Where does guitar improvisation come from?

[rcwilk]

Hi,

This question is partially about theory and practice, but more about history. But it isn't about "It comes from the heart." My question lies in another register:

That is, historically, how did improvisation evolve as something akin to the guitar? Is there something about the guitar as an instrument (physically or culturally) that lends itself to improv?

For my own view at this point (not particularly informed, just opinion) it appears that old blues players in the delta needed to expand the time of any single song, and I get this to some degree. Maybe we can call that the 'expansion' theory and see it as a contribution, but I would like to bracket it out, positing that the time could have been filled with repetitions or gone nordic and filled with long stories. Instead, something else emerged.

Clearly in Chicago blues there is almost a formula that rock picked up, and the solo (improv or fake improve, depending...) became a part of many live performances and many recorded sessions. There even seems to be a valorization of improv and long solos that mark authentic music from pop music (at least in the minds of those into improv) are part of this.

There seems to be some randomness and chance involved as well. Richie Havens was asked to keep going at Woodstock because the other bands weren't set up and ready - and the never ending Freedom, Freedom became a 'thing'.

This all came up for me as I was reading Clapton's autobiography yesterday. He was talking about how they ran out of songs and so they just started jamming and the crowd went wild. Later, upon visiting (don't call it) Frisco during the Fillmore/Psychedelic years, Clapton noticed that the band could improvise and kind of "plug into" the crowd. Perhaps that takes substances were everyone becomes ONE anyway, but it interested me in terms of the feed-back aspect of improvisation, and how that works or doesn't. Everyone in SanFrancisco seemed to be plugged into jamming in those days, improv that would go on and on, and surely there is a florescence of improv during that time.

Now, less so. Is improv and jamming fading? I hear a joke (I hate) that says, Q: how is a rock solo like a premature ejaculatory? A: You know it's coming and there isn't anything you can do about it.
Is this the current attitude? Get the song out under 3 minutes and move on?

Sorry, digressing - I'm not here to bang new music. Though I did notice in Amsterdam last summer that the "Coffee shops" are not playing songs with long extended jams anymore. They are playing non-ending electronic stuff, so I can't quite get my theory about substances and improv to work..ha ha, it's not 3 minute pop songs, so maybe the theory still holds.

I saw an ethnology video once about Kalahari Kung! Bushmen. They dance and dance until they achieve a higher level. I think this has something to do with it, but then so would rave repetitiveness, and that is sort of what I am NOT getting at. Rather I think there is an kind of circulambulation, a kind of poetic interweaving, (impleaching) and interlacing over this repetition that respects it, but traces out themes...

Just a theory, curious about what other guitar lovers think and do,

RC

[marnold]

Excellent question. I'm not sure if I've got an answer either, if for no other reason because I've never really studied it. I've been around enough people with innate musical ability that they can pretty much just play without really understanding how (or understanding why us normal folks can't understand it). You can certainly learn to do it, but some people just can.

[Robert]

My answer is, we get bored playing chords so we want stretch out a bit and improvise solo lines. Like the cool dudes with horn and piano and reed instruments did some 100+ years ago.

[R_of_G]

That is, historically, how did improvisation evolve as something akin to the guitar? Is there something about the guitar as an instrument (physically or culturally) that lends itself to improv?

I'd contend that improvisation didn't evolve as something akin to the guitar. It existed long prior to the guitar. Guitarists certainly helped expand the techniques/traditions etc. but I don't think guitar improv exists outside the tradition of other improvised music.

Also, not to be the guy that debates everything you said, but I also disagree as to whether improvised music/jamming is occurring less frequently today than the 60s. In "popular music" for sure, but it's difficult to suggest that term meant the same thing in 1968 that it does now. The entire distribution model is different. Getting songs on the handful of radio markets in each town is no longer the trajectory to popularity.

I'd actually contend there are more band and artists with some kind of improvisation/jamming component than there were in the 60s. My music collection sure seems to reflect that anyway.

[Eric]

Yup, I agree with Robert and R_of_G. I think improvisation has been going on for years. Guitar is just another handy medium for throwing out ideas and improvising, and perhaps the whole rock and roll culture embraces the idea of improvisation in certain contexts (big concerts, etc.).

