Just for the fun of it

[gator]

Actually, in regards to some exercises, particularly those to do with sound production and control, the idea of idiom per se often doesn't come into it. But once you play a melodic line or a progression,and you phrase it musically, you are in an idiom.The deciding factor is whether the individual just executes the phrase , or affects it with musical energy.The idea of divorcing musicality from the playing of the notes(in an etude or exercise as well) doesn't fit into the modern paradigm of classical music either...check with any decent teacher of an orchestral instrument...and its not about plugging in...its about using your instrument to negotiate hitherto unfamiliar territory. A sax player or a singer who doesn't have great piano skills can actually learn a fair bit about harmony by voice leading.
Its not the only way of working on it -but its a way..and students should be offered several ways into the whole area of dealing with harmony - even if there is only time to assess one. Sure, no-one wants to hear exercises regurgitated in an improvisation - but personally , I'm kind of over the note bashing bullshit that some players use when they cant hear a line through a simple progression...simply because they haven't listened and haven't worked on it , either through laziness or poor guidance or both.


Gee this is fun Tim..

[timothystevens]

Good work, whoever you are, and thanks for contributing. I did think there might be a few more people interested in saying something about what they want or would like to see in an educational course for improvising musicians. Given that it seems probable that many of the people here either have been or currently are part of a tertiary program in jazz (and so forth) and that things seem to be in a process of change here and there, I still imagine there might be some considered opinions around the place. Maybe not.

[isaacs]

Since jazz tertiary courses are generally in the same building as their classical counterparts, I'd like to see it compulsory that jazz students take some classical courses - and vice versa.

Many jazz players would benefit from exposure to a classical teacher to kick their ass. Or they might want to do a course in twentieth century compositional practice (Messiaen, set theory, whatever) or orchestration etc. Classical students would benefit from sitting in on improv classes, or taking jazz history classes to round out their knowledge of twentieth century music.

And I like to see mixed ensembles: string players would benefit enormously from having to play with a jazz ensemble including rhythm section, and it would be great for jazz writing majors to be able to write for strings.

To my knowledge this kind of thing is rare even as a course option, let alone compulsory as I suggest.

[timothystevens]

What I'm really interested in is the philosophy on which such ideas are based. What are we/should they be trying to do for students of improvisation in the university environment, and why? While I too wish that more jazz players knew more about repertoire, and more rep players knew about improvisation - even so that they didn't fear it as much as they often do - I think that there needs to be really careful thinking so as to avoid it being tokenistic or irrelevant. Messaien is someone who said he hated jazz, but the jury is still out on whether he'd really bothered to hear enough of it to have an informed opinion. And is he really an important composer? If so, why? Why should he take the place of, say, Bach in the education of young musicians? Is set theory as much use as counterpoint to a developing improviser? I'm all for the broadening of the mind, I hope that's clear, but very often tertiary students are lamentably ignorant of some very basic concepts in tonal functional harmony, so I'm not convinced that inviting them to delve into advanced twentieth-century compositional technique is the best use of their time. Or perhaps I've got it wrong and TFH is old-fashioned, and in the context of the University of Accounting there isn't even really time for that anymore.

Do we agree on the development of a personal voice as a primary objective? Can this be done within the span of an undergraduate degree? If so, how is it best achieved?

I offer this in a collegial spirit and am having a go at no-one on a personal level. (Except maybe Messaien.)

[isaacs]

Thanks Tim, my examples were really random examples and not meant to narrowly circumscribe an area such as twentieth century compositional techniques. I was just suggesting a compulsory requirement to include some courses from the "other" discipline, a jazz student might just as well decide to undertake to study Bach chorales (a bloody good idea).

On Messiaen, I'm aware that he hated jazz (he in fact described it as a "robber") but that doesn't put me off his music. Neither does Wagner's hatred of Jews put me off his. I studied Messiaen's music from the age of 14 and his harmonic and modal language remains inspirational. But I wasn't suggesting that studying Messiaen should be compulsory for jazz students, I just imagined one or two jazz people might be drawn to him as I was, or even if they chose him by accident they might get something out of it. Similarly, though I have used little set theory in my compositions, studying its organisational principles sharpened my mind to possibilities of hierarchical pitch structures other than tonality. It may not help that much, but it doesn't hurt! My approach as a student was to try and keep my opinions out of the way and soak up as much as possible.

