Improv or Planned?

[Ben Somerville]

Hey guys,
this is a question i've had for quite a while now. It may be really obvious, and i'm just out of the loop, but i've always wondered this: Do professional mandolinists always plan their solos before a show or recording session? Or do they make 'em up on the spot. I'm really confused because I almost always improv, but my band leader (a banjo player) says the pros always plan their solos before a show. :confused: anyone have any help? (like i said, this may be really obvious to you, but whatever...)

Thanks.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

I don't think it's that either/or. Most experienced players will have a good sense of how to whack through all the tunes on the set list that night, relying some on breaks they've played before *and* flying by the seat of their pants some, too. Also, surely it varies from one player to the next, and on how high-stakes the given gig is (and what genre of music you're playing).

When you sit down to record in a studio, most people work out pretty specific arrangements ahead of time, instead of wasting time (money!) in the studio. Those arrangements become your default script until variations start to creep in. If you're comfortable enough with the tune, improv can take over from the arranged piece. But by then you have a solid sense of the tune, so it's not a big deal.

[JeffD]

I don't know for sure what the pros do. But in blugrass the break is supposed to be iomprovized, And I prefer it improvized on the spot, over the composed and practiced break "masquerading" as a spontaneous improvization.

But in other contexts I have heard both.

I have heard both. I have heard Marty Stuart go into an intricate and well practiced solo, from which he then departs in some blisteringly brilliant ways. Thats cool too.

[Ivan Kelsall]

If you watch the Adam Steffey tuition DVD,he explains at length the way he goes about putting together a break. The way he does it,is to take the bare bones of the tune & work around it until he's got something that he's satisfied with. His main example is the delicious intro.to Alison Krauss's song "Every Time You Say Goodbye".
I always played my Banjo breaks as per the recording that i'd learned the tunes from,after all,that's what an audience wants to hear (IMHO),their favourite songs / tunes done the way they first heard them,& not 'my version' of the tunes. One instance of this would be the great Banjo break in Flatt & Scruggs' song "I'll Never Shed Another Tear". I'd never dream of playing anything other than Earl Scruggs' break in that song - it's a 'classic'.
I supose as you become more & more familiar with a tune,you learn to put together more 'personal' breaks & you become able to improvise freely on a tune more.
Personally,unless a tune / song has a very well known & liked intro./ break that audiences will want to hear played,i think that it's mostly ok to do your own thing,as long as it's within the context of the tune /song, & not 'too way out',
Ivan

[C Dubblez]

If you watch the Adam Steffey tuition DVD,he explains at length the way he goes about putting together a break. The way he does it,is to take the bare bones of the tune & work around it until he's got something that he's satisfied with. His main example is the delicious intro.to Alison Krauss's song "Every Time You Say Goodbye".
I always played my Banjo breaks as per the recording that i'd learned the tunes from,after all,that's what an audience wants to hear (IMHO),their favourite songs / tunes done the way they first heard them,& not 'my version' of the tunes. One instance of this would be the great Banjo break in Flatt & Scruggs' song "I'll Never Shed Another Tear". I'd never dream of playing anything other than Earl Scruggs' break in that song - it's a 'classic'.
I supose as you become more & more familiar with a tune,you learn to put together more 'personal' breaks & you become able to improvise freely on a tune more.
Personally,unless a tune / song has a very well known & liked intro./ break that audiences will want to hear played,i think that it's mostly ok to do your own thing,as long as it's within the context of the tune /song, & not 'too way out',
Ivan
I see what you mean about how the records are so great that you think that is what the audience wants to hear, but I don't know about note for note. I mean, they can simply just listen to that record then. I think using the same ideas on a classic break is great, but also putting your own touch on it or improvise it some will be much more original and make YOU the musician who played it rather than someone just trying to re play a break people have heard hundreds of times. Plus, you put yourself in some pretty big shoes to fill that way.

[Rick Cadger]

On the rare occasions that I do solo I don't usually play solos I have learned from other people (although I use a couple of "classic" solos from WSM or Sam Bush on a couple of songs).

I usually make up and rehearse solos. I then either improvise variations on the rehearsed version or have a stab a a full improv and then fall back on the rehearsed version when my mind goes blank or my nerve fails.

I do cheat. Many songs are so similar that I'll use my solo from one song in another. For example, a while ago I had to play 'Mama Don't Allow'. Well I haven't played that for ages, and I couldn't remember what I usually used to play, so I just played a variant of the solo I often use in 'Roll in My Sweet Baby's Arms'.