[rcwilk]

Some very good thoughts and points here. Let's focus in a bit. I want to tighten up my question to say something more like

How is guitar improv different from improv on other instruments? (and more technically) are there some forms of guitar music that lend themselves to improvisation more than others?

RC

[Eric]

Some very good thoughts and points here. Let's focus in a bit. I want to tighten up my question to say something more like

How is guitar improv different from improv on other instruments? (and more technically) are there some forms of guitar music that lend themselves to improvisation more than others?
Ah, well that's less focusing and more of a different question. I think the intervals and layout of an instrument just kind of lead to natural things you do in improvisation like double-stops, bends, etc. Pitch bending is probably one of the biggest things that guitars excel at, and that tends to be a good way to emote on an instrument.

As far as forms of music, I'd say the simpler music like blues are easier to improvise over, but I don't know that simplicity necessarily defines a style as more improvisation-friendly.

[rcwilk]

... I think the intervals and layout of an instrument just kind of lead to natural things you do in improvisation like double-stops, bends, etc. Pitch bending is probably one of the biggest things that guitars excel at, and that tends to be a good way to emote on an instrument.

Someone on Guitar Forums mentioned something similar, the direct contact the guitar playing has with the stings. Good points.

[R_of_G]

How is guitar improv different from improv on other instruments?

I'd suggest the differences are some mixture of the sonic differences of the instrument itself and the creative and technical prowess of the individual musician.

Several guitarists I enjoy cite saxophonists above/alongside other guitarists as their primary influences, and between developing certain techniques and mastering effects technology or the use of feedback, they've managed to successfully create some rather horn-like sounds.

Of course it goes both ways. Miles Davis made much use of the auto-wah with his 70s bands which opened up a sonic palette not available to him playing solely acoustic trumpet.



(and more technically) are there some forms of guitar music that lend themselves to improvisation more than others?

Given a musician open to improvisation, I'd say any music that isn't entirely through-composed can lend itself to improvisation. Simpler styles like blues and drone rock are great places for the novice improviser to start, but I agree with Eric, simplicity in and of itself doesn't make a style more improv-friendly.

For example, blues lends itself to improv for beginners not only for the simplicity, but because whether or not one actively listens to the blues, it's structure is so ingrained in American popular music that we're all pretty familiar with much of the common sonic language before we ever even learn how to do it on a guitar.

[rcwilk]

How do you think modeling guitars (like the variax from line6) that can imitate other instruments impact guitar players? Will guitar players that sound like sax start emerging as stars, or will the guitar sound be subsumed under keyboards or ?

[piebaldpython]

Improv can be simple-based (Blues) or complex-based (Jazz)......and it started well before the git was thought of as a solo instrument. Just look at the fundamental design of string, brass and woodwinds.....if they can't play chords, then you can only play single-string (haha) runs.

Git players can be influenced by other instruments, Duane and SRV for example, listened to the blues harp masters......or they can influence other instruments.

Lastly, improv probably came about because someone was jamming while plastered and couldn't remember the next part of a tune and had to make-it-up on the spot. Tongue firmly in cheek here.

The Variac gits essentially turn the guitar into a keyboard with strings. That's not a knock, just what it is. What I like is when an instrument plays "runs" or "phrasing" more commonly associated with other instruments (see paragraph above).

[rcwilk]

I know in the Big Band era, it was the song and the instrumental that was for-fronted, and the voice only came in occasionally. But I don't really know if they were improvising. Out of that era, some singers emerged (Sinatra) that could stand alone without the band - but did they improvise much, or was that all just pop?

[Zip]

Where does guitar improvisation come from?
From the same place as any other instrument (or vocal) improv comes from - the desire to try out new ideas, often inspired by the other musicians you're playing with, whether studio or stage. Oftentimes sheer playfulness (Joe Walsh, with a gleam in his eye: "Oh, yeah? Well listen to this!"). My experience, it's almost always for the benefit of the players rather than the listeners.

As to Variac players emerging as stars, years ago (lots of them) I got to see Les McCann and Eddie Harris at a club in Michigan. The guitar player was Matt "Guitar" Murphy. He was playing a Vox Guitorgan. Some crazy sounds, for sure. During 'Compared To What?' he did a solo that was some of the best keyboard playing I ever heard. Without a keyboard. All these years later, I bet you don't know a single person who owns a Guitorgan, or has ever seen one in person. Just sayin'.

