Learning jazz

[elfro89]

Ugh, modes.  Those suckers have been a thorn in my side for a while now.  The internet does not seem to really understand what they are since all of my research pulls up different answers on what they are and how they work.

It's best to think of modes as peticular sounds and moods, what they make you think of is entirely down to your own opinion. Some say phrygian sounds spanish or what have you, it's entirely down to your own interpretation.

Theory wise the way they work is very simple, The major scale itself is a mode, called Ionian, (why is it called Ionian? Who cares.) this scale has 7 notes, what mode you play depends on which one of these notes you decided to make your root note (also known as Home note) So that means there are 7 possible notes your can make your Home note, meaning there are 7 possible modes in the Major scale.

in order they are called
Ionian
Dorian
Phrygian
Lydian
Mixolydian
Aeolian
Locrian

So for example we are in the key of C major which can also be interpreted as C Ionian since C would be our home note. The next note in C Major is D which if we made our home note would become Dorian, and if we made the next note home which would be E then it would be E Phrygian. There are more ways to acheiving a modal sound but you need to understand chords and how they work before you tackle modal chord changes and all that other crap, otherwise you will have to learn 2 different concepts at once, which can be done but is much harder to grasp.

 

[elfro89]

and about breaking rules, yes the more we know the rules the more we can work within them, not break them, Look at blues and the use of Dominant 7ths in the 1, 4, and 5 chords, It seems that that breaks the rules of the diatonic harmonized scale we use as a base for music, but within the basis of the blues which is formed by playing a minor pentatonic over a major progression, and look at the tones set up by that, you will that the tones in those are diatonic to the basis of the blues and if we were to use the chords set up by the Harmonized scale we would be actually breaking the rules set up by the Blues itself. Now if we are to think that that a bunch of guys at the turn of the 20th century figured that out and wrote a thesis about it we would be wrong,but what they did was use modern instruments and use them over ethnic groves and figured out a basis that was harmonized to itself.

so...your basically saying breaking the rules is the wrong expression and I should call replace the phrase with" working with the rules?" I hate to be confrontational but your point escapes me...  :icon_scratch:

 

[AutoBat]

ugh, did this just become a music theory thread?

 

[Jusatele]

and about breaking rules, yes the more we know the rules the more we can work within them, not break them, Look at blues and the use of Dominant 7ths in the 1, 4, and 5 chords, It seems that that breaks the rules of the diatonic harmonized scale we use as a base for music, but within the basis of the blues which is formed by playing a minor pentatonic over a major progression, and look at the tones set up by that, you will that the tones in those are diatonic to the basis of the blues and if we were to use the chords set up by the Harmonized scale we would be actually breaking the rules set up by the Blues itself. Now if we are to think that that a bunch of guys at the turn of the 20th century figured that out and wrote a thesis about it we would be wrong,but what they did was use modern instruments and use them over ethnic groves and figured out a basis that was harmonized to itself.

so...your basically saying breaking the rules is the wrong expression and I should call replace the phrase with" working with the rules?" I hate to be confrontational but your point escapes me...  :icon_scratch:

  yes    ok
lets get back to the blues example, if we were to look at the blues we see it is based in  a Major progression, 1, 4, 5 major triads
if we use the diatonic diatonic chords we will use the 1M7th, 4M7th. and 5dom 7th, but we do not, we use 1dom7th, 4dom7th, and 5 dom7th, which breaks all the rules of the the major harmonized scale, however with out playing a scale yet we have a cool sound, but we now have to figure out a scale we can use and not have musical dissension  to write our melody lines with. Looking around we see we can use a 5 tone scale (pentatonic minor) in this context and arrive with use of our diatonic rules. Having combined the tones of the 3 dom7ths with the tones of the pentatonic minor we arrive with a form of music that allows us to keep with the rules of music having worked them within the base of the music. We broke no rules, we used the rules basic foundations within the new form. If we had broken the rules we would have sounded like we knew not how to play, but by using the rules and working them within the genre we created a form of music that has been strong for over a century.

 

[Jusatele]

Ugh, modes.  Those suckers have been a thorn in my side for a while now.  The internet does not seem to really understand what they are since all of my research pulls up different answers on what they are and how they work.

It's best to think of modes as peticular sounds and moods, what they make you think of is entirely down to your own opinion. Some say phrygian sounds spanish or what have you, it's entirely down to your own interpretation.

