Improvisation
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=94781
Printed Date: November 23 2024 at 07:43
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Improvisation
Posted By: The Pessimist
Subject: Improvisation
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 05:13
|
A question regarding this... How much improvisation do you like in your prog, and how important do you think it is for prog musicians to be able to improvise, even if it's on a small scale like a drummer improvising their fills? I appreciate this depends on the band entirely and the kind of music, but what about your tastes specifically? Personally I think it's a key element to all music. I always prefer improvisation in everything as it makes me feel like I'm actually there... As a result I'm not a massive fan of multitracking  So what do you guys think? I think it's an important question that I suppose we all think about at some point! ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Replies:
Posted By: rdtprog
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 05:45
|
I think that improvisation doesn't go well with prog rock, most of the good musicians in prog could improvise but it would give totally different results than a cd with structured songs.King Crimson do that a lot in live performances and in different projects and i don't like it very much, a little improvisation could be interesting but it has to be based on some basic ideas where you can hear the melody lines in sort of unity and not a bunch of notes played randomly. Liquid Tension Experiment have found a good balance with improvisation and written songs. ------------- Music is the refuge of souls ulcerated by happiness. Emile M. Cioran |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 05:57
|
I would argue though that with King Crimson the improvisation was the focal point, especially in songs like Starless, Indiscipline (Bruford's opening solo) and Level Five off the top of my head.
------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: Mormegil
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 06:26
|
Not a huge fan of improv in prog. Reminds me too much of free-form jazz, which I could only take in small doses. I expect my prog to take me places, where the road, however winding, is smooth. Improv, overdone, IMHO, is like a road chock full of potholes - not my cup of tea.
------------- Welcome to the middle of the film. |
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 06:46
|
Well I have to beg to differ. A lot of progressive rock compositions were based on initial improvs. Hocus Pocus is a good example. But these guys also had a certain degree of formal musical training which made it so much more interesting. Sometimes Rush live bores me to tears because their live performances so much resemble the studio versions. I might as well stay at home and listen to 2112 cranked to eleven. I remember reading this once back in the 70s. Fripp proposed an album of King Crimson songs played the way they are not supposed to be played. The record company did not go for it. I always love hearing variations on themes. Every time I have seen Crimson live it's been an enlightening experience. I love the off the top of their heads improvs. Listen to the Crimson jazz trio if you haven't already. If you want to hear a band play everything note for note then stay home put the cat out and crank the stereo to eleven. Music should be exciting and adventurous. Even classical music is interpreted differently depending on the orchestra and conductor.
------------- |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 06:58
I would not want to say I prefer improvisation because then I am inferring that I cannot like anything without apparent improvisation and that is not true as far as my tastes go. By the same token, I don't necessarily insist on everything being composed. But either way, I prefer some direction in music. It need not be very apparent but if it's just improv for the sake of it, I would prefer it in a live concert rather than on a recorded album. LTIA pt-1 for instance resolves into a specific mood (and not just a general blues/jazz mood) and that is how I prefer it. If it doesn't seem to resolve into anything at all, ok I might still enjoy listening to it the first time but there's no reason for me to return to it then. I also don't have any objection to multi-tracking or any other such 'studio' magic as long as it is, well, magical. I love all the different layers of Thom Yorke in Everything in its right place. But I don't like it if it's just an effect used to make it sound commercial/pop music, which you could probably find say in late 70s/80s recordings. Any effect is fine if it goes to enhance the emotional resonance of a given piece of music.
|
The Pessimist wrote:Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 07:22
|
I can enjoy both, each within its context. J-R/F offers more room for improvisation and that is fine, but some underlying structure is needed. For classic symphonic played live I prefer the musicians to respect the musical form but I appreciate when they don't play just an exact replica of the studio version, some variations are always welcome.
Having said that, I feel that the vocal melody is usually the instrument which suffers more from variations. A different guitar or keys solo, different drum fills etc are likely to be as good as the studio version, just different, but when the singer changes the vocal phrases in live performance, usually they never sound as good as the studio one (partly because when they do so it's because they can't reach the original tone comfortably).
I personally love it when there is apparent improvisation but now and then they play some bars of coordinated notes which show that it was not as improvised as it might have seemed.
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 07:39
| Improvisation is the bread and butter of vocals in Indian classical and semi classical forms, i.e., Hindustani, Carnatic, ghazal, qawali so a vocalist can certainly improvise in a pleasing way and with control. But I have not seen many prog rock vocalists who had/have that level of ability - for them, it's more about understanding the song (including often being involved in the songwriting) and possessing enough range to get through it. |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 07:42
|
Jazz also incorporates vocal improvisations. But to do something like this in prog, the scope of the composition and especially its vocal melody needs to be really broad, whereas usually it's just a few verses interjected between long interludes. |
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 07:45
|
Can't really give a general answer, sometimes I like it and sometimes I don't. I guess I like an even mix of composition and improvisation.