[rcwilk]

Ok, I seemed to have expressed the question too generally. What interests me is not so much where improvisation itself comes from (well, that does interest me, but later on that), but how improvisation emerged within the guitar culture. Maybe Charlie Patton wanted to stretch out his songs so people could dance in the juke joints. Muddy Waters got some mojo going on his guitar in Chicago that was different from Hooker in Detroit boogie blues. While curious about the individual styles, I'm here more interested in how you (all) guitar players see how your instruments lend themselves to improvisation (or not).

I've noticed, for example, that on Gibson 335's the fret board is very narrow at the bottom, but there seems to be plenty of room around the 8-10th fret and higher between the strings, which leads to bending without getting tangled and hence to shifting the improv (with bends) to higher frets. Some say that Strats are better for improv because they have wider fretboards, traditionally.

RC

[piebaldpython]

Hey "rcwilk".....just curiosity on my part....but...uh.....I'm getting the "feeling" that we're part of a scholastic project here.......not that I mind.......but is that where this is ultimately going? Do you even play guitar?

As to fretboards, etc.......the width of the frets is a direct relation to the scale of the guitar. It's a mathematical equation and conceivably one could have ANY scale length they wanted if they knew how to divide the frets.

Fenders typically have a scale length of 25.5"; Gibson LPs come in at 24.75".

When you get to lap steel guitars, their regular scale lengths can go from 22.5" up to 26".

I have no idea why fretboards widths vary like they do except to say it must be for economy of playing. DUNNO. Classical are the widest, acoustics are next and electrics are the narrowest. Hmmmmmmm....maybe it has to do with the distance between the strings for easy of picking??

[rcwilk]

Hey "rcwilk".....just curiosity on my part....but...uh.....I'm getting the "feeling" that we're part of a scholastic project here.......not that I mind.......but is that where this is ultimately going? Do you even play guitar?

ha ha - guitar hobbyist, I would classify myself. I did just sign up for the class from coursera.org on the history of rock and roll, and it did made me consider doing a project, though I usually just 'audit' those classes. But now your question has opened up the "RC" way of doing things, ha ha. Several threads have led to this question about improvisation, some of which I expressed abstractly, but here more personally : I am learning the studio version of Red House/Hendrix, and (gack) at the same time learning Clapton's lead on Crossroad. My general trend these last few years (as a hobbyist) has been learning about the blues, historically and on guitar and I do love the way the blues lends itself to guitar improvisation and leads. Recently I picked up the Clapton autobiography while waiting for the dentist and then had to finish it, scouring it for how he sees his own improvisation and which guitars he does want on. I've been reading the hendrix/clapton comparisons online, and there is some info of importance (for me) there, but I thought some discussion groups with guitar folk would have much more to say, and you sure have!

Ultimately going. Hey I thought we were improvising! ha ha. Well, I do want to broaden my view on guitar improv, and eventually break away from just learning other people's leads. But every time I just space out and go into guitar heaven, though lots of fun, I don't really come out with much on the other end except maybe being a looser player and counting it as a good time. I'm ok with that, but I just don't seem to have my short term memory connected during improvisation, and I think for me it is a fundamental key to being in that mode. Maybe not for others - some here seem to do improv just the opposite - in a realm of clear structure and knowing. Learning other people's styles seems to really feed my having fun when just jamin' , so I guess I do get "better." though when I record and listen back, I don't think so.

On another level, I think improvisation has kind of been a life-long value that best expresses one of the characters in the circus of play and joy, grace and transcendence. I best not go on and on about that here, but if interested, I think the French post-structuralists have the most to say about escaping from territorializing regimes and entering into the creative improverse, and have written more here http://dreamgate.com/pomo



As to fretboards, etc.......the width of the frets is a direct relation to the scale of the guitar. It's a mathematical equation and conceivably one could have ANY scale length they wanted if they knew how to divide the frets.

Fenders typically have a scale length of 25.5"; Gibson LPs come in at 24.75".

When you get to lap steel guitars, their regular scale lengths can go from 22.5" up to 26".

I have no idea why fretboards widths vary like they do except to say it must be for economy of playing. DUNNO. Classical are the widest, acoustics are next and electrics are the narrowest. Hmmmmmmm....maybe it has to do with the distance between the strings for easy of picking??