[ironguts]

The problem really is the large degree to which the previous education of the students varies. You might get someone who has done grd 6/7 ameb and studied Classical history as well as having done Big Band and small ensemble in school. Then you get someone who has played for 2 years and can hardly read and doesn't know their maj/mins let alone modes etc.
The tertiary system is letting in many students that often shouldn't be there, this makes it hard for the more advanced students and the teachers too.
How can you structure a course for that kind of variety?
Apart from that I agree with Mark that cross education is a great idea, though it's hard to convince people to study Messiaen when their head is up Parkers arse! (Even though Parker would be up for it I'm sure)
Gator, you talk of note bashing, I'd rather hear someone struggling to find a way through it all on their own path that may lead them somewhere than a player regurgitating lick after lick. It's a hard call but better to keep falling flat on your face and end up running free than walking with crutches, but I also get your point, confusing isn't it?
Tim, I think no is the answer to developing an individual style, not enough time in undergrad years, but the student can be showed ways to develop their voice when they leave and actually have time to do some practice!

[gator]

Sure- the idea of trying things that may fail is one of the reasons why I play this music...to learn limits and find ways to deal with them.what I mean by note bashing is the term ascribed to Opera singers who never learn to read properly and can only learn their notes by bashing them on a piano...its the continuous failure to address something in ones playing that ensures the failure of that element every time.Its not the domain of the conscientious I'm sure, but that ballpark attitude to improvising is still alive and well in our post modern system..

Maybe we are wrong in separating the notion of 20th C compostional and aural techniques from Tonal Harmony - Ive been thinking alot lately about this...the archetypal approach is to present them along the time line in which they occur historically - Functional harmony - chromaticism, bitonal,polytonal and atonal concepts come last. Maybe there is a case for presenting them concurrently, because there is intrinsic value in the relationships that people establish between both - One can gain an enormous degree of independent melodic perception in the atonal paradigm, and yet the basic ideas of functionality and substitution should be there too - it would be something that could be experientially taught - (if that ever gets recognised by the soulless university system here) in fact Im sure that in Europe, this approach is gaining popularity.

[ironguts]

very good points gator, I'm with you on all that, best idea yet from all this.

[alistair]

as someone who is currently doing a tertiary degree in improv... this is actually a conversation I have had a lot!

Honestly, one of the biggest issues for me is that not nearly enough time is spent on really learning how to play 'jazz' based music. I am not trying to suggest it should be the be all and end all of a university degree, but I think it is a bit of a worry when maybe only 4 or 5 kids in a whole year level can even bluff their way through a bop tune, let alone really kill it.

And as far as this, I think it really comes down to 3 main issues that aren't addressed.
first, there is so little real structured emphasis on transcription. I know monash has mandatory transcriptions every semester, and waapa and anu have those 3rd year subjects mentioned earlier, but really for some reason transcribing has really fallen by the wayside.

I don't think its in the best interests of a student to have it forced upon them, better to let them be interested themselves- but for me something ideal would be a subject that starts in 1900 and over the course of a whole year (or even a whole degree!) gets to the year 2007, focusing on a few main players and solos from each era. That way keen students could hopefully follow along with the subject, transcribing different players and styles along the way, and come out the other end which a much deeper understanding of the progression of jazz over the last 100 years. This would also remedy the 2nd thing that i think needs to be addressed, which is just a general awareness of the actual history of the music.

Lastly, I think especially as related to be-bop and some modern players, the idea of learning lines is great. I just think it is a nuts and bolts approach to hearing different ways to negotiate changes, and that can only expand options and in turn increase individuality.
If you know a shitload of lines to get through changes, you can choose to play anyone of them, or choose to play none of them (or the most realistic choice, which is none of them until your in trouble then using them as springboards for your own ideas). you dont get that choice if you know none.

In the end I don't think it's a uni's job to produce great, individual sounding players, but rather to pass on the history and real nuts and bolts stuff needed to play music. If they can get students techniques sorted, get their ears usable and give them an idea of what has come before, the players that have something to say will naturally come up by themselves.

There are other things I would like to see included, like more emphasis on classical technique, a lot more emphasis on composition and arranging (especially as a way to help students decide what materials they want to use when improvising), and most importantly I think uni's need to start having more playing and less talking. The greatest things I have learnt at uni have always been whilst playing, or getting feedback on my playing from some of the staff. I haven't made any great advances in a lecture yet!

Obviously its really up to the students themselves to get together and play, but I still think some of the uni's could at least make it easier to actually get a room to have a play with your mates.

sorry for the long ramble....

[timothystevens]

The long ramble is valuable and welcome. I think with regard to the disinclination to make students play bebop that a laudable question is being asked: what is the relevance of bebop to here and now? But of course the risk is when the solution seems to lie in what students don't do, rather than what they do. Okay, if no bebop, then what? What attention is given elsewhere to the here and now, besides leaving students free to make their own stylistic or procedural selections from the great department store of musical history? Is the theoretical context that downgraded bebop (or standard tunes, let's say, or transcription) outlined anywhere in the structure of the course? Where does it come from, how is it defended, and in what manner does it inform what is taught?

