General Music Chat

Gary Burton talks about improvising:


I’ll just briefly say that I often use—we all often do, people that teach improv—we use an analogy to speech. When we talk, we don’t think about nouns and pronouns and verbs and sentence structure and so on. We just think of sort of what we want to communicate. And as we picture it, words appear in our mind and we simultaneously speak them. And that is because we’ve learned a big vocabulary of words. And the rules of grammar that we’ve assimilated and our language abilities that our brain has allows us to then use them spontaneously. We don’t have to stop and organize those sentences ourself. They just come pouring out.

The same happens for the improviser. We learn vocabulary, which is getting familiar with chords, outlines and scales. And we learn grammar, which is how the chords move from one to another and how voice leading takes place. And they get assimilated. And then the same language skill, gift, however you want to call it, works for us as improvisers.

We are playing along and something triggers—a harmonic chord change takes place and it kind of triggers a connection in our memory bank and out comes a melodic phrase that fits it. And as it comes into our conscious mind, we simultaneously play it on our instrument. It’s just like talking only we’re using a different language.

That's a good basic summary!


Here are some excerpts from an interview with Anthony Braxton discussing improvisation.

Ted Panken: I'm not interested in regurgitating the "Does Braxton swing Does Braxton not swing?" question, which is a tired old thing. My interest is in the dynamics by which you respond to rhythms in real time in an improvised situation. You very deftly play off of Andrew's rhythms, as you did on those duo projects with Max Roach.
Anthony Braxton .. We never talked about anything .. Andrew and I, or Max and I. We wanted the experience of improvising and challenging one another. Playing with Andrew, I am free to try to do my best. I don't have to worry about anything. At the same time, he will present me with very mature ideas and propositions either to accept or transform.


It was axiomatic during the whole post-Jelly Roll Morton continuum that the individual brings his or her language to the circle, and from that point you interact with another person, with the hope that when the real "Is" moment comes, where the action space is happening and you have to respond, your ideas and devices will be correct. Andrew Cyrille has experienced and learned and gone through 4 billion devices. When you play with him, you're not so much matching experiences as finding those components of your experience that best fit where the It of the music is going.

The musics that push my buttons, whether improvised or notated, have a transparency and give-and-take. How that give-and-take is arrived at and what transparency means arises in what I call the "magic space" of the actual It moment, where there's no time to do anything outside what you've learned about yourself, because you're responding to a moment that itself is constantly changing, to an input from your duo partner that has its own personality and vibrational spectra. All these things are happening all at once in x time instant. It's not about Braxton's theories or Andrew's theories, and it transcends any one relationship to technique. It's about two musicians responding to each other, hopefully on the highest possible level. That includes learning what NOT to respond to and how not to over-respond, finding a way to work with the space, looking for vibrational points of change, knowing when to change, working together within a conceptual parameter.

Ted Panken: How do drummers affect your improvisation?
Anthony Braxton: The most fundamental axiom that I grew up with was the importance of finding something of your own, and when that happens, either everyone can hear it or they can't. Fortunately for me, many of the musicians and percussionists I hoped would be open to my music were, in fact, open to it. In this time period the business complex puts forth a notion of idiomatic certainty, where everyone uses the syntax from a generic perspective, and this is called jazz. But when I was coming up, it was the opposite. Generic was not seen as a point of mastery. Generic was part of the learning process. We start from imitating our heroes, and from that point evolve a position.

My experience has been that the percussionists are like me. They are interested in working with people who are playing something that isn't generic, and kicking it about based on possessing a vocabulary that respects the experiences I've had and the aesthetics and conceptual and vibrational parameters and/or proclivities that attracted me into music as a life's work and music as a spiritual decision.

Aside from all the good things you 2 boys just put forward... The most difficult thing about improve is not getting stuck in 3 things. Not getting stuck in harmonic patterns. Knowing your axe well enough to play it as you create. And learning to actually be creative, within the confines of what the average listener will accept as musical.

I like to keep it simple when comes to something as complicated as personal soul. Thanks Vinny... That was a great POV.

Every Gig I ever played was an off the cuff gig. I always played around the notes during the instrumental portion of a song so there was never a "set" line. Can't rehearse that as you know.

Every Gig I ever played was an off the cuff gig. I always played around the notes during the instrumental portion of a song so there was never a "set" line. Can't rehearse that as you know.

I bet... Some of your early gigs sucked... BUT... your later ones were GREAT!

i'm not a big fan of all of braxton's music but i gotta give it up for him.... he is consistently interesting.

as i see it...the biggest thing about improv is having something to say. i'm doubtful that, or "being creative" is anything you can "learn".

the more you expose yourself to other things...well, that CAN be helpful but it's only gonna get you so far.

studying/listening can be helpful to give you ideas....but if ya ain't got nuthin' to say.......

i'm not a big fan of all of braxton's music but i gotta give it up for him.... he is consistently interesting.

as i see it...the biggest thing about improv is having something to say. i'm doubtful that, or "being creative" is anything you can "learn".

the more you expose yourself to other things...well, that CAN be helpful but it's only gonna get you so far.

studying/listening can be helpful to give you ideas....but if ya ain't got nuthin' to say.......