I have one guitar friend who won't play on my acoustic D35Martin, but keeps begging to get my dy61Alvarez. I think it is partially because he is used to playing electric and likes the narrower width of the Alvarez. It took me sometime to adjust, but now I think the Martin is easier to pick and play leads as my fingers don't get as pinched in the smaller Alvarez strings.

Electric wise, I don't have a strat or tele, but he keeps recommending them, saying as you have said, they have a wider fretboard. And again, I've noticed people with narrow ES 335 Gibson's migrating to solid bodies if they do a lot of lead work.

RC

[Robert]

To become a better improviser, here is my recipe. These are not in order - practice all of them continually.

1) Learn the instrument - learn where the notes are on the fretboard.

2) Learn which scales and "tools" you can use over different types chords.

3) Listen and listen and listen to good players. Listen actively, and try and sing along/hum along to melodies and solos.

4) Tap your foot, and learn how to use a metronome/drum machine when practicing.

5) Transcribe. Copy and steal little things here and there, and make them part of your own playing. Connect this to 1) and 2).

6) Take lessons from a GOOD teacher, once in a while. Weekly lessons are not needed if you are a driven person. Once every month or every two months is enough.

See also http://www.dolphinstreet.com/become_a_good_guitar_player/

[rcwilk]

To become a better improviser, here is my recipe. These are not in order - practice all of them continually.
1) Learn the instrument - learn where the notes are on the fretboard.


So how deeply do you suggest one learns the notes? I mean it is one thing to stop and say, hmm, that is a F# in this key. It's quite another to play the note as you are reading it off a piece of sheet music.

RC

[R_of_G]

5) Transcribe. Copy and steal little things here and there, and make them part of your own playing. Connect this to 1) and 2).


This is a tremendously valuable skill to develop.

Aside from the obvious benefit of being able to replicate what you hear, perhaps my favorite by-product of my attempts at transcription is that it's often a trial-and-error endeavor and many times those "errors" have led me to little riffs or licks of my own.

Ok, s maybe I didn't figure out that one chromatic run in the 22nd chorus of a Coltrane solo, but I found a neat little lick to use. Know what I mean?

[R_of_G]

I don't really come out with much on the other end except maybe being a looser player and counting it as a good time.

Seems to me this is the whole point of playing. Think about it less and enjoy it more.

[Robert]

Ahh learning the notes. Good question now that I think about it more! I'll get back to you later when I have more time. I'll share with you how I teach this topic. It's of fundamental importance.

[Spudman]

When I think of soloing/improvising I think of having a conversation. You need to know basic sentence structure to communicate, which I liken to the chords or form of the song. The notes, or scalar parts, are like words. You get to choose what order to put them in to convey what you want to say. Move a note/word and it changes the message. When you know the language you can then handle any conversation/improv session.

Want to learn a new language, a different way of expressing yourself? Refer to Robert's list. Number 3 is listen, listen, listen. Then start incorporating those words, or phrases, into your own new language sentences.

That, and finger dancing, is how I view improvisation.

[rcwilk]

When I think of soloing/improvising I think of having a conversation.

So if improv is like having a conversation, are different instruments like different languages for you?

RC

[piebaldpython]

The absolutely, positively most important skill to develop from DAY 1 is the ability to keep the beat and to count. If you can't keep the beat, it doesn't matter how great your riffs are because it'll all sound lousy because it's not in time. But.....if you can keep the beat, even if your git-playing skills are so-so, you'll sound GOOD because you're playing in time.

[Spudman]

So if improv is like having a conversation, are different instruments like different languages for you?

RC

Nope. Different instruments are more like different people or individuals. While French horns may speak French, glockenspiels may speak German, electric guitars may speak British, drums may speak Swahili, bass may speak Norse, but like people, those instruments can also speak other languages.

Just as we don't always practice what we are going to say in the next moment, improvising on an instrument is like having a conversation to me. I don't know what I'm going to say until the situation requires it.

[rcwilk]

Just as we don't always practice what we are going to say in the next moment, improvising on an instrument is like having a conversation to me. I don't know what I'm going to say until the situation requires it.

Nice analogy. I wonder though about the conversation metaphor which implies a dialogue between two or more that are using shared representations. Do you sometimes find your improvisation(al) conversations go beyond what can be represented?

