Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner - Non Classical How Does Keith Jarrett Do it?

No it's lot like that at all. Lots of people climb everest but there is only one Keith Jarrett.





Dream on.

But technique alone will never get you there. What Jarrett does is simple - he stays in the present while he plays. Something I'm sure he learned via improvisation. When you can do this, what communicates is very deep. Which is why so many enjoy this guy's playing. What people hear is that X factor.

Beeboss

Maybe I wasn't clear on this. I am not saying you can be the next Keith Jarret per se, but to be able to "get enough technique under your belt, "let go and let the music tell you where it wants to go." , and to be able to let at a very high level like Keith(and incoporate his musical characteristics in your playing) requires years and years of practice. That's the only point I am making.

I know you've seen this, but I had this in mind as I wrote my last post.

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

There are a lot of great players who can play really well and is strongly influenced/sound like someone. I think that's something one MIGHT be able to do with lots of practicing. But the percentage of people who can get there is still very small (hence the Mt. Everest analogy)

Besides, the point of jazz is not about playing like Keith Jarrett anyways...


ewiss

I agree that staying on the present/letting go is important, but then again that alone won't make you a good jazz musician either

I think the thread is more about the mechanic of playing like Keithjarrett.. as the OP said he is interested in all the ideas Keith Plays. You are not going to come up with these great musical ideas by playing with your heart. In fact, I'd imagine it will take couple of months to steal one idea from Keith Jarrett, work it in all keys and be able to do it in your playing naturally(which is one way that most people learn to "do it")

I guess my point is that that part of the craft takes years and years to learn, and it's important to see this is a very long term commitment.

>> What Jarrett does is simple
Nothing KJ does is simple.
In fact, few can play in so many styles with such ease and perfect technique. KJ lets each and every single note ring with extreme precision, and controls each finger direction and dynamics as to let any voice come out.

That's what people get out of his solo piano. The perfection he has developed. People hear perfection.

but back to the OP. It's actually reasonable to think someone could work up an arrangements of ATTYA such as KJ's and perform it.

Listen to Fred Hersh, lots of amazing stuff. His Bossa album is fantastic. Mehldau also.

This is what I would say as far as incorporating in your playing:

Transcribe a few of those spots where you have the multiple voices going. From a variety of artists.
Meanwhile, arrange a few heads in this style also. Your music.
For technique, you can either play those transcriptions, or work your way up Bach's WTC.
There's nothing like actually doing it.

KJ has a few versions of ATTYA, and while there's not all the same, they sound very similar.

Write stuff down... it sticks that way.

You are right. It takes many many years to be able to able well, if we can ever achieve such a point. I am still hopeful.
It is just as well that playing like Jarrett is not our goal otherwise we may as well give up now.

And what is that 'perfection?' It's an artist expressing feeling. Intuiton and intellect combined and functioning as one. But intuition will ALWAYS contribute more to technique then vice versa. Why? Because when feeling leads, there's no end to the possiblities.

Except maybe the into to the version on 'tribute',that is in a class all its own imo

I love Hersh's Jobim album, I can't stop listening to desafinado, awesome.

That Thomas Rueckert track that etc linked to is amazing as well.

Knotty

I agree. It's simple for him only because he's built enough facility to stay in the present let the music just flow out of him. I am guessing what people really want to know is how/what train yourself so that you can execute all these complex ideas and still stay in the present.

Think of it this way.. if you can learn 1 new Keith Jarrett idea every 2-3 months, you will have a decent amount of vocabulary in 5-10 years As far as I know, Most of Keith Jarrett's ideas are very straight-forward bebop idea.

Beeboss

I recently had a gig where I felt like I was leaving my body as I was playing. It was intense experience, but at the same time I've noticed how I wasn't prepared for it and my chops/time other problem kind of took me out of that experience. Ultimately I think it's about being able to stay there as we play, and that's why we want to play like Keith because you hear that emanating from him.

I hate to sound rude, but I don't really see how all these new-age rhetoric is actually helping anyone become better improviser, specifically to be able to play like Keith.

Few things to consider

Does intuition always contribute ore than technique? You may be inspired but how does that help if you don't have the technique to hit the desired note at the right timing? Isn't that kind of like communicating to someone who doesn't speak your language? You might be able to communicate, but you wil be very inefficient.

How do you know for sure that when feeling leads, there's no end to the possiblities?... doesn't having better technique also open you up to new possibilities, maybe even possibilities that you might not realize when you are leading by feeling alone?