Heck, licks are portable: so are solos!

I'm not much of a one for playing without a safety net. I don't have the nerve or the ability to improvise well under pressure.

[farmerjones]

i play straight ahead Bluegrass and C&W. There's probably only one break for me in each tune. I play the melody as sweet & clean as i can, with some tag on the end. The tunes are simple, and im pretty lazy and like what works. I wouldn't say "planned" as much as grown over time. Still note for note, probably not identicle. Though i can do identicle for recordings. If you gimme a second break, you're going to hear more improv because the melody has already been stated the first go-around.

[Ben Somerville]

So it looks like everyone, even among the pros, has their own way of doing it. I knew that obviously you have to improv during jams and stuff, but I was afraid I was some weirdo who improvised on all of his solos. So this is good to know.

Thanks for the help!

[Brent Hutto]

For popular music as well as for bluegrass that's had wide acceptance by a general audience, I think there is a certain tyranny of "How it was on the CD" that performers flout at their own peril. Alison Krauss or Mark Knopfler or Keith Richards are perfectly capable improvisers but when they're getting huge bucks from each backside in each seat they have little incentive to vary much from the recorded break or solo.

[tree]

I've been playing mandolin seriously for about 8 years, and I'm still trying to learn how to improvise on the fly. Right now I work out most of my breaks ahead of time. I play some of them the same way every time. Sometimes I will improvise a phrase or two when I have an idea. Sometimes the ideas work, sometimes they don't. I do devote some of my practice time (at home) to improvising, I find that at slower speeds I'm better at it. I think this is a decent way to approach it, and I'm hopeful that if I keep working at it I will gradually improve over time.

Overall, the melody is my safe place and it starts to get dicey when I leave the melody.

I'm no professional, but I do play with a band. Playing with a band is different from jamming or practicing - it is much more structured (in my experience) and you spend a lot of time working up your arrangements. As you get the arrangement down the breaks tend to evolve. I expend an awful lot of mental energy trying to remember the current arrangement and play (and sing) at the same time. It's work, but it's good work.

[Markus]

I often try to play in service of the melody, with improvised ornamentation more than melodic deviation.

Instrumental tunes are another thing altogether, but for sung songs I hear a lot of reference to the melodic line which is improvised around.

If it's a song that I've played for a while, worked up to lead at a jam or group context ... most often I will solo fairly similarly as I'm mostly just ornamenting the melody with only a small segment near the end venturing very far from `playing it straight'. I play fiddle tunes similarly - often the final Part B repeat will be mine.

I used to do more constant improv, but eventually felt that every song tended to sound the same as I ventured too far from the melody. When I stick with the melody closer, I pay attention to rhythm, dynamics, and group interplay more ... less space for improv, but more variance song to song.

[300win]

I always play it so that you can hear the songs { vs. tune } words, so anyone familar with the "song" can recognize it, but with maybe a little fill in notes here and there if they work, if playing just for fun jamming etc., I might throw in something differant, but never so far off the true melody that you can't recognize it. Always put heart in the break, if it's a sad song, play it sad, if it's a happy fiddle tune, play it happy. Once I learn something new, tune or song, I experiment while practicing by myself to see what I can and can not do on it, and what will work or not work, then I use that for a base for any other improvisation I might do. and when recording with our band, most of the time I play what I know to save time, thats not the time to try out some new riff, it cost too much.

[AlanN]

You'll hear both types by bands on stage.

When JD Crowe and The New South play Old Home Place these days, Dwight McCall picks Skaggs' perfect break from Rounder 0044 note-for-note. When 3TO plays John & Mary, Wayne does the mandola thing just like on the record, at least the opening. Dempsey Young said he would play his solos just like he recorded them, cause that is what the fans want to hear.

Then, you have pickers who never play the same thing :mandosmiley:once:mandosmiley:.

[Ben Somerville]

Dempsey Young said he would play his solos just like he recorded them, cause that is what the fans want to hear.


That's also what my band leader said, but I sorta disagree. I know that when I go to a show, I'm looking foward to hearing a new and different solo from everyone. Am I the only one here?

[Brent Hutto]

Ben,

You're a musician. What proportion of the audience at a typical show you attend are mandolin players? If you pitch your music to the instrument-playing geeks in the audience you run the risk of ending up the punchline to a joke like the one about playing 10,000 chords to three people.