[Spudman]

Nice analogy. Do you sometimes find your improvisation(al) conversations go beyond what can be represented?

The conversation is with the music. Not with another assumed person. The backing music is saying one thing and I then add my voice to the dialogue.

I don't know how anyone can go beyond what is represented. When improvising, it is what it is.

[R_of_G]

The absolutely, positively most important skill to develop from DAY 1 is the ability to keep the beat and to count. If you can't keep the beat, it doesn't matter how great your riffs are because it'll all sound lousy because it's not in time. But.....if you can keep the beat, even if your git-playing skills are so-so, you'll sound GOOD because you're playing in time.

This is true only if the nature of the jam calls for everyone to play in the same (or complementary) time signatures. Plenty of musical situations allow more freedom in the rhythm/timing.

[piebaldpython]

This is true only if the nature of the jam calls for everyone to play in the same (or complementary) time signatures. Plenty of musical situations allow more freedom in the rhythm/timing.

I think that even if you're just doing some solo "front porch playing", timing is still important so that whatever it is that you're playing is somewhat recognizable, wouldn't you think? Unless of course, one is doing some avant-garde version of Happy Birthday. :D

[rcwilk]

Delta blues players may offer a good example of timing in playing. They treated their instruments in a more percussive way than contemporary guitar players. Still, the timing would speed up, slow down and jump erratically.

One Delta blues guitar player, upon migrating north to Chicago and being pulled to record in the studio, said that the piano players were always yelling at him, because he was playing in a variety of keys and tunings and time signatures, speeding up, slowing down and picking notes outside their range and knowledge set. I forgot who this was, sorry, but he said this interaction between delta guitar and northern piano shuffled the rural blues guitar into northern structured formats which is now rarely questioned. Lighnin Hopkins? Not sure who it was.

RC

[R_of_G]

I think that even if you're just doing some solo "front porch playing", timing is still important so that whatever it is that you're playing is somewhat recognizable, wouldn't you think?

Yes, timing is important in phrasing even when playing solo, but that's not entirely the same as playing in time. Does that make sense?

Perhaps it's listening endlessly to solo arrangements by guys like Ribot and Frisell that excel in deconstructing a song to (and often far past) it's recognizable parts. The timing in their phrasing is often intentionally out the window, but if the melody is persistent enough, it still sits at the heart of everything.

In my initial answer I was thinking more in terms of Albert Alyer type of group improvisation where playing in time with everyone else isn't necessarily the goal. Of course that could lead us to a far wider discussion of different types of improvisational approaches, and the differences between improv and jamming, and so on. A discussion I'd be thrilled to have but is tangential to RC's original question so I'll avoid forcing us in that direction.

[R_of_G]

Delta blues players may offer a good example of timing in playing. They treated their instruments in a more percussive way than contemporary guitar players.

I'm going to make you define "contemporary" before I accept that as a statement of fact.

There are dozens of funk, punk and jazz guitarist I can name off the top of my head that embrace the percussive aspects of their instrument. An army of Jimmy Nolen devotees are scratching their heads right now. :poke

[rcwilk]

Of course that could lead us to a far wider discussion of different types of improvisational approaches, and the differences between improv and jamming, and so on. A discussion I'd be thrilled to have but is tangential to RC's original question so I'll avoid forcing us in that direction.

Maybe twist this question to ask, do some instruments lend themselves to jamming vs improvisation? Or is there something about the guitar that lends itself to one over the other?

This may turn out the same answers - some feel the player is the total influence on this, others see qualities in instruments that lend themselves to these forms of expression.

[rcwilk]

>>I'm going to make you define "contemporary" before I accept that as a statement of fact.

Ha ha, yes, there are many people playing these days that have percussive techniques in their guitar playing, but I don't find that a big part of playing currently. As someone said, it doesn't do much to hit a solid body electric, and though Spanish guitar has it's own percussive techniques, they don't seem essential to me. Country, Reggae, heavy metal - they may have some percussive moves, but I don't see it.
I'm not sure smashing a guitar counts as percussive, nor just banging the guitar around because you are only dimly away of its presence due to substance abuse.

RC

[Robert]

The easier the instrument is to play, the easier it is to improvise.