Theory wise the way they work is very simple, The major scale itself is a mode, called Ionian, (why is it called Ionian? Who cares.) this scale has 7 notes, what mode you play depends on which one of these notes you decided to make your root note (also known as Home note) So that means there are 7 possible notes your can make your Home note, meaning there are 7 possible modes in the Major scale.

in order they are called
Ionian
Dorian
Phrygian
Lydian
Mixolydian
Aeolian
Locrian

So for example we are in the key of C major which can also be interpreted as C Ionian since C would be our home note. The next note in C Major is D which if we made our home note would become Dorian, and if we made the next note home which would be E then it would be E Phrygian. There are more ways to acheiving a modal sound but you need to understand chords and how they work before you tackle modal chord changes and all that other crap, otherwise you will have to learn 2 different concepts at once, which can be done but is much harder to grasp.

lets look at modes a bit different and tie it all together
first, yes modes sound different, but lets use that as a secondary issue
now instead of looking at the modes a you discribed, lets look at it like 1 ionian, 2 dorian, 3 phrigian 4 lydian, etc, so that if we are in what ever key we now know that we play the Lociran over the 7th chord of the diatonic major progression.   Follow?
so now in any key all we need to know is what chord of the progression we are in to know what mode is the super arpeggio to play over it.
now we no longer have to memorize 7 different complex fingerings,but one major scale,and start it and end it on the chord tone we are using, opps Ijust told you how to throw out the most complicated thing and make it dirt simple, but that is what the power of knowing music theory does.  I do not sit around trying to learn complicated boxed forms that capture me to the fingerings I want to use here or there, I simply use the major scale, If I want to play in C and need to use the Mixolodian mode (5th chord) I grab a G anywhere on the fingerboard, play the g,a,b,and guess what, I am back at the beginning of the scale so I am just playing a major scale, just stating on the G. I still play C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C, I just started on G, I can do that anywhere I want, not just in some movable box form someone locked me into. I just broke out of the cage.

 

[Danuda]

I kind of follow you.  What I don't completely understand is why Locrian is what you play over the 7th.  If you were in the key of C couldn't you just play it in Ionian (C being the root) and play that same Ionian scale over the 7th?  I thought that that would keep the whole thing in an Ionian feel.  If you switched what mode you played over every chord in a progression wouldn't it sound disjounted?  Here is what I mean.
Say you were play this chord progression.
C F G or the I IV V  If you wanted an ionian sound wouldnt you just play the major scale with the center over C?  If you wanted a Dorian sound then it would be D right?
I am confused as to what playing the Ionian (CDEFGABC) on C, the Lydian (FGABCDEF) on F and the Mixolydian on the G (GABCDEFG) would do.

 

[hannaugh]

I think things are a little different in jazz, yeah?  Like, in jazz it's more common to use certain modes in certain situations.  It's not really a "rule", it's more like a stylistic characteristic of jazz.  I might be totally wrong because I only learned core theory with a little jazz at the end, but I think I remember reading that. 

 

[elfro89]

and about breaking rules, yes the more we know the rules the more we can work within them, not break them, Look at blues and the use of Dominant 7ths in the 1, 4, and 5 chords, It seems that that breaks the rules of the diatonic harmonized scale we use as a base for music, but within the basis of the blues which is formed by playing a minor pentatonic over a major progression, and look at the tones set up by that, you will that the tones in those are diatonic to the basis of the blues and if we were to use the chords set up by the Harmonized scale we would be actually breaking the rules set up by the Blues itself. Now if we are to think that that a bunch of guys at the turn of the 20th century figured that out and wrote a thesis about it we would be wrong,but what they did was use modern instruments and use them over ethnic groves and figured out a basis that was harmonized to itself.

so...your basically saying breaking the rules is the wrong expression and I should call replace the phrase with" working with the rules?" I hate to be confrontational but your point escapes me...  :icon_scratch:

  yes     ok
lets get back to the blues example, if we were to look at the blues we see it is based in  a Major progression, 1, 4, 5 major triads
if we use the diatonic diatonic chords we will use the 1M7th, 4M7th. and 5dom 7th, but we do not, we use 1dom7th, 4dom7th, and 5 dom7th, which breaks all the rules of the the major harmonized scale, however with out playing a scale yet we have a cool sound, but we now have to figure out a scale we can use and not have musical dissension  to write our melody lines with. Looking around we see we can use a 5 tone scale (pentatonic minor) in this context and arrive with use of our diatonic rules. Having combined the tones of the 3 dom7ths with the tones of the pentatonic minor we arrive with a form of music that allows us to keep with the rules of music having worked them within the base of the music. We broke no rules, we used the rules basic foundations within the new form. If we had broken the rules we would have sounded like we knew not how to play, but by using the rules and working them within the genre we created a form of music that has been strong for over a century.

although I agree with your infomation, arguing about whether you choose to call it breaking the rules or working with them or whatever is silly, you could argue the technicalities of the English language all you want but it has bugger all to do with the subject in hand, so why argue about the same information because we choose to call the same principal different things? although your example is subjective, it really doesn't back up your claim at all, and have wasted paragraphs trying to use some musical examples to back up your statement when we were really saying the same thing. I totally disagree with your statement about breaking the rules and that by saying it suggests they don't know how to play.