[Toycona]

I always think it's cool when people play crazy, upside-down solos that somehow fit into the groove and key of the song. I'm thinking about the super funky bass solo in Paul Simon's "Call Ma Al" song from "Graceland." It's really the bass line run in reverse. Personally, I'm not at a proficient enough level to trust my fingers to do the talking, so I end up rehearsing breaks, because if I make it up on the spot I risk messing it up in a way that will affect the other musicians (timing, accidental key change, etc.). So, for the moment, I adhere to the rule, "If I don't know what I'm going to say in the break, it may be better not to say too much."

[Laird]

I know that when I go to a show, I'm looking foward to hearing a new and different solo from everyone. Am I the only one here?

You're not alone. I feel let down--maybe even cheated--when instrumental breaks sound too close to the recorded version. This may reveal my Deadhead roots, where you might hear the same song several times on a single tour, and it's crazy different each time. That's what's exciting about it.

As a performer, I usually improvise around the melody. In some cases, such as "Walls of Time," I'll figure out a basic lead that works well, but is all my own, and then improvise around that each time. (It usually starts the same, though.)

By the way, it was a big realization for me that many performers plan out their instrumental breaks before hand. For a long time, I was 100% improvisational. Now I'd say my best breaks are 70% planned and 30% improvisation.

[Ben Somerville]

What proportion of the audience at a typical show you attend are mandolin players?

Our band doesn't really play any big shows yet, so I'd say only 5-10% or so. I guess it's not really shows that I'm thinking about, but more recordings that I'm doing. I'm sorta trying to figure out the "normal" way of playing a solo, but it looks like each person has their own way, so I guess I'll just create mine!

Thanks again for the help everyone.

[Tom C]

On White House Blues, it seems everybody, including professionals like McCoury,Skaggs..etc, take the same 3 breaks Monroe did.

[pglasse]

As we're starting to figure out from the variety of posts, there is no single answer. Players (pro or not) have very different approaches. Some improvise a lot. Some have a basic structure or a few possible approaches and vary slightly from these. Some play the same solo every time.

I've got a bunch of thoughts on this but the main one is that I'd like encourage folks to not necessarily view improvising as playing lots of wild sounding notes or not eluding to the melody in any way. There are many of different ways of improvising and subtle melodic variation can certainly be among them. I'd point to Jerry Douglas on dobro and Buck White on mandolin as players who both can play lots of notes that don't refer to the melody AND are also really great at playing subtle economical solos centered around the melody of the tune. Any given player could take on either of these approaches in an improv or non-improv manner.

In jazz we often expect improvisation. Though many great jazz artists have had certain territory for a solo mapped ahead of time -- perhaps not whole solos. I love listening to live recordings and alternate takes of Wes Montgomery. Sometimes he'll try something completely different. Other times you can tell he's found certain places he "wants to dig" but the details of "how he digs" are different each time. I've heard that Louis Armstrong called these things (or places) "routines."

Your banjo player-band-leader may be right that Earl Scruggs and J.D. Crowe have often repeated the same solo. Bill Monroe often didn't. Even if he had, on some tunes, certain predetermined landscape he'd explore -- the details were virtually always different.

Another thought: just because you haven't figured out a solo ahead of time doesn't necessarily mean you're "really improvising." (Whatever that means.) It's pretty easy for us all to get in the habit of letting our fingers do the walking through a selection of our same old patterns. So, try to make sure you're ears are guiding your fingers, instead of the other way around.

Enough for now....

All the best,

[bobby bill]

Many years ago, in a question and answer forum on his web site, David Grisman said that he did not improvise - merely ornamented the melody. He was even somewhat dismissive about improvisation stating that it was just composing real fast. I mean, does anyone care how fast a painter takes to create a painting.

Not sure what I think about this but I found it interesting. Sure wish I could not improvise like Grisman.

[mandolirius]

On White House Blues, it seems everybody, including professionals like McCoury,Skaggs..etc, take the same 3 breaks Monroe did.

That's because those are three of the greatest mandolin solos in bluegrass!