We don't find too many improvisers of this instrument: (not that I know of anyway :tongue: )

http://www.thurau-harps.com/images/harpimages/Loeffler-Harfe-Frontseite.jpg

Or this one (bassoon)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bzqwTvI4nYk/TbD9F0RrToI/AAAAAAAAADI/9FJKL_VXE8Y/s1600/bassoon.jpg.png

[rcwilk]

The easier the instrument is to play, the easier it is to improvise.


So when there are times historically when the same instrument is being used less or more for improvisation, how does that fit in?

[R_of_G]

Maybe twist this question to ask, do some instruments lend themselves to jamming vs improvisation? Or is there something about the guitar that lends itself to one over the other?


Seems that is the question we've been getting at all along, no?

I suspect the answer is still going to come back trending towards "it's more to do with the player(s) and the situation" than towards any specific instrument.



Ha ha, yes, there are many people playing these days that have percussive techniques in their guitar playing, but I don't find that a big part of playing currently. As someone said, it doesn't do much to hit a solid body electric, and though Spanish guitar has it's own percussive techniques, they don't seem essential to me. Country, Reggae, heavy metal - they may have some percussive moves, but I don't see it.
I'm not sure smashing a guitar counts as percussive, nor just banging the guitar around because you are only dimly away of its presence due to substance abuse.

I think the key here is where you say "but I don't find that a big part of playing currently."

You're making a lot of declarative statements about the totality of "current music" which seem solely based on your anecdotal experience with it and not to seem harsh about it, but what you (or any one person for that matter) doesn't know about "current music" could just about fill the Grand Canyon.

I pride myself in listening to a ridiculously wide range of new music and yet I still know that the percentage of what I don't know about is far greater than what I do, and moreover that it always will be that way.


...Reggae... may have some percussive moves, but I don't see it.

Hearing test time?

If not for the distinct percussive rhythm strumming would it even be reggae?


The easier the instrument is to play, the easier it is to improvise.

Gonna have to disagree on that one, or at least suggest the sitar is the exception to that theory. There is nothing remotely easy to play about the sitar and yet it's lent itself to highly improvisational play dating back several thousand years.

[rcwilk]

I think the key here is where you say "but I don't find that a big part of playing currently."


No debate there. As I may have mentioned, I'm taking an online class in RockNroLL history and finding each lesson vast areas that I don't know and never knew about. I was shocked to find out BlueGrass is not an old rootsy form of music, but pretty much invented recently mid last century.
Certainly the Blue Men fad was percussive (guys in blue with tubes and other instrumental environmental drums), and there must be many more.

But I would suggest something (pseudo) scientific - we could start with forms of forums such as "all radio stations" and ask the question, do you hear a use of percussion on the guitar?

Ok, radio stations may be low output and have fewer ears than, say Youtube. So say we sample Youtube for music with guitars. How many are using guitar in a percussive way (that is essential to the music)?

I guess if you are including rhythm as percussion, which is surely a fair thing to do, then ~all~ guitar is fully percussive. But really I was getting at something else, that I see now I need to ponder how to express, as it isn't getting across very clearly.

- RC

[R_of_G]

I was shocked to find out BlueGrass is not an old rootsy form of music, but pretty much invented recently mid last century.

Prepare to be shocked again? That's inaccurate.

The term "bluegrass" to describe the style of music originated in the middle of the last century (likely due to the association with the great Bill Monroe). The music itself is a derivative of "old time" music and is most assuredly a very old form of American roots music.

Also, I don't mean to blow off the rest of your answer as you're clearly putting thought into this discussion. I'm just hung up on the idea of a course in "Rock n Roll" getting a piece of American roots music history so fundamentally wrong. I shudder to think what (if anything) the course says about New Orleans jazz.

All of which is to say I will process the rest of what you asked and try to answer that as well. I have to say, I do enjoy this thread. My two favorite discussions here this week have been about improv and Miles' 70s electric bands. The venn diagram on that one has a HUGE crossover section. :)

[Robert]

I am not sure what the topic is any more... ;)

But I believe that the harder the instrument is to play, the harder it is to master, which leads to it becoming harder to improvise on. It's easy to make up a melody on the fly with your voice. That's improvising. Try doing that on the bassoon.

Some instrument like the guitar has been around a long time. Way back, it was not used for improvising so much. I think that's because improvisation wasn't something musicians strived for. Mozart and Bach weren't known for their long jam sessions! Before the 1900s, wasn't music mostly composed all the way? Compared to the world of blues & jazz that later came.