If you break the rules without knowing what rules you are breaking I would agree on a theory level. but people can break the rules, not realise they are breaking them and sound amazing. But knowingly going outside of the rules can be tasteful, nothing says that more then in the be-bop style of jazz when the thing of the time was to use chromaticism to get between one chord/key and another. What about the use of the whole-tone scale over diminished chords, that's totally unconventional and can sound amazing.  Or in dodecaphonic music where every musical note in western music is used in a peice of music, that again is totally unconventional.

 

[elfro89]

I think things are a little different in jazz, yeah?  Like, in jazz it's more common to use certain modes in certain situations.  It's not really a "rule", it's more like a stylistic characteristic of jazz.  I might be totally wrong because I only learned core theory with a little jazz at the end, but I think I remember reading that. 

sure  , in my opinion there is no absolutes in music governing what you decide to use, I would never say, "use this scale over this chord" i might say, "this scale/lick/arpeggio can sound nice over this chord" or, "this mode is very common in this style or this style" but I've always explain to my students why they are used, and the answer most of the time is because "it fits."

when you get down to it, everything sounds modal in someway or another, the vast majority of the time when people think of modes they think of the corresponding scale which I've always believed to be a limiting way to view them. Being able to recognise a modes sound within a chord progression is much more beneficial because if you can pick up on what could potentially sound nice you can influence the overall tonality of the peice in ways that are unexpected to the audience. Sometimes these modes can sound out of place to the casual music listener which is a small reason why jazz is a very musician based market.  :icon_thumright:

 

[hannaugh]

Fair enough.  Some day I will know more about jazz theory, but it's gonna take a while.

 

[Jusatele]

I think the confusion is between breaking the rules or working with in them
the rules always remain the same, it is just hat we can rearrange the tones within them and that is what Jazz does, however you still have to agree the rules remain the same.
what theory does is set a set of rules that refines what our ears find comfortable. It adds structure to music.
Including to much such as chromaticism makesthingsallruntogethersuchasthisandwenowhaveextremeproblemsdifrentuateingthingsanditallbecimes buzz
not including enough means that ,, ,,, no ,,nger ,,expr,,s eve,y th,,ig we ,,,t to say.
Having no set structure means (jt, g29ajN OIKJM 2#*chsK  LKJHGF, or jibberish
without  the rules we have such as above. That is why we study Theory,  Jazz is taking theory to the next level, not breaking the rules but working within the bounds of it, we do not change the rules, we change the layout and see where we can go with that.
If we are to change the layout of the intervals of a scale, we do not break anything, we change the layout of everything, such as the harmonized scale that goes with it, suddenly we are using new tones in each situation, that is Jazz
Jazz is not breaking rules, if it were we would not have to study it so hard, we would just hand a instrument to any 3 year old and except what he came up with in the first 10 minutes as music

 

[elfro89]

I think the confusion is between breaking the rules or working with in them
the rules always remain the same, it is just hat we can rearrange the tones within them and that is what Jazz does, however you still have to agree the rules remain the same.
what theory does is set a set of rules that refines what our ears find comfortable. It adds structure to music.
Including to much such as chromaticism makesthingsallruntogethersuchasthisandwenowhaveextremeproblemsdifrentuateingthingsanditallbecimes buzz
not including enough means that ,, ,,, no ,,nger ,,expr,,s eve,y th,,ig we ,,,t to say.
Having no set structure means (jt, g29ajN OIKJM 2#*chsK  LKJHGF, or jibberish
without  the rules we have such as above. That is why we study Theory,  Jazz is taking theory to the next level, not breaking the rules but working within the bounds of it, we do not change the rules, we change the layout and see where we can go with that.
If we are to change the layout of the intervals of a scale, we do not break anything, we change the layout of everything, such as the harmonized scale that goes with it, suddenly we are using new tones in each situation, that is Jazz
Jazz is not breaking rules, if it were we would not have to study it so hard, we would just hand a instrument to any 3 year old and except what he came up with in the first 10 minutes as music

Again I agree with a lot of what you say, but there are instances in jazz where I could argue quite successfully that it was written with the purpose of not using any meaningful musical structure. Take this piece for example which is dodecaphonic...and completely lacking in any real time signature.