------------- My other avatar is a Porsche It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased. -Kehlog Albran |
Posted By: twosteves
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 09:19
| I think any good musician will improvise when he can---the groups I love live play around with certain parts to make the live experience "Live"---I'm not talking long improvised solo's--talking about changing things up within the framework of the song and not playing it note for note as recorded. |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 09:32
|
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 09:40
|
When I was in high school I played in the stage band. I would double on tuba and electric bass guitar sometimes during rehearsals I would jump on the drum kit as well. We had this really talented piano player named Andrea who had been playing since she was in diapers. But she stuck to the sheet music while I was making up my own parts. She had the bass lines to play with her left hand and she would always complain that I was throwing her off. She would always have the sheet music in front of her. Because of her rigid training she didn't really know what improvising was. She hated my guts. I really felt sorry for her. But the last I heard she went on to be a successful concert pianist. I guess I'm happy for her. I wonder if she remembers me and if she learned anything from me. ------------- |
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 09:46
This has been my ongoing argument about Peart. He does the same sh*t over and over and over. Why can't he do a differeny solo once in a while? When I was in the air force sometimes I would have to demonstrate the jet at airshows and would never stick to the program and caught a lot of sh*t for it. ------------- |
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 10:23
|
I guess it's all down to who's doing it and the delivery itself. I'm a huge Krautrock fan, and while I wouldn't in a million years call this brand of music prog - it still remains one of the most progressive takes on rock music imo. Krautrock practically emerged from improvisation. It's the core of something like 99% of the early pioneers. Yeti by Amon Düül ll fx features long freestyled jams that seem to have purpose and orchestrated powers, without ever having been written down beforehand. Personally I feel Yeti is one of the best examples of improvisation in rock bar none. The instrumentation is almost at a metaphysical level. I also agree with those who've said that improvisation on stage is key to a successful gig. Be that ulterior drumming fills, prolonged sections and guitar solos where there shouldn't be any - give me some mo please! Lastly, all music comes from some form of improv - never forget that. It comes from playing around with notes and moods, and then at some point sowing things up nicely to form a piece of patterned sound. ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: The.Crimson.King
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 10:56
|
I think there's three types of improv in prog that are great. First, the King Crimson style where the entire piece is an improv by the whole band. To pull that off you have to have musicians of the highest caliber who can both improvise, and stay in tune with the other players improvisation so they can add to the overall sound of the piece. This is clearly the riskiest type of improv with the highest degree of difficulty and can easily turn into pointless noodling in less skillful hands. Second, a band improv that yields a piece of music that they later turn into a song. The first example that springs to mind is "Dance on a Volcano" that was born out of a jam, then structured into a coherent composition. Third, improv of a guitar/keyboard/sax/whatever solo. This is a staple of live music and keeps the songs from becoming stale and worn. There are some solos that need to be played note perfect because they're tied to the structure of the song, (I'm thinking of Tony Banks synth solos on "In the Cage", "Colony of Slippermen", "Riding the Scree", etc) but usually it's built into the song that the solo is meant to be expanded on or changed...I want to hear the soloists skill in creating something new rather than just repeating licks like a jukebox. Can you imagine Steve Howe playing the final solo in Starship Trooper note perfect to the studio version every night? ------------- https://wytchcrypt.wixsite.com/mutiny-in-jonestown" rel="nofollow - Mutiny in Jonestown : Progressive Rock Since 1987 |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 11:41
|
Being used to free form music, I wouldn't mind some bands to be more adventurous on stage - or just trying not to sound like the records! I LOVE Iron Maiden, but I've always been puzzled (and a bit disappointed, too) hearing the guitarists playing their solos like on the records note by note... Furthermore, since many progressive bands not only listened to classical European music, but also Jazz and even "classical" Indian music, one could expect to hear some musicians improvising: after all, Steve Howe was interviewed by free jazz guitarist Derek Bailey for a book about improvisation. There were also bands like Henry Cow or This Heat which could rearrange their songs in drastic ways, if not taking the "risk" to try free improvisations without any pre-determined theme or rhythm (going further than King Crimson, by the way...) So, I'm always a bit disappointed to hear bands playing on stage the same stuff that they played in studio: if a concert is just a mean to promote a record, then they could just have a "meet and greet" event! They could even do the same thing as Kate Bush or the Sisters of Mercy around 1987-88: shoot videos instead of touring (okay, I may begin to sound a bit harsh...) But, on the other hand, when a band touring for 40 years try to play most of its standards or hits, I can understad that the musicians "stick to the book" - otherwise, their concerts would last 3 or 4 hours! Just imagine Yes or Genesis playing two or three 20-minutes epics and a dozen of 5-minutes songs... |
Posted By: Nogbad_The_Bad
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 11:48
|
Needs to be the right setting, if its Fusion, Krautrock, Electronic, Avant or King Crimson it seems to work really well. I can imagine Ozrics improvising to their hearts content and it fitting beautifully to their style. ------------- Ian Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on Progrock.com https://podcasts.progrock.com/post-avant-jazzcore-happy-hour/ |
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 12:12
|
Or The Grateful Dead. Could you imagine a grateful Dead concert without well, firstly drugs and then improvisation. I think this short vid explains the whole Krautrock mindset . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZMfsPDVcD4" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZMfsPDVcD4 I love the parts with Renate. She says they were doing crazy things on Phallus Dei. I wouldn't have known.
------------- |
Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 12:13
|
I rather have bands rip off from classical work and play keybaord solos all day long. note for note |
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 12:24
|
Well even when they were doing classical ripoffs they were reworking them. Do you think Pictures At An Exhibition was the way Modest Mussgorgsky wrote it. And they never played it the same way. Do you think Emerson had the sheet music in front of him with a page turner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_XUhoAtCnA" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_XUhoAtCnA ------------- |
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 12:26
|
The Japanese are also pretty neat at this. Taj Mahal Travellers practically made "Japrock", and it's all free-form. All of their releases are live concerts from different venues. Think TD's Zeit meets fusionesque version of Faust. ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: The.Crimson.King
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 13:35
Although there's obviously tons of room for Emo to improv in Pictures - which he utilizes to the fullest, both Promenade's and Great Gates of Kiev are highly structured pieces which I'm sure was simple memorization for him. I would love to see the sheet music though for his Moog Ribbon Controller Solo  ------------- https://wytchcrypt.wixsite.com/mutiny-in-jonestown" rel="nofollow - Mutiny in Jonestown : Progressive Rock Since 1987 |
Posted By: Rando
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 15:28
This thread (and this post) made me think why Bruford left Yes, I think Bruford was searching for a more open-ended, loose, musical landscape that would allow him to play and utilize improvisation; or something on a more spontaneous level. I always felt Bruford was at heart, (at best) a Jazz drummer more than a Rock drummer. I could hear it in his style and approach when he was in Yes. He was just a little too intricate, choppy, and with too much space in his breaks which is perfect for Jazz. Now this is not to take anything away from him, absolutely not, he's one of the greatest drummers, I just think he finally found the perfect home to settle in with King Crimson. I love Starless. But you might be hard pressed to find much improvisation in Prog. There might be some exceptions here and there. Prog music is built more on structure, with set arrangements. that do not change. Nice thread.  ------------- - Music is Life, that's why our hearts have beats - |
Posted By: m2thek
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 16:06
|