^^ This!

I learned improv a long time ago and while vocabulary and sentence structure are important, the conversation must be relevant to the song and the audience. One of my early guitar teachers stressed the "Da Vinci method" when improvising. He was the first painter in history to capture the expression of his subject having a conversation with you, the viewer. I apply this to improv and really strive to have a conversation with the audience and my band mates. Tell em a story and take em for a joyride. It can be a simple story with just 4-5 notes to punctuate the vocal lines BB King style, or a very involved story with full fretboard arpeggios and other pyrotechnics depending on the song, the audience, or the setting.

A few guitarists from my era who tell a great story IMO:
BB King
Peter Green
Slash
David Gilmour
Carlos Santana
Jeff Beck

.... and many others.

Improv all starts with training auto-pilot. We train the hands not the head. That way when we are ready to do something different our fingers can pull it off. Improv is taking the existing structures and synthesizing on the spot by feeling and instinct. AS SOON AS YOUR ARE THINKING ABOUT WHAT YOUR DOING, YOUR SUNK. Thinking is only usefull for figuring out songs , practicing ,etc. You want to test your auto-pilot just sit down and read a book while you are practicing your instrument. You'll find that mind can easily follow the book meaning while the playing is completely separate, or simply play with your eyes closed. You really have to learn all the scales and structures to be able to improvise other wise you are just poking and hoping.

Gotta Love it

Shawn Sun

as to communication....in Burton's autobiography (a very good read BTW) he was saying that he used to focus more on impressing and trying to reach the musicians in his audience, but as time's gone on....he likes the challenge of communicating w non musicians.

let's face it....we all want to appear cool, and hip to other musicians but they don't make up the majority of our audience.

My skill level has not reached a point of 'no mind' while playing.
Being as all our material is original or our rendition of a cover, improvisation is the bulk of what we ( I ) do.
It can be done with a mindset of focusing on formation ( scales ETC )
Though I have to agree the flow is greatly enhanced when one need not consider such things, and just plays by 'feel'.

semantics aside....i don't believe the "no mind" theory or the notion that "if you think you stink".

"AS SOON AS YOU ARE THINKING ABOUT WHAT YOUR DOING, YOUR SUNK."

maybe for some...but that ain't nuthin' that's across the board for everyone.

i do believe it is important not to OVERTHINK and it is important to know your $hit so you don't have to spend too much energy and time finding your way around.

but there's never a time that i'm not using my mind to grok the harmony/scales or considering the last line that i played and what would be a good line that follows up on it.

or i'm using my noodle to toss in a humorous (read: goofy) quote from another song that often will have to be modified in some way to work in the context of whatever the song is. and i HAVE to use my brain for that.

granted all this stuff happens very, VERY fast and you have to have your bidness wired.....but i don't buy into that "turn your mind off and play from the soul" bit. more like USE your mind AND play from the soul. it doesn't have to be one or the other.

I try to take the David Gilmour/Billy Gibbons approach. Melodic as possible, fit the melody line of the song if possible, who cares if I can play 147 notes in 12 seconds, if I can play 23 and make each one count I'm happy. I can play pretty fast, but usually don;t try to. It's great to be able to jump into some fast licks occasionally when appropriate, but 90% of the time I'm going for tasteful and melodic. Make every note count and sometimes just a couple is the best way to go.

The hardest thing to me was to let my head forget about it and let my fingers go where they will. That's when I get my best leads, but it's not easy...don't think, play.

I try to take the David Gilmour/Billy Gibbons approach. Melodic as possible, fit the melody line of the song if possible, who cares if I can play 147 notes in 12 seconds, if I can play 23 and make each one count I'm happy. I can play pretty fast, but usually don;t try to. It's great to be able to jump into some fast licks occasionally when appropriate, but 90% of the time I'm going for tasteful and melodic. Make every note count and sometimes just a couple is the best way to go.

The hardest thing to me was to let my head forget about it and let my fingers go where they will. That's when I get my best leads, but it's not easy...don't think, play.

That's cool Billy... Just like YOU.

Shawn

Good points. We've talked on this forum about reaching a certain 'level' where one is deemed competent. You've described it well.

I will admit however, I was wailing through one of those leads God gives us once in a while, and as I went to resolve it I did have the conscious thought, "Switch to Phrygian!"

It worked - though it sure wasn't a slam dunk.

I reckon knowing a bit of theory (much more than me!) can be useful but nothing trumps muscle memory.

Talbot

Another consummate pro weighs in:

"know the technique and then have a conversation, tell a story."

http://www.examiner.com/article/guitari ... nd-the-gut