[R_of_G]

I am not sure what the topic is any more...

The topic has become as amorphous as good improv music. :poke

Some of you that know my strongest influences by now had to expect I'd have perhaps far too much fun with this thread.

Turn an Albert Ayler obsessive loose in a thread about improv and watch the tangents fly.

Of course, if it doesn't all come back around again in the end, I'd do that particular hero of mine an injustice. :)



Before the 1900s, wasn't music mostly composed all the way? Compared to the world of blues & jazz that later came.

Western classical music perhaps. Indian classical music (at least the Hindustani strain) is not through-composed and features a reliance on both structure and improvisation.

That's what I was getting at earlier when I suggested the sitar may be the exception to your "simpler instrument leads to more improv" theory. Like I said, few people would claim it's easy to play a sitar, yet improvisation has been a key element of its play further back than Western classical music or the countries in which it originated.

Also, there are thousands more traditional African styles I don't know than ones I do, but the ones I am familiar with also place some emphasis on improvisation. Unless I'm mistaken, this is where "call and response" originates, a technique still prevalent among improvisers on all instruments, and the most tangible example of Spud's "improv is a conversation" line of thinking (which, by the way, I agree with entirely).

How this entered into American music takes us right to the Delta and New Orleans. The rest you should know. :)

[Tig]

Seems to me this is the whole point of playing. Think about it less and enjoy it more.

In the tech world we refer to an old saying, "Paralysis through analysis."

I've not posted anything because my answer to the question(s) is, "Just play. The rest will sort itself out." I know, that's not helpful. I prefer to keep it simple and play the groove, similar to soul surfing.

This is just my philosophy, not bashing the thread. There have been several wonderful analogies, viewpoints, and useful ideas presented that I won't diminish for a second.

[NWBasser]

When I think of soloing/improvising I think of having a conversation. You need to know basic sentence structure to communicate, which I liken to the chords or form of the song. The notes, or scalar parts, are like words. You get to choose what order to put them in to convey what you want to say. Move a note/word and it changes the message. When you know the language you can then handle any conversation/improv session.

Want to learn a new language, a different way of expressing yourself? Refer to Robert's list. Number 3 is listen, listen, listen. Then start incorporating those words, or phrases, into your own new language sentences.

That, and finger dancing, is how I view improvisation.

This is exacty how I see things too.

I try to "converse" in my playing to whatever extent the music allow me to.

[rcwilk]

I am not sure what the topic is any more... ;)

But I believe that the harder the instrument is to play, the harder it is to master, which leads to it becoming harder to improvise on. It's easy to make up a melody on the fly with your voice. That's improvising. Try doing that on the bassoon.

Some instrument like the guitar has been around a long time. Way back, it was not used for improvising so much. I think that's because improvisation wasn't something musicians strived for. Mozart and Bach weren't known for their long jam sessions! Before the 1900s, wasn't music mostly composed all the way? Compared to the world of blues & jazz that later came.

I heard a story about Chopin, (and my stories don't seem to be very accurate, so, grain of salt) that he would improv away, and then every once in awhile stop and try to write those notes down, typically frustrating himself to pieces.

Beethoven, I heard was challenged once during a party to a contest, and he kept putting the guy off, and putting the guy off, but he was persistent to compete. The challenger played his masterpiece, but Beethoven kept talking with his friends, though he sat down and with one hand did variations on the challengers masterpiece without breaking his conversation, and winning the contest.

[rcwilk]

In the tech world we refer to an old saying, "Paralysis through analysis."

I've not posted anything because my answer to the question(s) is, "Just play. The rest will sort itself out." I know, that's not helpful. I prefer to keep it simple and play the groove, similar to soul surfing.

This is just my philosophy, not bashing the thread. There have been several wonderful analogies, viewpoints, and useful ideas presented that I won't diminish for a second.

Ha ha, yes MLK used to say that about the Kennedy administration, Analysis is Paralysis. But for fun, I counter with Neitzsche's quote, "there are no data, only interpretations" which indicates that all acts are acts of analysis.

Probably a better Neitzsche quote, though thinly relevant " Life without music would be a mistake"

[rcwilk]

Prepare to be shocked again? That's inaccurate.