In regards to King Crimson's 70s era, I think most people would place their composed songs over their improvised songs. Yes, some great songs had both (like Starless), but there's a very clear divide between the two kinds of pieces. In general, I think it's fine during a live performance: you're physically present so you feel the energy of it, you only hear it once, the musicians feed off of each other, new twists on familiar songs, etc. However, as soon as you put that to a recording is where it breaks down: it goes on for too long, it's usually pretty directionless, doesn't bode well for repeated listenings, etc. Since I listen to most recorded prog I'll say that I greatly prefer composed pieces of music, but I welcome a little bit of improv at concerts (ex, extending the solo of Comfortably Numb during a PF tribute show)
|
Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 16:34
|
I like both rigidly scripted and purely improvised music. I agree with those that prog is better suited to the former. But never a problem with throwing in a little free-formity for flavor. (Assuming the musicians can do that sort of thing.) ------------- Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect. |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 18:34
|
Thanks for the responses guys! So good to see others care about this topic as much as I... First point I'd like to address is the definition of improvisation. For me, it can't be anything other than "momentary composition". Therefore, a good improv is structured in a compositional manner, and has the same boundaries as a composition i.e. Thematic intricacy and recursion The second point is that due to the first point improv can encompass any kind of variant within a framework. There are plenty of mentions of Indian classical music and jazz, and as a jazz student myself I can say safely that the ONLY way to improvise is via a framework. Even when improvising "freely" (I despise this term and it's ambiguity) there are still parameters set as the music progresses, no matter how vague. Third point is that anyone with any kind of musical memory can improvise, as all that is required is a recollection of well learned musical knowledge, so in essence most live performance has some degree of improv entailed within. I've noticed that a lot of posters - and thankyou for doing so - have stated preference in a structure that is not deviated from. The question I must ask in response is this: do you prefer it due to your desire for complete familiarity with the piece being performed? This is not an attack at all, merely an enquiry so we can all learn more about listening habits. ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: Smurph
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 19:10
|
Personally in a live experience, I am not one that prefers long bouts of improvisation unless it is under a specific set of rules. I prefer music with heavy amounts of movement on all ends. So if there is improv, I prefer it to be over a strict set of bars that are able to mutate much more than the norm with the rhythm section. And it's nice if there are 4 lines of sound (no inclusion of drums or lyrics), so that 2 lines are strict, and 2 lines are improv. This gives a solid chance for gorgeous accidental counterpoint, especially when the musicians are familiar with each other. But in a studio I prefer, shorter, tight, compact compositions with as much movement as possible. Improv is more for a live setting. Because you only create the album experience one time, to be heard over and over. I want every single note to be as deliberate as possible. You can craft your emotions, and allow your audience to experience your new interpretations of them in a live setting. But all these thoughts go completely out the window when hearing jazz. Improv is good in jazz as long as it is just damn amazing. (my experience with jazz is limited) Though I'm not sure how much of the 2 different Thelonius Monk/Coltrane recordings are improv. ------------- http://pseudosentai.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - http://pseudosentai.bandcamp.com/ wtf |
Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 19:15
|
What I loved about early prog is that a lot of it was improvisation built onto a set structure, and not the long endless jams that could have resulted and that other bands freely employed. Sadly improvisation seems to have been phased out of prog since the late 80's/ early 90'swith only a few exceptions. One of the best live experiences I had was seeing Kayo Dot a few years ago and watching Toby orchestrate the band's music. Easily the best version of __0n Limpid Form I've ever heard, easily blowing the studio version into the weeds. You just can't get that from most bands. ------------- Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005 
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 22:08
Exactly. It is the same way in Indian classical music as well: you improvise within a raga. You cannot literally play anything. I think some people in this thread have equated all improvisation to free jazz, which is not very accurate. But what improvisation does bring is an element of surprise so it boils down to whether listeners like surprise or not in their music.
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 22:15
To be precise, most people would prefer ITCOTCK to their other albums. On the other hand, Poseidon doesn't fare so well. Not only LTIA but even Starless and bible black enjoy higher ratings on this website than Poseidon and Red is pretty close to ITCOTCK. That is probably the flipside of working within a more structured approach. The band is then much more liable to be criticised for repeating itself and Fripp probably wanted to break out of it. Not the criticism part of it, but the restrictive aspects of structure. Sure, the Wetton line up had their excesses but when it works well, like on One More Red Nightmare, the results can be more organic than music that is deliberately fit to a structure.
|
Posted By: The.Crimson.King
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 23:13
|
One style that hasn't been brought up in this thread is RIO. I'm not as well versed in this as other PA members, and so you know where I'm coming from my modest RIO collection is made up of Henry Cow's "In Praise of Learning", Univers Zero's "UZED", "1313", "Heresie" and the Thinking Plague albums "In This Life" and "In Extremis". Are these albums mostly improvisation or are they highly structured compositions? In many cases the songs seem like a few sections are highly structured but are linked with completely chaotic improvised bridges. A specific example I'm thinking of is the beginning of "In Praise of Learning". "War" opens with Dagmar's vocal mini-song section then runs through some wonderfully chaotic sections to return to the vocal closing. I know that the chaos in Captain Beefheart's "Trout Mask Replica" was actually composed and rehearsed to the point of a crazy obsession with every single note, but can a RIO expert comment, is this style improvised or highly structured?
------------- https://wytchcrypt.wixsite.com/mutiny-in-jonestown" rel="nofollow - Mutiny in Jonestown : Progressive Rock Since 1987 |
Posted By: smartpatrol
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 23:20
|
I enjoy each as much as the other, in general. It all depends on the quality and content of it.
------------- http://bit.ly/1kqTR8y" rel="nofollow">  The greatest record label of all time! |
Posted By: zravkapt
Date Posted: August 09 2013 at 23:38
RIO (and avant-prog in general) can be either. Beefheart is highly structured (even if it doesn't sound like it). Univers Zero is highly structured. Henry Cow could be highly structured but usually were very improv based. ------------- Magma America Great Make Again |
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: August 10 2013 at 08:26
|
I think the best thing that happened to Bruford was his association with Alan Holdsworth who never liked playing the same song twice. ------------- |
Posted By: npjnpj
Date Posted: August 10 2013 at 10:50
|
Several thoughts on this: - It depends to which genre or sub-genre of prog you're referring, some can take improvising better than others. - It depends on who's doing the improvising. There are masters and then again there are the incessant noodlers. - It depends on whether there is any musically structured backing from a rhythm section underlying the improvisation. - It depends on whether you're talking about live performance or studio albums. On a studio album a good solo should mostly be composed, planned, and executed. Only in very rare cases does an improvised solo work without additional work. The same song on stage can benefit greatly from a well executed improvised solo, provided the length doesn't get excessive and it's carried by a solid backing. I've read King Crimsons Wetton-Bruford phase mentioned here as an example, and it works quite well although a lot of the basic tracks were lifted from live stage improvisations, and are kept relatively short. For instance: the Larks and Starless albums I like very much, but The Great Deceiver is far beyond anything in that way that I can enjoy over longer periods of time. Personally I don't mind longer improvisation on stage if it's interesting and doesn't overpower the musical proceedings uncomfortably (very subjective, I know). I don't think improvising has a place on the studio albums of the genres that I prefer, which are: symphonic prog, heavy prog, prog metal, and a lot of melodic prog-related. As I'm generally very melody oriented and also enjoy complicated but precisely executed musical structures, improvisation can easily damage a lot of my musical enjoyment and require large amounts of Budweiser to endure. Improvisations in other genres are not anything I have a particularly strong opinion about. |
Posted By: infocat
Date Posted: August 10 2013 at 13:35
|
I'm always amazed and delighted with Djam Karet's Still No Commercial Potential, which is apparently all improvisation; though you mostly can't tell!
