Jazz Improvisation Software--Free

[robert.najlis]

there was one group who were against the "Abersold/Berklee" approach. I think they favored the afore-mentioned Lego Bricks approach.

For me - and I am no expert - the Abersold/Berklee can coexist with the Lego Bricks approach if you want. The Lego Bricks approach first and foremost makes it easier to memorize tunes. For me, it also helps me get a bigger picture of the tune and the movements therein. I can use that information whether I am using a Abersold/Berklee (Chord Scale Theory) approach, or a thematic approach, or what have you.

[August Watters]

From watching Ken Burns, I know that a lot of the original, African-American jazz musicians could read and write music. But didn't a lot of them learn by ear, without actually transcribing, too? I am wondering in this day and age, where slow-down programs make ear learning so easy, what the additional benefit of writing out someone else's solo is.

Wow, lots of good questions and ideas here! I think we may have some misunderstandings though because we haven't defined our terms: I hear "transcription" used to mean any of the following:

1) Listening to a recording, working out a solo on your instrument, not writing it down;
2) Listening to a recording while checking notes on your instrument, writing it down;
3) Listening to a recording, writing it down without reference to an instrument.

I favor 2) because it helps me to learn quicker and remember longer. And it helps with analysis, to understand what's going on harmonically.

I learned about the importance of transcribing from my first teacher and mentor, David Baker, a great jazz historian and teacher who came from the Indianapolis scene that produced Freddie Hubbard and Wes Montgomery. He made me aware of the benefits of transcribing, including learning the little details of articulation and phrasing that reveal themselves on close listening. I think of transcribing as a form of learning by ear, just slower!

My impression is that transcription entered the informal world of jazz education with the need to keep up with Charlie Parker. Berklee caught on to it early too, they began in 1945. I still emphasize the value of transcription, and wish even 1% of my students would take it as seriously as this one has:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhE0m...1&feature=plcp

I don't think more than 10% of incoming students are jazz musicians, but today there are many coexisting approaches to learning jazz, such as the ones you mention. I agree Berklee was most associated with the chord/scale method (Aebersold) that dominated jazz education for a couple of decades. As a student I became part of the reaction against that, which was the arpeggio-and-voice-leading method that emulated the intuitive thought process of earlier generations of jazz musicians. I still believe that's a more direct approach, and equally useful for triadic music. As a player and teacher both, I use this approach for soloing on jazz, and improvising melodic variations on fiddle tunes.

[JonZ]

I am trying to imagine transcribing Charley Parker before the advent of slow down programs...

Nope--can't imagine it.

I have been running into the voice leading approach a lot. I haven't seen much in the way of materials for learning to do it. My kids do Skype lessons with Christian Howes, and he starts them off playing arpeggios in ascending and decending, three-note sequences:

R 3 5, 3 5 7, 5 7 R, 7 R 5, etc., for various chord tones.

Next you combine two chords. So you would start on G and play R 3 5, and then go to the closest C note, 3 5 R, and so on.

Are there other good exercises for being able to use chord tones and voice leading?

[Mark Robertson-Tessi]

I am trying to imagine transcribing Charley Parker before the advent of slow down programs...

Nope--can't imagine it.

Actually, you could change the speed of your record player with weights or a drag pressure. Still, if the recording is clear, any transcription can be done at speed with practice.

Cheers
MRT

[August Watters]

I am trying to imagine transcribing Charley Parker before the advent of slow down programs...

Nope--can't imagine it.

My generation had to transcribe by rewinding cassette tapes, which was a big improvement over my teachers' generation, who had to pick up the needle and drop it, over and over! I had a special deck that played at half speed so you could play at half tempo, down an octave. And although my teachers never confessed, I remember LP players that played at 16-2/3 rpm!

I have been running into the voice leading approach a lot. I haven't seen much in the way of materials for learning to do it.

Are there other good exercises for being able to use chord tones and voice leading?

I'm writing that book this summer! Meanwhile, practice your I-Vs like this (in scale degrees):
1 3 5 1 7 5 4 2 3 5 1 3 4 2 7 5 5 1 3 5 5 4 2 7 1

[Ted Eschliman]

Also Gravity notes. Anxious to see your materials, August.