"And what is that 'perfection?' It's an artist expressing feeling. Intuiton and intellect combined and functioning as one."

Again, how does knowing that help anyone get there. I also thing what knotty meant by perfection is different. It has more to do with the idea of being able to do complex tasks accurately&effortlessly. It has just as much to do with technique as intuition.

I disagree with you, mainly because youm see to emphasize intuition over technique. You can't go without the other, and I think it's more beneficial to see them as one thing. Yes performance is about letting go of intuition, but as far as I know most great players spend hours at home improving technique on daily basis... and the time they spend on technique is way more than the time on their feeling/intuiting music

Because it's true. And if you want to 'play like Keith' you have to be willing to trust yourself and go beyond technique. What do you think he does?


Here's the big secret ... if you don't have the 'technique' to play something - you make it up! Which is why trusting intuition is so important. It will lead you places thinking won't. And again, this is how Jarrett (I assume) does what he does. Sure, he's got the technical chops, but technique alone isn't what communicates - it's what's behind the notes. How's that for 'new age' rhetoric?

Again, the problem is that you seem to suggest technique as something different than inspiration/trusting yourself, and all these new-age spiritual stuff(which is important too), as something you "need to go beyond".

To me all aspect of music is equally important, and I think it's better to avoid statements that seem to show bias against technique.

Who's biased against technique? Not I. But go ahead ... practice your scales, arpeggios and whatever for years and years. It won't help you achieve the X factor that Jarrett seems to have in spades. Why? Because you have to let it all go and just play. Those who don't or can't do this will always sound 'wooden' for lack of a better word. And having sophisticated 'technique' is a very easy way to hide behind the notes.

Any great player will tell you that have been practicing scales/arpeggios for years and years, and I am pretty sure they will say you need to do that too if you want to play like Jarrett. That's like saying you want to be a good basketball play and play inspired but doing your daily exercise/grinding won't help you get there

I also feel like you are failing to understand the distinction between what you do in practice and play. When you practice at home, you approach like you would as an athlete and grinding things out, and when you play, you do your best to just forget and play. It's not one of the other, you do both and you need both equally.

Good analogy. Let's look at Michael Jordan - probably the greatest basketball player ever. Did Jordan spend much time learning how to play basketball? Of course. But why is Jordan considered the best? Because he went beyond technique and played basketball his way.

It's like someone asking "how come Jordan's so good?" The answer is technique is second nature to him and now he relies on his gut instincts (intuition) to lead him to that 'perfect' shot.

Larry Bird stayed 3-4 hrs everyday after regular training to practice shooting, Gilbert Arenas practices 100,000 jump shots(equivalent of scales and Arpeggios) during off season.

The reason they became so good has A lot to do with the fact that they practiced (improved their technique) more than other people. If they were able to go beyond technique, why did they still practice so much?

I don't see anything in that as being mechanical or wooden about technique. You have to have a lot of fire in you to want to work that hard and go the extra mile, and there is a lot of joy in being able to accomplish something . You always have room to improve, more techniques to perfect. Why deprive yourself of wanting to become better?

I think what you want to say is that technique is no good if you let it become your sole purpose and neglect the inspiration/emotional aspect of it, and that's what makes people sound "wooden".. but I think the opposite is equally wrong too

I thought I did say that.

That's great. I strongly suggest purchasing The Bremen/Lausanne Concerts (mentioned above by John in Montreal) if you don't already own it. Recorded two years before Koln, it was actually somewhat better received by critics:

Record of the Year, 1975, The New York Times
Album of the year (Pop), 1974, Time Magazine (USA)
Record of the Year (International Critics’ Poll), 1974, Down Beat (USA)
Record of the Year, 1974, Stereo Review (USA)
Record of the Year (World), 1974/75, Jazz Forum (Poland)
Grand Prix (gold), 1974/75, Swing Journal (Germany)
Grosser Deutscher Schallplattenpreis, 1974/75, Deutsche Phono-Akademie (Germany)
Kuenstler des Jahres, 1975, Deutsche Phono- Akademie (Germany)

From 1981, the Bregenz/Munich "Concerts" release also contains some awesome moments.

Listened twice already this week, Brings total plays to about 5,000 but who's counting

John

There are indeed a lot of great moments in the 1981, Bregenz/Munich concerts as well. You just inspired me to listen to it this evening

John