------------- -- Frank Swarbrick Belief is not Truth. |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: August 10 2013 at 14:35
There is a saying in the jazz world: if people can tell you're improvising then you're not doing it right  of course it's to be taken with a pinch of salt...------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 10 2013 at 15:06
|
Hi, It depends on the context and what is happening. Some call it this, that and everything else, but there are many schools of thought that deal with "improvisation", and HOW it is done, is an issue. In general, if you have any "format", or "idea", for what you want in a piece of music, notice I did not say "song", then the improvisational window gets smaller and smaller and the ability to let it fly and die on its own wings, is gone ... it already died in the "format" ... which has a tendency to cut down the abilities. But there are things that you want to listen to, if you have the musical ability to learn from them, which is where most people fail ... it's missing a beat, it's missing a lyric, it's always missing something! Examples: Keith Jarrett, specially in his early days, was magnificent at improvisation. Considered a jzzz person, USUALLY means that you are playing around chords and notes, although when you hear "The Koln Convert" you might find that a piece or two appear to sound a bit mechanical and clever, but others are just outright ... free. Egberto Gismonti, in his early days of guitar playing was more about the sound of the thing and the moods they created. He can also do this with a piano. Guru Guru, was the ultimate improvisation work in the early days, unffortunately most of it ended with "Dance of the Flames", which still has the guitar going everywhere until it's done with the part it is doing. There is a reason why their early stuff had titles like ... "LSD March" and some other things, but in the middle you get something that is similar to what you probably would want to hear Jimi Hendrix do if he had survived. CAN, had its improvisational methods kinda worked out from their Berlin music schools, and it was mostly centered around ... no western concepts ... though later, this changed some, specially after Damo left. He himself came from the same theater/film style of improvisation that was so active in the work in Germany, and CAN is almost a follow up to that. American music, for my tastes, does not have enough improvisation. Mostly they are centered on a theme or a chord, and solos, which not all improvisations are about. It's kinda like Miles Davis, who used to say ... I do my part first, then I pass it to you, then you pass it to him, then we come together, and in between all's fair and love and hate ... and there were some excellent things, albeit some of them are difficult to connect and explain musically, but that is Miles ... a rebel. The "Fillmore", or "Greateful Dead" kind of experimentation, was not always about the chord or the song, or anything else, as their early bootlegs showed, something that has never made it to CD or album, and it was one of the things that helped a lot of people learn how to do long cuts, and explore the musical side of things. However, because many of these were never recorded, or appreciated by anybody, none of them have been studied for a bigger and better value, than one riff for a song! Personally I find that sad, but in the end, the musicians involved were not as refined in music history, other than just learn anything as you go. Europe, having a much longer musical tradition, tends to be more centered on musical designs, although, as mentioned, there are music schools that are different on purpose. Lastly ... the eastern model for "improvisation" is very different, and folks like Ravi Shankar were massive in helping us hear it ... but it's a cold day in heck that many folks that like "progressive, or prog, will ever listen to a huge raga that can go as much as an hour ... and "get something" out of it, without asking ... where's the song? Listening to "raga's" is an exercise in improvisation, and the only goal is to get to a point, where the music and the person are one, and meaningful. This is hard in "western music" because the center of the music is outside of the person, and it always has to be "composed", where the "raga" concept, is not meant to be composed, although both you and I would think that if I were to do it I might want to start with this or that ... and go from there. There is no rock band that is anywhere near doing this, even in India! The King Crimson, and in general, English style of experimenting is called "guided improvisation" in theater. I, personally, do not think that it is as valid an improvisation, as it is a very detailed and specific way to go about rehearsing and learning to get better! This is NOT something that most musicians ever get involved in! There is another thread where I have discussed the Robert Fripp/KC style of improvisation. Honestly, compared to others, this is a "result" of an improvisation, and not an improvisation AT ALL in the final product. But whatever you do, do not comfuse a 30 second chord change as an improvisation ... it kinda counts, but it is not leading the song in new directions. Usually, the point of ANY improvisation, is to find new places for the music to come alive and live. The only issue is, not enough people have an ear for this kind of stuff, and even most (supposedly) improvisational stuff you find here listed in prog/progressive, is not anywhere near the word and its meaning! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 10 2013 at 15:25
I'm not sure about this.
I've seen a lot of improvisation in so much different music, and it could be the Brazilian Indians, or the American Indians in a pow-wow, or anything else. We make it sound like this HAS TO BE MUSIC, AND MUST FOLLOW THE MUSIC PRETEXTS AND IDEAS ... and that is the anti-thesis, of what the word "improvisation" means.
Master and Noodlers ... I can accept ... but we should state that the "master" category for improvisation is under 1%!
The structured backing comment is strange ... it's already limited to the "structure" of "rhythm" ... and no longer an improvisation. It's time span is limited to the pop/rock/jazz ideas! That is a "song" format and not inclined to help create improvised material.
Live or memorex. Goes both ways. You can not say that Keith Jarrett is better live than he is on Memorex. Or that Ax Gernreich with Guru Guru was any better live or memorex ... he was crazy in both states ... it didn't matter, and you can check his solo albums for a bunch of fun weirdness! You don't think that's improvised? Another example is Miles Davis ... you almost never want to get his studio albums ... because he is better live, even though things change and are so different. Why? He knew the secret of music and what improvised material did for it all that one's mind could not make it better.