Fourth song down called, "New York Moxie"
http://www.tradebit.com/mp3-artist/140849/eric-watson

to someone who doesn't listen to jazz it would have sounded like nonsense (and i doubt any 3 year old could play this), you know why it sounded like nonsense? Because it was wrote with that in mind, it was designed to completely negate everything western society deems "good music." Whether someone can appreciate that is another story. Now you could try and work out what harmony was going on where, and what time signature was what, but that completely ignores the point of what this is all about. Hence in my eyes its just broke the rules...

 

[Jusatele]

I had my Sr high school music theory teacher bring in a symphony done only in percusion instruments, It was very hard to listen to, at first, but over the course of the semester you finally fell into it and as we studied it the next semester we all realized it was a great piece, but took a real trained ear to understand it.
And maybe that can explain a lot of music we do not appreciate, it just takes time to figure it out.
Jazz pushes the envelope, that is the reason it exist.
I think a lot of guys refuse to learn theory thinking it is this massive study of rules and regulations, However I have found that it is all just the C major scale and the circle of 5ths, everything starts with that and returns to that, when you learn something new it goes back to that. it is just a big circle.
My epiphany was when a teacher told me that a minor scale is just a minor scale  in a round a bout way. I tried to figure that out for a while till we were doing some work with modes and it hit me, yes everything just rolls in a circle, you can do what ever you want with the intervals, but you cannot get away from harmony, and it all goes back to what we learned with the C major scale and the circle of 5ths. In other words it is so F^&%(*G simple it is laughable we fight it so much. It is all written right there, here it is in laymans terms

the scale gives us our tones, the circle of 5ths gives us our keys (or scales) what else is there?

 

[stubhead]

Jazz music doesn't exist in isolation, as a collection of licks or chords to learn, then you "know jazz"... if you're in a big city that helps immeasurably, because you can find people to play with, and people to learn from. Other that that, learning songs from recordings has been the traditional, fastest and best way to develop a working vocabulary. I personally don't think you have to play a keyboard to play it well, but I do think that you have to get outside of the guitar in your listening and reading. If you're not able to find live people to play with 2, 3, more times a week you'll absolutely HAVE TO LEARN TO READ, and read well enough that you can pay attention to the concepts that are in front of you, not just fumbling through the notes. And you'll HAVE TO be able to play what you hear - I start my students on christmas carols & nursery rhymes, you'd be amazed at how often I've asked a new kid "Do you know "Mary Had a Little Lamb" or "God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen" and they say "yes." I say ok, play it - and they can't. "I don't wanna play that crap anyway...."

Mark Levine's "Jazz Theory Book" is a pretty comprehensive overview, if you combine that with Jess Gress's "The Guitar Cookbook" and work back and forth, you'll at least get some chords working. But you need to be playing songs and music, so go to Ebay and search DVD's for "jazz fake books" and some DVDs pop up that are a bunch of fake books scanned into PDF format. I paid $40 years ago and it was all hush-hush illegal, now they're $10! And FIND another person in your town to play with... trade songs. Recently a friend of mine sent me a copy of "The Music of Miles Davis" and I was pleasantly surprised to see it had a good basic overview of chord theory and melodic concepts, if you like Miles and Levine's book is too big a bite to start with this'll do. READING REQUIRED, of course, they're music books, after all.... full of music, thank goodness.

If you start reading today you'll be better in a month than if you don't start.  Sure, Hendrix didn't read - but you're not Hendrix.... Another book I love is Paul F. Berliner's "Thinking in Jazz." It's packed full of interviews with working famous-and-not musicians of all stripes talking in very specific terms about what they do to generate music. Lewis Porter's bio "Coltrane" has quite a few specific musical examples, as do many, many other books about individual musicians. "The Classical Music Fake Book" is a great place to go for reading practice, they have all those songs from cartoons & movies you grew up with - and since when DIDN'T a few Tchaikovsky licks come in handy.... :evil4:

 

[erogenousjones17]

Sure, Hendrix didn't read - but you're not Hendrix....

There is a lot of truth in this statement, and it applies to a lot more than just reading music. Let the record show, however, that I can't read music. Not very well, anyway. And not reading very well very closely resembles not reading at all.