[JonZ]

Meanwhile, practice your I-Vs like this (in scale degrees):
1 3 5 1 7 5 4 2 3 5 1 3 4 2 7 5 5 1 3 5 5 4 2 7 1

Which numbers are the Is and which are the Vs?

[August Watters]

Sorry, let me separate the alternating I and V7 chords:
1 3 5 1 - 7 5 4 2 - 3 5 1 3 - 4 2 7 5 - 5 1 3 5 - 5 4 2 7 - 1

I chord (triad) contains 1 3 5 of the key
V7 chord contains 5 7 2 4 of the key

Work it out and pretty soon you won't have to think about it -- you'll just have the most common connections between chords under your fingers!

[JonZ]

Thanks. I could never hack it as a code breaker.

[JonZ]

I still don't understand it!

Are all of the 1s 1s, or are some of them 8s. Is this all one octave?

One thing strikes me about transcription is that when people talk about how the greats developed their great technique by transcribing others, it seems like shooting an arrow and drawing a target around where it lands.

Most jazz greats were forward thinking, and used whatever was available to understand other people's techniques. If they had the opportunity to watch someone, they would go and watch their fingers to get that extra information. They wouldn't close their eyes to get the benefits of listening closely. When record players came along, they used various techniques to slow them down. Later, when half speed tape players came out, they used those. I am sure that they are using slow down programs now, and studying published transcriptions when they are accurate and available.

I am not saying there is no benefit to listening and imitating. But correlation is not the same as causation. Sometimes I wonder if it is romanticizing the past, or a form of egotism (I learned this way, and I'm great; you should learn how I did).

[Mike Bunting]

It seems to me that jazz improv is not about technique, if you are going to play jazz , the technical ability is a given. It is about creating melodies spontaneously to express the emotional content of the song/tune as you are feeling it at the moment. if one doesn't understand that little arpeggio exercise and can't tell the 1 chord tones from the 5 chord tones then it would appear to me that a lot more basic learning needs to take place before thinking about playing jazz.

[Mark Robertson-Tessi]

...it seems like shooting an arrow and drawing a target around where it lands.

I am not saying there is no benefit to listening and imitating. But correlation is not the same as causation.

How can something have a benefit but not be causative? It's pretty clear that to learn a style, you need to transcribe it in some way, whether on paper or by ear, with notes or without, etc. Very few musical styles arise in a vacuum. No one learns an instrument without learning other people's compositions, which are essentially transcriptions. If you take the broad meaning of transcription, you almost can't separate it from music in general. The aural/oral tradition is fundamental.

Cheers
MRT

[SincereCorgi]

One thing strikes me about transcription is that when people talk about how the greats developed their great technique by transcribing others, it seems like shooting an arrow and drawing a target around where it lands.

I think there's a certain amount of backlash against the 'transcriptionist' approach that seems to have been around since the late '60s. Like you say, the legendary jazz players didn't learn by transcribing solos note-for-note, although some of them were excellent readers and arrangers and classically trained. The thing about all the Aebersold books and jazz camps is that they give jazz the same problems as classical music, where it turns into this genre museum where successful emulation of the golden age is the benchmark of success. You get all these YouTube videos of 12-year-olds tearing it up on Giant Steps, but who cares? That recording's fifty years old and one would hope that a living genre would have moved on by now and they'd be covering something just as groundbreaking from within their own lifetime.

[JonZ]

I didn't say transcription was not useful, just that the "this is how the Masters did it" reasoning is not a strong argument in its favor. Some of them used heroin too.

It seems to me that jazz improv is not about technique, if you are going to play jazz , the technical ability is a given. It is about creating melodies spontaneously to express the emotional content of the song/tune as you are feeling it at the moment. if one doesn't understand that little arpeggio exercise and can't tell the 1 chord tones from the 5 chord tones then it would appear to me that a lot more basic learning needs to take place before thinking about playing jazz.

I will let this quote stand as a shinning example of basic learning.

[Mike Bunting]

I didn't say transcription was not useful, just that the "this is how the Masters did it" reasoning is not a strong argument in its favor. Some of them used heroin too.

Mike--I said the "Are all of the 1s 1s, or are some of them 8s?" Do a little research on this, and then get back to me about the basic learning I need.

If you had learned the basics you wouldn't even have needed to as the question in the first place.

[JonZ]