You want to learn improvisation? ... give your 3 year old child a small keyboard, and your homework is to play together with the kid for 10 minutes. If you get frustrated and tell the kid anything ... you LOSE!
------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: August 10 2013 at 23:47
|
I love improvisation. I should. That's all I do when I play guitar. Bruford talked about this somewhere comparing music to a conversation where your whole conversation is planned in advance, and then night after night you have that same preplanned conversation. I feel like this. I learn specific pieces from time to time and then I get promptly forget them.
Frank Zappa would hover over both extremes. He would have pieces that were meticulously worked out, and then he would have some that were rather free form. Even in Zappa's free form pieces, such as on the Shut Up N' Play Yer Guitar albums, his improvs were not exactly directionless. He would hit moments when he would play a phrase, then play it again but change something, and then play it again a third time changing something else. I would like to point out to some naysayers that arrangements, even complicated arrangements, can be improvised. Steve Hackett sticks most often to well worked out arrangements, but he does improvise in a nuanced way within them. He's also talked about liking classical guitar because he can more freely stretch out or shorten notes, being freed of the dictates of a drummer's backbeat. |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: August 11 2013 at 06:02
Well, it depends on what you understand by the term improvisation. I am not sure there is any consensus so far in this thread on even the point of what exactly is improvisation. See, the notes on a studio recording may also have been improvised even if they 'sound' composed. We say it is composed if it fits well with the music but that's not necessary. E.g. the coda of Starship Trooper is pretty loose and has an improvised quality. To me, that is the highlight of the track, Howe's playing elevates an already good track. Speaking of KC, the saxophone solos on One More Red Nightmare don't seem to have been entirely composed either - at any rate, there is a lot of room left for different interpretations in the way it is structured. I am not sure there is any genre that cannot accommodate improvisation as a rule. I do agree that it depends heavily on the musicians; poor improv can be very off putting as it can come across as show boating. As Pessimist said earlier, good improv tends to be within certain parameters and if these are more melodic, there is no reason why an improv should include out of tune/wrong notes.
|
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: August 11 2013 at 06:19
|
I personally think that what Rogerthat just highlighted in npjnpj's post sadly shows yet another example of people relying too much on made up stickers. You can't boil music down to a label - especially when we're talking about progressive rock releases from the 70s. Some of the albums listed here on PA residing in either Heavy, Symph or related were part of the Krautrock-, Canterbury- and/or psychedelic scene, and they were definitely no strangers to improvising, both on stage as well as in the studio. So for the love of dog, don't read too much into stickers! ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: August 11 2013 at 06:44
| Genesis, who are well-associated with sophisticated arrangements, frequently wrote music by way of improv. The Waiting Room was improv even in the studio as I understand. From what I recall from bootlegs, they didn't make rigid renditions of it live either. KC from the Lark's Tongue era improvised sophisticated arrangements, and there is a little sample how that transpired on DVD. They went through sections with cacophony developing later into subtle quiet periods. Often it was musicians who didn't mind listening to each other, overlapping tastefully when it seemed to contribute something. Of course you can improvise arrangemens Prog fans love. |
Posted By: twosteves
Date Posted: August 11 2013 at 08:22
|
I like my live recording of Bruford playing with Genesis--sounds like he's improvising and doing his own thing with very specific arrangements---I know it frustrated the fastidious Banks.
|
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: August 11 2013 at 13:55
In the most respectful way possible, I couldn't disagree with you more npjnpj. As I said earlier on, the best definition of improvisation I can think of is simply "spontaneous composition". This doesn't even necessarily mean it's uncalculated either, hence it can be just as melodic as anything composed over a larger time scale than a second. Not prog, but check out Stan Getz. Possibly the most melodic improviser I have ever heard in anything. Bach (and most other baroque composers) were renowned for improvising fugues, which can't possibly work without melodic emphasis. To answer the point on genre, improv by definition can be applied effectively to any genre or subgenre of music, it all depends on the skill and knowledge of the musician. ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: August 11 2013 at 15:14
Yeah, I agree.
"The nature of Genesis when we’re playing the songs… They have a certain kind of structure. If you’re playing “Robbery, Assault, and Battery” you had to play it as written. I mean, it’s a song – everything in it has been composed. There is no improvisation in it, but the drummer can always do what he likes within that [structure]. If he can do it, he can fiddle about with it." Tony Banks (from a World of Genesis interview). |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: August 11 2013 at 22:58
|
Frank Zappa and Jean Luc Ponty - Canard du Jour
Good stuff! |
Posted By: The.Crimson.King
Date Posted: August 12 2013 at 00:15
I think Bruford was chosen for the tour primarily by Phil because he respected his abilities and felt they could work together...I had an old boot from the tour and their drum duet was fantastic...but I agree that any divergence from the script would have driven Banks bonkers ------------- https://wytchcrypt.wixsite.com/mutiny-in-jonestown" rel="nofollow - Mutiny in Jonestown : Progressive Rock Since 1987 |
Posted By: Hercules
Date Posted: August 12 2013 at 16:35
|
I'm sure improvisation is often used as the basis for composition, which is fine. But when something is recorded or played live, I want the band to be totally rehearsed and note perfect and I don't want much improvisation. After all, when I had my new kitchen fitted, I didn't want the workman to say "well I just put all the bits where I felt like it at the time" do I? I want it all putting where I asked for it on the plan. ------------- A TVR is not a car. It's a way of life. |
Posted By: Rando
Date Posted: August 12 2013 at 18:02
True! Banks was once asked in an interview if there was ever any improvisation in regards to his solos. Banks typical response was he viewed his solos, or any in the band as "arranged instrumentals." It seems 'Improvisation" here has sparked-off a variety of reactions, and all valid ones. I was raised in the rigid confines of a university music department and there would often be endless hours of discussion, savage debates and arguments about Improvisation. We can go on and on like a revolving door trying to define what Improvisation is and to what degree it should be applied. The likelihood of it then falling into the subjective or personal preference. There was even a class being offered in the dept. titled "JAZZ IMPROV." There's that word again, "Improv," and was the only class being offered that used that word for its title. In those days it was called "jamming." After I graduated from that rigid enviroment I discovered that most people (musicians & non-musicians) immediately associated the word "Improvisation" with Jazz, but hardly ever associated it with Rock. My conclusion was that there existed a variety of definitions and associations in regards to Improvisation, but not surprised. I think of the band "Chicago" that often used improvisation within the structure of their highly successful songs. Namely James Pankow, their brilliant trombone player's solo in the song "Mother" from their third album. Or the song "Goodbye" (Chicago V) with trumpet player Lee Loughnane's solo. Just some examples to ponder on. Improvisation encompasses much more than we think. ------------- - Music is Life, that's why our hearts have beats - |