 

[elfro89]

I had my Sr high school music theory teacher bring in a symphony done only in percusion instruments, It was very hard to listen to, at first, but over the course of the semester you finally fell into it and as we studied it the next semester we all realized it was a great piece, but took a real trained ear to understand it.
And maybe that can explain a lot of music we do not appreciate, it just takes time to figure it out.
Jazz pushes the envelope, that is the reason it exist.

I call the same action breaking the rules? who cares what I call it, it doesn't make me wrong. Whether you choose to see it from that view point or not matters none to me.
jazz isn't the only genre of music to push the envelope. People push the boundaries in all styles of music, most of the time its got nothing to do with music theory at all cause a lot of them don't recognise the relationships for it to mean anything to them. Whether or not you choose to figure out what they are doing musically matter's nothing to anyone else but yourself. Music theory has a lot to do with making your own connections, you may very well see a relationship I do not, and visa versa, it is a personal journey towards a greater understanding of music.

I think a lot of guys refuse to learn theory thinking it is this massive study of rules and regulations, However I have found that it is all just the C major scale and the circle of 5ths, everything starts with that and returns to that, when you learn something new it goes back to that. it is just a big circle.

and the C Major scale is made up of 7 notes and those notes are... How each of us understands the information is subjective, there is no right or wrong, just good and bad. I know your mentioning it to make a point but there should come a time when you learn something new, and that new information just gets processed ultra quick because you don't need to think about it, you just... know it instinctively. How that infomation is applied is an entirely different thing altogether. Like I was saying I got theory coming out of my ass, but there are times I really struggle to create or come up with something I feel fits. This is because I have not had the practice and experience, nor listened to enough of a genre to understand how that theory is applied in that particular situation. Its like, how do you draw a cup if you have never seen one before?

the scale gives us our tones, the circle of 5ths gives us our keys (or scales) what else is there?

In relation to the circle of 5ths and keys, nothing. But theory can get way way way way way more advanced, sure if you need to go back that far to make the necessary links but if the individual truly understands the circle of fifths and how it works, they wouldn't need to acknowledge it since it would be obvious. It's like the different parts of a house. if your on the roof, you don't need to acknowledge that below you is a floor, you just know it is... so why bother mentioning it... if you follow my analogy.

 

[Jusatele]

Sure, Hendrix didn't read - but you're not Hendrix....

There is a lot of truth in this statement, and it applies to a lot more than just reading music. Let the record show, however, that I can't read music. Not very well, anyway. And not reading very well very closely resembles not reading at all.

Hendrix may not have been able to read, but he spent years learning music, from a guitar at early age till his death he constantly went out of his way to jam and play with a lot of different guys. Once in England he spend hours every night going out and Jammin and learning new stuff.

The amount of time you spend will be how you develop, now if there is an easier way, why not take it, what I mean by that is there have been some guys that never learned to read and write that were inventors, but how much easier would that have been if they had the ability to research what they wanted to do. what they invented has been engineer to perfection now also.

It is like you say you want to learn music to be the best, but yet you refuse to learn to read music? that is like saying you want to be an politician but refuse to study Law. Do as you please, and when you come up and write a new symphony show us the music so we can play it, or is it a visual thing because you do not have the ability to print out your ideas?

Knowledge is power, Hendrix had the ability to have recording studios with professional engineers at his becon call. And had the experience to know what they asked for. he spent years traveling around the country in bands that were recorded playing that music and learning, and when he arrived in England he stepped up the learning even more, he was a sponge soaking up everything he heard. the difference between Hendrix and you is he could have some one whistle to him "God Save The Queen"  back stage and go out and play it. You can not.

 

[hannaugh]

I think of it this way: having a new skill isn't going to hurt me.  There are always some things you use and some things you don't.  Like maybe being able to whistle isn't going to help your guitar playing ability, but there is no way it's going to hurt it, so might as well learn.  Maybe some day down the line you will start using whistling in your music, you never know.  I'd rather have skills I never use than not have certain skills and possibly have that hole in my knowledge hold me back. 

