Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
I completely resonate with your points here, Per. I think many musicians who are educators, have played jazz professionally, or who are free improv musicians definitely utilize this approach of hearing or imaging notes before they play them. I do the same much of the time, and often when I play traditional jazz and I'm soloing over the changes, I scat along with my guitar lines. It is good practice to keep my melodies "real"...because if I start "blowing" over the changes with 32nd notes, with a lot of chromatic runs and filler, like if you are soloing over Stella by Starlight or Giant Steps as 300 beats per minute, it becomes impossible to scat along with it. The soling loses some of its melodic appeal and moves into the technical, "oh yeah, I can play as fast as John McLaughlin" approach. Though this latter fun has its merits too and is a lot of fun. Also, this is why a lot of jazz educators recommend that when students learn songs that they first be able to hum or sing the head melody. The jazz songs I play best on are the ones that I can play in my mind, and consequently I can play them in any key, or solo while always having that melodic structure cycling through my heads to maintain the grounding. ...all this said, however, I am still a proponent of spontaneous experimentation and improvisation. I don't think being able to imagine the note before playing it is a hard and fast rule, but it is a good one. Kris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Per Boysen" <perboysen@gmail.com> > I have a similar approach to music: I always start the experimentation >in > my mind and take care to learn new things slowly piece by piece, only > building on what I already know as my own vocabulary. I never play a > note (or a Mobius script) that I can't already "hear as sung by me" > (meaning it must have a true expressional value in my imagination, or I > will pass and stay silent or go into a different direction). > > I think this is especially important for young musicians that learn >both > about making music and mastering an instrument at the same time. >Without > suitable guidance it's so easy to fall into the trap where you loose > track of what is your own voice and what is simply pyrotechnics without >a > unique content. > > I really hope that people on this list do not misunderstand my musical > approach because I sometimes have posted detailed descriptions of what >I > do, by technical means. Please note that these descriptions have only > been posted on specific request. What really matters IMO is the music >you > make and I think its' much more satisfying to play music or listen to > others playing other music, compared to describing music in words - as >we > tend to describe the technical tools we all use for bringing over that > wonderful content of Unique Musical Expression ;-) > > Another related thought: Often people ask on this list "how to set up a > looping rig". I think the best way to set up a looping rig is to not > think about technological tools at all. Just think about your music, > yourself and your destination in life. Then figure out how to express > these emotions and attitudes as sound statements and you will find > yourself with a good blueprint copy of the rig you need to assemble. > Going the other way, like buying some unit and say "oh, this box has 64 > outputs - I'm gonna need some huge mixer to do my thing" (ironically >put) > is just something I can't understand. > > Greetings from Sweden > > Per Boysen > www.boysen.se (Swedish) > www.looproom.com (international) > http://tinyurl.com/fauvm (podcast) > http://www.myspace.com/looproom > > > >