Posted By: Dellinger
Date Posted: August 12 2013 at 20:42
| For me, it all depends on the context and the ability of the musicians. However, I might begin by saying that I don't usually like pieces that are completley improvised... or I might like them as background music or as part of a record (or concert), or whatever, but I won't feel the urge to hear them again. But to have improvised bits thrown into the songs in live albums often takes the songs to new levels for me, and more often than not I like those versions better than the simpler studio versions (though I guess in many cases the extended bits aren't really improvised, but composed by the band to complement the song... or perhaps they begin like improvs, and then they become a permantent part of the song). In many cases, the studio versions are like incomplete versions of the songs compared to the extended live versions. |
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: August 12 2013 at 21:59
|
I don't know if this has anything to do with music but it sort of has something to do with improvisation. When I fkew in the air force sometimes we would have to show the flag in remote areas. This was sometimes done bythe land guys and sometimes by the Canadian Air Force which at the time was known as Air Command. I was flying a fighter plane known as a Freedom Fighter and was instructed to make three low passes over this Inuit community and then f**k off back to my base in Cold Lake AB. I turned it into a full blown 15 minute spectacle complete with rolls, high speed passes, climbouts and a low speed pass waving to the people assembled below. After that I got sent to Australia as an exchange pilot but I caught a bit of flack from the brass. Just a wee bit. My point is that a performer wants to show off. I guess if you don't want to improvise go and play second violin with some symphony orcestra for the rest of your life. Artists like Klaus Schulze and Tangerine Dream fascinate me because of the freedom in their music. C'mon what do you prefer the studio version of Deep Purple's Space Truckin' or the Made In Japan version. I rest my case. ------------- |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: August 12 2013 at 22:40
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edvSGawh7jQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edvSGawh7jQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Hey guys. You want rock improvisation? Check this out. ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 13 2013 at 10:33
That could be bad ... that means that Miles Davis needs a lot of sugar, to make it all sweeter!
 ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 13 2013 at 11:50
That would take away from a lot of things that we love ... so Fripp and Eno's Evening Star, or No Pussyfooting ... would be crap ... there are, out there, just as many improvised things as there are non-improvised pieces, and in general, with Eno, Robert is there to just let it fly and go ... regardless, because Eno can work with it!
You really want to go, check out Faust in that krautrock special by the BBC, and that is ... improvisation ... at its ... worst musically ... but at its BEST in experimentation ... and the point usually is ... to find musicality in the piece.
Completely improvised material is just a simple exercise ... again ... start with a 5 year old and a small keyboard and have them bang on it ... and you have to play with it (and encourage the kid to do so and think that this is fun!) ... and what comes out is not musically adept, except in your HEAD ... and you will be able to see the wide gulf in between ... now think of 100% improvisation as a bunch of these kids playing anything ... which is a total anti-thesis of what we think music is!
...
I would say that this is over "thought". The extent of the exercises in improvisation, usually tend to meander (actual theater exercise which can be done with music!) for the first 30 minutes. After this, you can see the folks are kinda bored and searching for something. Let them. At 1 hour, folks are really struggling to find something. At the 90 minute mark, you can see that some folks have found something and are working on it ... and one or two others might join them or not.
Only at this far point into the improvisation, after the "freakout" (of whatdoIdo?), do you come to find something to work on ... but most musicians are too lazy to get that far ... they know music and will not learn anything else, except what a DAW will tell them they can do, or better yet ... what Eric did ... or what Jimi did ... or what Chris did ...
There are no rock bands today, working on this level at all! Most are just doing copycat krautrock things, or copiecat jazz things, for the most part! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Dellinger
Date Posted: August 13 2013 at 21:20
Hey, I never said I considered improvisations to be crap, I even said I do enjoy them often enough... just not in the same way I like conventional written songs, and I won't often think "oh yeah, I want to hear such or so improv"... And I'm afraid I don't know those particular albums you mentioned, but I do have some albums with improvs. |
Posted By: npjnpj
Date Posted: August 14 2013 at 01:00
|
Here's a thought though: If, in an artistic sense, a true improvisation were an occurance singular to a particular space and interval in time, the true listening experience would be either: - to listen to a recording of that improvisation only once and then never again, because through repeated listening you would start to become familiar with what was (and was supposed to be) essentially a one-time occurance, or even - only listen to it if you are actually there, and never to its recording, because the improvisation truly occured at that one point in time and that one place. Listening to a recording would by its very nature violate the uniqueness of an improvisation. Nuts, of course, but the artist's world has been known for crazier things than this. |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 14 2013 at 05:37
| Well, I went to concerts where I heard free improvisations without listening to the records (or the videos) later made from these performances... And I don't see what's "crazy" about that. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 14 2013 at 10:52
In general, to listen to it back, is ... not a good idea. It turns the whole "learning" process away from your inner attention, to a mental exercise.
In acting, you let these things go, because they work BETTER, when you learn to trust yourself better, and you can not learn about this via memorization ... or it will take years and years. But once you "feel" it, and "know" it, in terms of ability you will be miles and miles ahead of others simply because you have the feel for things that others don't!
The important part of "improvisation" is NOT so much to find out what music you got, as it is to find out INSIDE ... what it is about you and the music that CLICKS ... but we're such a SELF-CONSCIOUS society, that is so afraid of letting go ... like we will lose everything we know if we let go for 10 seconds ... to find out that there is life elsewhere that can teach you about music, and any else you want to know!
And this last sentence is the "secret" behind the great improvisations of some "progressive" folks that we talk about ... that there is a recording is about as lucky as not ... but we're trying to duplicate the invention of the wheel, and this is not what "improvisation" is about ... EVER. ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 14 2013 at 13:48
Not meant to be taken that way!