 

[add4]

I think learning jazz depends a lot on how you want to play it.
In my experience, if you start copying solos of some greats, it takes a lot of time learning them by heart, and ultimately you might find that you cannot replace the parts you've learned smoothly in your own improvisation. If you do, you might still realize that you are playing licks. Plus, when you've worked on your soloing, you find that you only know a limited vocabulary on chords and cannot comp creativelly
To me, jazz is about forging your own vocabulary, and being able to play something personal.
To do this, i believe you have to have two skills :
- to be able to listen to what you are feeling as a person when you play, what do you want to play at a moment, and how musical is it?  this skill depends on your ears, what you've listented to, what you like, your personality, how you feel on the moment, and it will be refined as you work on music and on the instrument.
- to be able to play anything coming in your head directly without any restriction, thought, delay, effort or frustration/fear.

For the second skill to develop, i think you have to work in a focused way on the instrument. that is: know your scales, your chords/inversions/drop on the whole neck, your arpeggions, know the tune you're playing on, knowing the name of the note you're playing, the names of the notes in the chord and the modes you choosed to play, etc etc
In my experience again, it is really easy to progress if you decide to work on one specific thing at a time. providing all other difficulties are easy, you only have one difficulty and your brain can assimilate that specific thing.
Providing you have a theoritical knowledge of what a major scale is, and how it can be harmonized, you can start working for years(!) on the instrument.
Here are some leads of things i've worked (and am still working) on:
- Learn your major scales: it really helps developing your neck knowledge. I personally worked in positions, using 3 notes per string always, it's easy for the triplets, it's easier to remember, and you will have to make a small move at the B string that will give a bigger span to each position. If your root note is on the A string, begin the scale on the E string anyway, going down until you have 3 notes per string. Learn all positions, slowly, with a metronome, using patterns: 1-2-3-4 - 2-3-4-5 - 3-4-5-6 - .to the highest note of the position on the e string, then . 8-7-6-5 - 7-6-5-4 and variations of patterns : 4-3-2-1 - 2-3-4-5 - 6-5-4-3 - 4-5-6-7 - .to the highest note on e, then . 8-7-6-5 - 4-5-6-7 - 6-5-4-3, ...
try using groups of 3 notes, in eight notes, then triplets, groups of 4 notes in eight notes and triplets. work the metronome up slowly. Work in one tonality over the whole neck, then try one position, and one tonality, then when it's done up and down, switch the tonality, following the 4th cycle, or try other modulations. this can be done with backing tracks or band in a box.
- My teacher showed me chords on adjacent strings only at the beginning it helps remembering them :  you can find families of chords that are all possible ways of putting the notes 1357 on 4 adjacent strings on a guitar. families can be : 1573 or 5137 for example, there is at least 1 family per inversion. when you have them, play with a metronome, going to the next bass note. ex play one chord with the root on bass, then the next chord with the 3rd on bass. and go back and forth between them. then do the same with the 3rd on bass and the 5th on bass, etc until you assimilate them. when you know that, if you put the chords on 1 and 3, and a bass note between them on 2 and 4, you are doing a walking bass with chords very easily.
- Start playing the notes of the mode on the 1, beginning on each one of the arpeggio's notes.
- write down every exercise you decide to do in notation, it teaches you to read more easily, and teaches you a lot about making your own exercises.
These are some of the first things my teacher gave me in months of work with him and i feel this way of working really opened up my vision of music, practicing music, and playing music. it also opened my ears and mind to new possibilities and i learned some things that i thought were nearly impossible in a easy way.
I also learned a lot about the process of learning and in particular , that if something is too difficult, it's not because it's difficult, it's because you're not well prepared for it. so you only have to analyse what you need to be prepared, work on it, and do it again until it works.

hope that gives you some ideas for working jazz. that's the way that works for me
Best

 

[OzziePete]

I will confess to being totally illiterate about Jazz. I did one school group session (this is years ago) with Australian Jazz greats, Don Burrows and George Golla when I was playing clarinet and quite frankly, I did what I was told to do but had no clue what was going on.

I have tried to understand where Jazz comes from, the point of the music etc. and it leaves me cold. I simply can't understand how you take a basic music line and abstract it to the point of musical complexity and ambiguity and then say, "Oh that's Jazz". I saw a doco on Jazz and they included a very good pice of music played by Charlie Parker doing "Little Brown Jug" and for once, I understood how they took the basic hook of the tune and twisted it and twisted it each cycle of the music. By the end of that clip, Parker was doing all sorts of scales and lines but somehow it still sounded a bit like "Little Brown Jug" !

I have a heap of respect for good jazz musicians but I am also aware that my own personal taste can't appreciate that form of music. Because a good jazz musician will be very technically proficient, it sometimes comes off as note wanking, when they test themselves with complex  music. Having grown up in an era of 15 minute drum solos and things like "prog rock" and jazz fusion I kinda urk at that.