians, esp for the time feel as I obviously want to be in time and hearing the bass line. I've got a rhodes sound so that's fine.

My problem is that I like complex music! My favourite trio album of all time is "Now He Sings, Now He Sobs" and think the music on there is just unbelievable. Not just Chick, but Miroslav Vitous and Roy Haynes.

I obviously like other "simpler" albums if you can call it that, like Kind of Blue etc. Miles' phrasing on that would be a good point to follow. But you know what I mean by the more complex stuff.

To think that Chick is 26 on that Now He Sings recording is pretty mad, only 2 years older than me now! It'd take me a lifetime to get anywhere near that, but I might surprise myself if I organise my practise routine appropiately.

You know one of the reasons I think so many jazz pianists like Bach is specifically phrasing. In Bach usually the melodic line or the subject starts at any moment in time, in any voice (alto, tenor, soprano or bass) and usually while other voices are playing. In this setting you really need to pay special attention to how you phrase each individual voice and melodic line. Though phrasing real time is always a challenge for me.

Yeah ALT, I also saw that Chick Corea video. It made me feel better that even Chick Corea is human and makes mistakes!

Alt, I think there's nothing wrong with multiple approaches at all. I think it's necessary in jazz as there's too much to learn as it is.

Learning by (1) transcribing complex music, (2) Studying Bach, (3) Soloing on simple tunes are things that I do all the time. Well at least I study Bach not play it due to my horrendous sight reading abilities ...

I can add 50 more things to the list. Of course we all have limited time so if I were a teacher, I'd focus on the weakest foundational stuff first. Instead of just studying the voicings of the masters, maybe it's time to take some random tune and do your own take on the voicings based on what you learned.

I guess I'm constantly trying to get you and others interested in Jazz on ABF to develop the music creation brain cells. Mostly everyone avoids and pushes it off and says, "well I'll do it after I finish learning Rach 3...".

But if it gets pushed off, that capability never develops and you might as well just stick to playing transcriptions. Except that's not jazz anymore.

Just realize that it's a mistake to think that every listener is looking for complexity in a jazz playing. It's a common mistake I keep making frequently. That's why maybe a little grounding in more Miles Davis might balance it out. It is possible to create your own jazz music starting simply first.

We can't start playing jazz at the level of a Rach 3.

The difference with Bach and most of the Bach-like Jazz is that it is mostly out of reach of normal people to improvise with two hands at the same time. I've watched Brad Mehldau and that video I posted and really they're exchanging roles between hands and during a break, a quick ostinato pattern keeps the hand busy.

So there really isn't a 1:1 correspondence to Bach as one might think. In classical, it's pre-written so you can play full counterpoint.

Phrasing is a little different when you split LH and RH ideas, at least in improvisation. When Keith Jarrett does it, he may have pre-arranged that so he knows what he's going to play in the LH. Which doesn't surprise me if this were true since I discovered recently that Bill Evans pre-arranged a lot of that too.

Yes certainly there is a big difference between improvising, creating melodies on the spot vs reading from a score. Its hard enough to phrase a melody when you know exactly what it should sound like. In improvising phrasing is a new challenge when you yourself do not know what is going to happen next.

I personally like prearranging most of my ideas, and I don't think there is necessarily anything wrong with that. Weather its jazz or not I don't know. I think it more depends on what your personal goals are. I think its clear there is more then 1 way into making music

For a learning jazz pianist, I think pre-arranging is one of the ways to get the brain in motion, especially for doing something complex like a head played two-handed in solo piano.

I admit I had felt a stigma to that as my teacher discouraged me from doing that. But in a professional performance, we've got to do everything to sound good and I can understand Bill Evans wanting some consistency, even when he was drugged out of his mind...

As Dave Frank said, if Bill Evans can get away with it, who are we to question?

However, the art form of jazz is about improvisation so clearly, to be in this genre, it has to be the majority. So far, I haven't done any pre-arranging other than playing a head. I let my mood dictate the music that's going to come out. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's not but it's the rawness of that that makes jazz.

Disrespectful and very stupid reaction.......sorry.....

Johan B

b13#11, you like Correa. Correa plays the Goldberg Variations. Therefore you conclude you need to play the GV. But you already sound like him using his published sheet music, so I don't see why you need to knock yourself out playing the GV. Frankly, in my opinion if one works up a single two-part invention, that's enough Bach to last several lifetimes. More than that, and it quickly becomes tedious.