It was the same thing with many "beginning" actors, that kept thinking they had to understand the reason why every single line in the play was there ... and until the day that you get involved in a serious "meditation/improvisation" that lasts a couple of hours, you will never learn, or know, how to interpret lines and words ... you will always try to use some kind of imaginary idea in your head that changes every night! And your performances will be extremely inconsistent day in and out. This is what "advanced" acting classes are usually about. Trying to teach you to feel things, so you know how to respond without being told, and without having to thik about it.
Improvisation is an "acquired taste" ... but something that is more used in theater and film, for example, than it is in music. In many ways, music is not even an intuitive process or art ... because all the sublteties of "here and now" have been suplanted by ideas of then, and yesterday, and concepts and designs ... that are not about this moment! The great "improvisations" were about this "moment in time". ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: August 14 2013 at 14:38
|
How's this for improv. Maynard always encoursged young musicians to play on the outside. Wait for the bass solo. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2QxehKabIY" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2QxehKabIY ------------- |
Posted By: Wafflesyrup
Date Posted: August 15 2013 at 03:31
But when you're using that kitchen to make love, what about then? It's as though no one realizes that all music is bound by the same principles, improvisation is integral in traversing from point A to point B given the physics of music. No improvisation? No music. I agree entirely with the idea that improvisation is composed music, except you're listening to a musician experience music, instead of relaying a preconceived idea which has little to nothing to do with their present state as a human being. This to me is musical dishonesty and is best kept in the practice area where one can further develop their ear and breadth of musical understanding instead of further diluting our artistic society with simple mimicry. While the whole presentation may certainly be emotionally involving outside of its origination, the Art which takes place between a band of musicians is truly what it's about. To think otherwise is just being selfish, which hey, we all are from time to time. Does art lie within the result of a design? Or within the act of designing itself? I fear we'll never see the day when society stops making a distinction between artists and people - "The Day Humanity Learned to Breathe as a Whole." And a big 'HMPH!' to anyone with the gall to proclaim themselves a King Crimson fan yet dislike their "improvised" material. Bunch of close-minded poppycock if you ask me.
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 15 2013 at 03:52
------------- What? |
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: August 15 2013 at 03:59
|
Nothing like a good fondling session in the kitchen area.
------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: Wafflesyrup
Date Posted: August 15 2013 at 04:50
|
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: August 15 2013 at 07:57
This made my afternoon On topic in response to Wafflesyrup, improvisation always consists on premeditated ideas, otherwise where else do the ideas come from? A magical musical ether? All you do when you improvise is let them out of your brain and then develop on them. ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: August 15 2013 at 08:49
| ^^^ I think he probably means trying to fit the music to some idea of what is good instead of going with the spontaneous flow. But that may not necessarily be how even bands that preferred tightly composing everything like Genesis worked either. They probably began with an improvisation and then kept adding elements to it till they were satisfied...and the luxury of recording in a studio allows them that option. But there is these days a tendency to second guess either the audience's tastes or the musician's own...to start with some generic arrangement that they have already decided is good and then go from there. It used to be that arrangements adorned a raw melodic/harmonic idea but arrangements have become the most important thing somehow these days. I am not saying everybody does it - mercifully, because it gives some more options for somebody like me - but it's become the norm now. |
Posted By: Wafflesyrup
Date Posted: August 15 2013 at 22:11
I agree. Perhaps I articulated my point poorly. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 21 2013 at 08:55
In many ways, music history and top ten go together like good bed partners. They all copy the same formula and process and design, and are not necessarily about people's tastes, though this, on occasion, faces the wrath of the public and changes for a few years, and this happened on the late 60's that brought out so much new music!
The arrangements, keep coming back to the same thing, or just extended in between the same thing ... so the same idea is 5 minutes long, instead of 3 minutes long ... and this is the reason why so much "prog" doesn't really hit me as fine ... it's just another song!
But there is a lot of stuff out there that does not live by the format ... and calling that a "song", is weird, because there is no "format" that it fits into, and I think this is the type of stuff that will make changes in the music history, otherwise, it is all the same and nothing new under the sun and we still get our tans! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: kingcrimsonfan
Date Posted: August 24 2013 at 10:30
|
I really don't get why people on here are opposed to improvisation. Improvisation has created some amazing music like Faust's Faust IV. If bands do not improvise, all progressive rock will sound exactly the same ex. transatlantic and spock's beard. Isn't innovating and improvising the basis of progressive rock and what makes the genre unique? ------------- 
|
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: August 24 2013 at 11:41
|
^ its one of them. You are right about that I think. Improvisation or 'free association' is important in music. As a musician, you gotta wave your 'freak flags' now then and see what you come up with instead of just boxing yourself up and sticking to one program or vision....how boring I think.
Also, let's look at an artist like say, Devin Townsend or. Trent REZNOR. You think they just sit around 'picking their asses' hoping the music will just fall into their brains and fingers? Noway. Look at the amount of remixes and demos they both have put out. It's a ton! All done through improv. Anyway. So important. Also improv for live show always seems especially interesting. Not always good, but a treat to hear and see cause its not always done. ;) ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 24 2013 at 12:51
The more I listen to Faust, and then see some of them in the Krautrock special, the more I think this is not designed as an improvisation per se ... but simply a way to do something else, and hope that one or two things come out of it ... when you see them fooling around playing along whatever they find, you wonder ... is this what the "improvisation" is all about ... just goofing around and having fun, which "might" ... just might! ... end up as a part of the piece of music. Why would you pay for FAUST, when you can have the same thing done by your kids? Now you have an issue with definition!
This is, quite different, from a musical process, or an acting process -- the examples of which I tend to use a lot here! Why? ... there is a method, or end result that is required for the use of the exercise, and while I personally love the stream of consciousness and total free flow of the results, in the end, if it is not applied to the art, as something with more depth and understanding, the whole thing is wasted on the stage or the film, or in the music!
A lot of rock bands do improvisations, but they are tied to a "form", which prevents them from getting better, and Transatlantic doing this is a bad joke, because you have a bad drummer that can not improvise, though he can count really well, and he can add that extra little tick and make that 8th, sound like a 16th! ... big deal ... that's just "mechanics" ... not FEEL ... and rarely is it good for the music itself. He's a very good technical and tight drummer ... he's the worst improvisational one, and I would state right off the bat the old (bad!) adgage ... he needs to go get stoned, and learn how to feel the music, instead of relying on his technique ... and allow the feel to add to his arsenal ... because right now he has no feel ... he's doing too much empty music with poor lyrics! That supposedly make it all better -- for fools like you and I!