The term "bluegrass" to describe the style of music originated in the middle of the last century (likely due to the association with the great Bill Monroe). The music itself is a derivative of "old time" music and is most assuredly a very old form of American roots music.

Also, I don't mean to blow off the rest of your answer as you're clearly putting thought into this discussion. I'm just hung up on the idea of a course in "Rock n Roll" getting a piece of American roots music history so fundamentally wrong. I shudder to think what (if anything) the course says about New Orleans jazz.


I can't say the teacher totally convinced me, and maybe why I unconsciously posted that as an example, hoping some other views would emerge. He did identify Bill Monroe as the culprit, and then the split off folks in Bill's group the Blue Grass Boys, Earl Scruggs and oh now I'm gonna flunk the test -- someone Flatt? Ahh, thank goodness for Wiki, Lester Flatt. But surely Monroe can't be the only bottleneck in that musical trend? Some research probably needed here.

What is "Miles' 70s electric bands" sounds interesting. Like Miles Davis?

[Bookkeeper's Son]

I don't know about origins, history, theory, etc., but I do know one thing - a LOT of guitar "improvisation" is mostly comprised of popular, common and highly recycled licks.

[R_of_G]

I can't say the teacher totally convinced me...

By far the best answer. But hey, now you looked some of it up and know more than you did before so it was all a worthwhile endeavor.


What is "Miles' 70s electric bands" sounds interesting. Like Miles Davis?

Yup, Miles Davis. Tig and I had been discussing some of his 70s electric funk-rock bands in the Now Playing thread. Interviews with his players of the period (John McLaughlin, Pete Cosey, Chick Corea, Dave Holland, Herbie Hancock, Keith Jarrett, et al) provide an endless amount of discussion on the nature of improvisation.



I've not posted anything because my answer to the question(s) is, "Just play. The rest will sort itself out." I know, that's not helpful.

On the contrary, I think it's quite helpful as it simplifies the answer to something a player of any skill level can comprehend.

When my neighbor (the bass player) and I would first play together or even hang out and talk music, he often asked some form of the question "what am I supposed to play if the band is playing _________?"

My answer never changed and it never will. There's no such thing as "supposed to." If it's not right, you'll hear it.

Of course, rather than just leaving it a Zen riddle for the guy, I've tried to expose him to some bass players and styles he didn't know before. It's helping him see that there can be an infinite number of approaches to "what do I play when they play _______?"

[R_of_G]

I don't know about origins, history, theory, etc., but I do know one thing - a LOT of guitar "improvisation" is mostly comprised of popular, common and highly recycled licks.

Perhaps therein lies the difference between improv and jamming/soloing?

[rcwilk]

I don't know about origins, history, theory, etc., but I do know one thing - a LOT of guitar "improvisation" is mostly comprised of popular, common and highly recycled licks.

Hey that might make a fun song based on Wonderful World

Don't know much about im-prov-i-sation
Playin chords or song im-i-tation ...
Don't know much about tabs and notes,
Don't know much about songs Dylan wrote.

But what I do know is I love to play
This old guitar and the songs it say
Nothing to fret about now all day.

[sunvalleylaw]

To me it is all about the guitar singing. I look back to Louis Armstrong and his horn playing interspersed with his scat singing. The horn and voice emulated each other. And it is an early example of "soloing" by an instrumentalist. Sometimes the scat and playing was more staccato and other times, like "wonderful world", more conventionally phrased.

So I like to emulate the horn players and have my guitar take the place of the voice in the song. And I like to consider the call and response, question and answer aspects as well.

Of course my improvisation is much more conventional than the stuff R_of_G is talking about. But I do think a lot of improv comes from those early jazz roots.

[rcwilk]

Of course my improvisation is much more conventional than the stuff R_of_G is talking about. But I do think a lot of improv comes from those early jazz roots.

Thanks. This makes me wonder, has someone classified different styles of improvisation on the guitar? ie are there 'schools' of improvisation that break down into various trends and techniques? Or has the game always been one of personal expression and individual exploration?

[sunvalleylaw]

I would say from the player's perspective, the latter. I would think some scholar or pundit somewhere may have classified things, but would think that most players find their inspirations and then express themselves individually.

I am not aware of a scholar or author who has done such a classification but I am willing to bet there is such a book or article somewhere. But again, I doubt it would be written by a very significant artist. Just my guess.