[Alex Orr]

I knew that obviously you have to improv during jams and stuff
You don't "have to" improv during jams. I've gone to the same jam for a while and a few months back I started writing down songs and the keys we played them in that night. It's a fairly regular group, so the song list tends to be about 65% the same on any given night. Each week I'd try to take one of the more common tunes and compose a break for it, basically sticking to the melody and throwing in some ornamentation. Then I'd try to memorize it. Now, when a lot of those tunes come up, I play the break I wrote and memorized. I recall the first time I nailed three or four of those breaks in a night. I got more compliments on my playing that night than just about any other night - and for good reason, me and my breaks actually sounded good. It also felt good to play something I was confident in and knew would add to the song. The breaks were certainly better than most of my improvised attempts at a break. When I play open mics with my guitar playing buddy, I always play a break I wrote and rehearsed, because quite frankly my improv skills aren't strong enough for me to feel confident that I won't end up crashing and burning, which makes both of us on stage look bad and subjects the audience to some lousy picking. Interestingly enough, I heard an interview with Alison Krauss and Union Station where they said they tend too strictly adhere to playing what they recorded, and playing the same thing night after night when on tour. To their mind they spent time composing the best breaks they could come up with, as a result they have some real pride in what they wrote and don't see why they should jettison that for the sake of improvising each night. They also pointed out their belief that people come to hear them play the songs they enjoy on the albums, not to see a improvised jam session.

With all respect to Jeff, I don't think there is any hard and fast rule that you can't learn a lead break and use it at a bluegrass jam. I've had both instructors and better players at jams suggest I actually learn the melody lines to songs rather than just showing up and either noodling over scales or haltingly trying to simultaneously figure out a melody and instantly use it to compose a respectable break for the first time at 180 bpm.

Furthermore, part of the long process of becoming a good improviser is simply learning melodies and composing instrumental breaks. As my instructor pointed out, a good jazz musician is among the finest improvisers in the world, and yet the best jazz players usually spend countless hours honing their composition skills and learning a TON of songs.

I certainly enjoy the challenge of improvising, and for songs I've never heard I'll still dive in headfirst and try to improv something cool from scratch. Frequently I'll also slightly alter my composed break to songs. Maybe I have a well-memorized lead break that I've made-up and I'll start out in my prepared break and then have an idea to tweak something and see where it takes me.

I certainly think improvising has a big role in bluegrass music, and jamming with folks in general, but I don't think the idea of improvising should in any way negate the importance of learning and writing breaks, being able to play a set break within a group setting, or the simple utility of having something to fall back on that you know sounds good.

[JeffD]

David Grisman said that he did not improvise - merely ornamented the melody. .

Wow. Thats what I do. Though of course, not as well.

[Manfred Hacker]

I have asked myself the same question the OP did. I would like to add: do they make up solos on the fly at 270+ bpm?
I think that somebody who practices 6 hours and more every day for a long time has a huge inventory of 'prefab' licks and runs they can combine at lib at any time. But I don't believe they make up a solo from scratch at such tempos.
Just the two cents of a dabbler.

[Ben Somerville]

I have asked myself the same question the OP did. I would like to add: do they make up solos on the fly at 270+ bpm?
I think that somebody who practices 6 hours and more every day for a long time has a huge inventory of 'prefab' licks and runs they can combine at lib at any time. But I don't believe they make up a solo from scratch at such tempos.
Just the two cents of a dabbler.

Are there really songs that fast? Do you mean 170+? Even Chris Thile can't play over 270.

[GRW3]

Last night I was playing guitar at a jam. I was wanting to work on my group playing and doing rhythm things. I was faced with the occassional need to do a simple break. Because I know my scales (CAGED system on a guitar) and can get the gist of the melody with a couple of reps I did OK. Without having the fundamental knowledge of scale structure, if I only learned guitar solos by rote, I would have been helpless. Frankly, the only help you have in a jam situation is the work you put into knowing your instrument.

I understand that Steve Kaufman can reel off over a thousand tunes on demand. I can't. I know enough to call a few if we get into a tune session and I try to have some set breaks for songs I sing that carry the melody but when the session ventures into new territory I try to participate with a form following break that moves the melody forward. I do not learn set tricks that you play like a string of dominos, G phrase C phrase G phrase D trick G base run out...

#1 recommendation - learn the scale forms, open and closed. I strongly recommend Ted E's FFcP approach. When you start getting into them expand it to understand how to use the forms for more scales than just the examples he gives.

[ralph johansson]

Are there really songs that fast? Do you mean 170+? Even Chris Thile can't play over 270.

The usual confusion from talking about bpm and not specifying the meter. Lots of people seem to assume that Bluegrass is mostly in 4/4. Most of it, as you realize, is really in 2/2.

[ralph johansson]

Many years ago, in a question and answer forum on his web site, David Grisman said that he did not improvise - merely ornamented the melody. He was even somewhat dismissive about improvisation stating that it was just composing real fast. I mean, does anyone care how fast a painter takes to create a painting.