Again, I am not necessarily taking issue at this stage with any of the positions suggested above, nor am I pointing the finger at any particular instutution, teacher, student, student's friend, family, annual income or sexual orientation.

But I am feeling rather interrogative today.

[alistair]

I have to be careful how i say this, because it could easily come out the wrong way (and come out in a way that I don't really agree with).

I don't give two shits about whether someone plays bop, or free, or 'modern' or dixie or anything. What I really enjoy listening to (and i think this is pretty universal between musicians and non-musicians) is the sense that someone is approaching their improvisation, in whatever idiom, with a great deal of care and logic. For me, the way to work on this has been to really try and (slowly and painfully!) develop a system to approach improvisation that works for me. There has to be inherent logic for the system to really work, and the more time spent with it, I think naturally the greater the care that goes into it, and is therefore displayed.

I too often see other players (and myself too to be honest) with a lack of a cohesive system, and for me that is dud improvisation. It may be bits and pieces of different methods cobbled together that don't really work as a whole, or a system that really deals with the technicality of something and leaves the care side of the equation out.

The attraction of passing on a fairly large, well developed system, that still has a huge amount of room to add individuality and personality within it, such as bebop, can only serve to show students how to structure an approach to improvisation as a whole.
They can choose to become part of this system, part of another system or create their own, but at least they will have access to A system if they need it.

Hopefully the better students will be able to take whatever they need from the tradition and make whatever they need to advance, and become both a product and a producer of the tradition.

not sure if that was explained very well... it's really a bit too intellectual of a discussion for me before midday.

[ironguts]

Yes, ramble welcome.

Tims questions are great, Be-Bop? Fusion? Swing? Rep? The list can go on, what music should be taught? Post-Bop is old music, so is blues, classical, who's to say what's relevant?

Transcription? The thing I got from it was it removed some of the mystery of a player, they're just using the same notes that are available to us all. I didn't feel the need to do heaps, once I got the idea, I just wanted to make up my own shit. To some extent transcribing something exactly seemed a waste of time to me, not very creative really, again, rather explore my own ideas.

Sure it's great to have a library if ideas or even lines, but again, why someone else's? What makes them special? Just the fact that X or Y played it? Work out your own, it's easy as, it starts with a note. The thing of having a line to 'fall' back on is not music, it's regurgitation. If you can't think of anything to play then just don't play for Christs sake, take some time to listen!

History? Yes good to understand what's happened that's for sure, and it should relate to the music.

Playing? Yes more. These courses are supposed to be Performance based are they not? There should be Ensemble everyday in a perfect world. ( Just as long as I don't have to take them !)

[timothystevens]

Alistair, please don't misunderstand: I am no apologist for bebop. I only used that example because you spoke of students being unable to bluff their way through a bop tune. I'm fairly sure we agree about the usefulness of precedents but the danger of becoming bound by them. And while on this, it is possible to love jazz music from across its history while having no desire to become adopted or accepted by the proponents of any paradigm of tradition. If so-and-so says I don't 'play jazz' because my playing doesn't accord with their understanding of that term, there's nothing to be done about it and that's fine with me.

[alistair]

"if you can't think of anything to play then just don't play for Christs sake, take some time to listen!"

I think that one of the advantages of having some lines that you are at least familiar with is the idea of being able to play decent harmonic language when focusing on another aspect of your playing. God knows there are a lot of times when rhythmically I can hear what I want to do, but harmonically I'm a bit clouded. At least having this bank means that I can really focus on getting my rhythmic intent out there, whilst not having to stress about terrible melodic or harmonic content. In an ideal world that wouldn't be the case, and hopefully as time goes on I will need that crutch less and less, but for the moment it really helps.

And sorry Tim, I didn't take you as bop apologist at all. just the dangers of the written word taking things slightly out of context I think. sorry!

[gator]

"Since jazz tertiary courses are generally in the same building as their classical counterparts, I'd like to see it compulsory that jazz students take some classical courses - and vice versa."

In an ideal world where there is aesthetic equanimity, I would wholly support this. Its unfortunate that in some cases, you can have classical students freely participating in ensembles, usually because of the flexibility and tolerance of the improv students...and yet the converse never occurs - i.e an electric guitarist performing string parts in a chamber piece, because of the myopia of the staff and students of repertoire. Some serious philosophical changes have to be made before this exchange becomes meaningful.