Not sure what I think about this but I found it interesting. Sure wish I could not improvise like Grisman.

The analogy with painting is completely false. Musicans perform, painters (as a rule) do not. I mistrust your reference to Grisman. In my experience such indirect quotes usually are somebody's interpretation, not the actual facts. Why don't you link to the interview?
Do Grisman's solos with the Quintet really sound like mere ornamentation of the melody?

There are compositional values and improvisational values. A very rough analogy would be the difference between reading aloud and conversation.

[Ivan Kelsall]

Brent - You couldn't have stated a better case than Mark Knoffler. I watched a TV programme on him a few nights ago & he stated that he played his solos exactly as per his recordings,because that's what his audience wants to hear.
For me.'classic' tunes /songs etc are 'classics' because they are so good to begin with,& personally,that's what i want to hear if i got to listen to a band play - other folk may think differently.
I often think of what our reaction would be upon hearing one of our own well crafted & thought out tunes / songs,totally dismantled & hacked about. To me it's hardly complementary to the originator of the tune,but it they wish to do it,well that's fine by me - i don't have to like it (as much).
There's a YouTube clip of John Reischman & the Jaybirds playing live,one of my favourite JR tunes, "The Eighth of February. JR doesn't play his 2nd break like he plays it on the CD & for me it doesn't sound as nice. OK - it's his tune & he can play it backwards if he feels like it,but again, 'personally' i feel a bit let down if i don't hear a tune that i really like,played the way i really like it played - maybe that's just me,
Ivan:(

[Brent Hutto]

Ivan,

I believe I've seen Knopfler make that same comment in an interview which is why his name came to mind. For my part, I have a lot of time for that view. Even sweet, perfect little fills and intros and such on guitar, mandolin, fiddle are sometimes so well realized that it is highly unlikely something spontaneous and in the moment is going to be more musically compelling.

Of course there's the competing view of why would you play a bunch of money to hear a loud, indistinct version live of something you can listen to in pristine studio form sitting home with a CD in the player. I see that point as well. But for my favorite artists, there are certain little bits of certain songs that I literally can not get enough of. And frankly, the actual musical quality on average during an extended, free-form 6-1/2 minute jam break in a concert is often mediocre. Even the best improvisers can't come up with but so much good stuff on any given night.

[Ben Somerville]

The usual confusion from talking about bpm and not specifying the meter. Lots of people seem to assume that Bluegrass is mostly in 4/4. Most of it, as you realize, is really in 2/2.

huh... maybe it's just me, but for me the tempo stays the same whether I'm in 2/2 or 4/4.

[jimbob]

I asked my teacher the same question. His answer made a lot of sense: No one will know but you. He is the mandolin player for a BG band and is very good. He has many variations well rehersed and like a previous posted said, in his "prefab" lick inventory. I have always struggled with on the spot, improv stuff that goes way back to high school stage band. I have never been very good at it. I think developing a good "prefab" inventory makes a lot of sense....learn a bunch of ways in different songs or different keys and no one will know if it is improv or something you have been working on for weeks. Maybe....

[bobby bill]

I mistrust your reference to Grisman. In my experience such indirect quotes usually are somebody's interpretation, not the actual facts. Why don't you link to the interview?
Do Grisman's solos with the Quintet really sound like mere ornamentation of the melody?



Wow. Sorry you think I'm lying to you. Grisman has updated his web site several times in the last ten years and I doubt he archives his question and answer format. I do recall the comment and his painter analogy. And I recall being stunned by the comment (which is why I remember it today) because I always thought he was improvising. And it may have been more about his definition of improvising than about what he was doing. It made me thing about improvisation differently. I'll hear something and wonder, hmmmm, improvisation or ornamentation? I'm thinking that what Grisman calls improvisation is more abstract and farther removed from the melody than what some other folks might consider improvisation.

[bobby bill]

huh... maybe it's just me, but for me the tempo stays the same whether I'm in 2/2 or 4/4.

You are absolutely correct. Time signature says nothing about tempo.

[Brent Hutto]

Haven't you seen the same tune written out in sixteenth notes and somewhere else in eighth notes? Different time signatures, of course.

The problem with saying "120" is when someone leaves ambiguous whether that's 240 notes per minute or 120 notes per minute or whatever, depending on how they're picturing it written. Playing "120 beats per minute" when each beat has four sixteenth notes if pretty hard. Playing "120 beats per minute" with two eighth notes per beat isn't quite as bad!

Personally I'd just prefer people say how many notes per minute in the basic melody.

[AlanN]

In the mandolin realm that I cover (bluegrass to jazz) and of the players I'm familiar with, I would say Staman is more of a true improvisor than is Grisman. Everybody has their style and particular sound when they play, be it because of stock licks, attack, or just plain feel. To my ears, Dawg's style is pure and simple his - I can pick him out after a few bars. Andy is more wide open.

[Laird]

Wow. Sorry you think I'm lying to you.

His careful use of the word "mistrust" avoids giving the impression he thinks you're lying, as I see it. More likely an inaccurate original paraphrase ("someone else's interpretation") or a mistaken memory--or even Grisman speaking off the cuff and saying something that he might reconsider after further reflection.

[JeffD]

Without having the fundamental knowledge of scale structure, if I only learned guitar solos by rote, I would have been helpless.

You have a real good point. There is a lot more to knowing the tune than memorizing the string of notes. A knowledge of the chord structure, the scales of the keys involved, and it even helps to know the words and the story behind the tune. The more you know about what is going on in the tune, the more you can figure out what is not going on that could be - which to my mind is what improvization is about.


I understand that Steve Kaufman can reel off over a thousand tunes on demand. I can't.

Its not crazy difficult. Really. I bet you know more tune than you think. Its a mental thang that folks have to one degree or another. It comes from lots of time behind the instrument, but not from trying. Before cell phones and speed dial, (back when there was an actual dial!) I knew folks who knew right off most of the phone numbers they ever needed.


I do not learn set tricks that you play like a string of dominos, G phrase C phrase G phrase D trick G base run out...

That's the kind of thing that gets stale quickly, even when done at top speed.

[ralph johansson]

You are absolutely correct. Time signature says nothing about tempo.

That's not what I said, either.

My point was that the time signature determines the bpm at a given tempo. And, conversely, the bpm says nothing about the tempo if the time signature is not specified.
By way of example, Rawhide is a very fast tune, often played at 80 bars per minute, or even more. If you think of it as 2/2 that means 2*80=160 beats
per minute. If you think of it as 4/4, that would mean 4*80=320 bpm.

In response to another post, eights or sixteenths has nothing to do with it. 2/2 (mainly eights in the Rawhide example) and 2/4 (mainly sixteenths) are just different notations of the same thing, 2 beats per bar in either case.

[ralph johansson]

His careful use of the word "mistrust" avoids giving the impression he thinks you're lying, as I see it. More likely an inaccurate original paraphrase ("someone else's interpretation") or a mistaken memory--or even Grisman speaking off the cuff and saying something that he might reconsider after further reflection.

Exactly. I just listened to two versions of Steppin' with Stephane. Grisman's solos are certainly no mere ornamentations or paraphrases of the melody. They do utilize similar devices, e.g., abundant use of tremolo and blues scale over the final chromatic sequence -but differently in the two versions.

Improvisation is not about creating something entirely new each time, it's simply about relating to the present and to the other cats in the band.

[Toycona]

Fascinating discussion!

[Ben Somerville]

Haven't you seen the same tune written out in sixteenth notes and somewhere else in eighth notes? Different time signatures, of course.


oh right. I forgot about that. :) I guess when I see a song in sixteenths, I think "120 quarter notes per minute," and when I see one in eighths, I think "120 half notes per measure.

sorry for confusing everything! I understand now.

[mandocaster]

I am in the pro improvising crowd. I am disappointed if the musicians don't let something a little spontaneous into their music.

[Brent Hutto]

I'm in the pro "sounds good" camp. If it doesn't sound good, no brownie points for having made it up on the spot. And if you play something like that's better sounding "than it was on the CD" then I'm all for improvising. But if someone impresses me with a gorgeous bit of interplay between the band members in a live show, it would not bother me in the slightest to find out they had actually practiced that arrangement for two weeks to get it right (versus making it up on the spot).

[Ben Somerville]

I'm in the pro "sounds good" camp. If it doesn't sound good, no brownie points for having made it up on the spot. And if you play something like that's better sounding "than it was on the CD" then I'm all for improvising. But if someone impresses me with a gorgeous bit of interplay between the band members in a live show, it would not bother me in the slightest to find out they had actually practiced that arrangement for two weeks to get it right (versus making it up on the spot.

I agree. It's not that I'm disappointed when they don't improvise; it's that I'm disappointed when they play the exact same thing as in the recording.