Rock bands, are the worst at improvisation, since the only thing they can do is go around a note, or a chord! And most rock drummers these days, are even worse ... they don't even know how to get out of the groove and get back in it! Which means, that improvisation for the group, is already messed up right from the start.
This is what makes Yes, Pink Floyd, Amon Duul 2, and some of the earlier psychedelic folks so interesting and important that helped identify and create the progressive mold of things ... and it was, generally, by extending the musical piece that did it first, and since then, it has been sanitized with bad clorox into a 5 minute song with a special effect that we end up calling "prog", but is anything but progressive ... though we think that long cut sometimes means progressive and it doesn't! Iron Butterfly was a good example, and so were the long meandering things that the Grateful Dead did! All of which were more about just tripping with the sound of the music, than it was anything else! The others, had more in their music, than just a let's get stoned and then get laid, to it!
------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 24 2013 at 20:03
|
I like free-styling... Scootely-beep-bop-bow and improv... Sha-dooby dooby do... in my prog archives posts Deetin-dee-dee-bomp! ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: August 25 2013 at 12:07
|
^ sounds like a Jazz man to me. ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 25 2013 at 17:00
| Sounds like a Scatman to me. His dance-music hit singles scared me for life. |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: August 27 2013 at 13:59
|
The most basic thought enters my mind about improvisation and it's for the musician to question themselves as to what they can accomplish during improvisation. Are they accomplished enough to play 4 different ethnic modes, an influence of Jazz or Classical? Are they willing and able to make transitions during improvisation and attract the listener who may be in a universal state or mind set? If the improvisation revolves around a musician who does not plan and should, then it may come across as noodling. Unlike Mel Collins considered by Fripp to be a young student of gymnastics during the developing stages..and considering that the manic sax fit considerably in Crimso's style, many up and coming professional players leave out chapters of their musical education. If they are improvising in a Prog piece...they may not begin the solo with a melodic feel...which most ofthe time is vital to the piece of music. Such as starting the improvisation with a Classical influenced melody and proceeding to build the solo through transcending on the guitar from the 1st fret to even the 24th. Every musician programs patterns into their mind from childhood, teen years, etc.. and the expression the musician gives to those patterns is they key to being universal at improvisation. Everyone on this site and globally seems to know that improvisation is a means to express yourself. yet not every musician recorded in history had any business improvising and it became the destruction of music. You must at least..be decent at doing it first, otherwise you are sounding like a little plastic robot boy. During improvisation you are not suppose to be thinking about music.
If you have already been schooled...then that is when you release the constant thought of music theory and become an artist through expressing yourself or your version....creation. There are and were many musicians in the Progressive Rock world who never reached these levels and instead they focused more on composition. There are ususally 1 or 2 fine musicians who handle improvisation in prog bands.If they don't have the right approach by not attempting to constantly exceed beyond their abilities and filling their practice of scales into a piece ...which is ignorant and self centered, childish...you know what I mean? It is then that the music suffers. Miles Davis had a unique approach to improvisation. Anything coming across like noodling...like 3 swirly keyboard sounds were condensed into a bizzare drum pattern and a trumpet with echo adding a tri-tone melody. It's not usually colored that way in prog. Only with a few of the most impeccable bands.
This is 1 very bad result that has occured in the prog world: "Oh I just learned this new "Jazz riff" and I'm sitting in the studio witnessing the musician placing it into 4 different original prog pieces. Wait! No! Just use it in one piece for the album so our music doesn't come across as noodling throughout. But ,,I do believe this may be why many people dislike improvisation as a rule and it's because they are listening to ignorant musicians who are placing their studies into the music. It's because many of them are excited to learn complexity ..yet are dense and fail to develop at a slow pace, have no respect for the writing, and structure. When you're listening to a seasoned musician who knows and feels when to play and when not , the music becomes timeless.
|
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: August 27 2013 at 15:39
|
Just wanted to say that I really treasure the two very different posts from Moshkito and TODDLER. They both resonate with me on a personal level. Thanks you guys. ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: August 27 2013 at 15:55
| thanks for your support |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: August 28 2013 at 12:53
|
I didn't mean to come across snooty. If you're a younger musician that lacks experience in difficult to master areas, then you should hold back and allow nature to take it's course. It doesn't mean you won't reach the levels of John McLauglin one day. It's merely the fine logic or simple teaching that you should not break your musical barriers until you have devoted long hours of practice in a room , alone, to master it before bleeding it to the public.
With Birds of Fire by Mahavishnu Orchestra there is a theory that McLaughlin was inspired by his guru or another rumour states that it was spirituality in general. In which case forming the analogy of the music deriving from some other place, spiritual level...and chanelling through a human being. When I was 17 years old, I read an interview in a magazine with Billy Cobham who claimed that this concept of the music being inspired by some spiritual force was B.S. That the members of Mahavishnu were a binding unit of creative forces which burned out over a 2 year period of touring/recording. Birds of Fire was innovative to prog music and widely defined as Jazz/Fusion. There is something very strange and dark about the music that expresses something other than that identity. The improvisation on Birds of Fire has a mysterious element that will not unfold. You can study all music , as much as possible...from other cultures and you will stumble on to the foundation of McLaughlin's influences. You can play along with the album note for note and best yet...you can add or adapt some of the style to your own vocabulary. The phrasing or notes played during the improvisation opens up a door in your mind. If you believe in a door or passage that can be reached when improvising on an instrument?
I am not really interested in following the path of a guru, but there is something in the bloodline of a seasoned musician who has played since childhood. To be exact..it's unknown to a majority of people who are not born with natural talent. It's quite unknown and yet people see something which channels through a musician when they improvise. I can understand and relate to it feeling like an "out of the body" experience. Basically it feels like this: You are very schooled, you have composed, you have adapted influences to your vocabulary, you have gained the attention in a live performance , they are picking up on how natural you're playing is and now they want to know what is drawing you in or how can you escape the planet like that? Everyone wants to know what you're thinking about as you go further inward. They paid to see it. Then when you're lying in bed after the show, you feel scared because you actually don't know how or whatever it is that channels through you. That is a huge mystery in improvising. Once you know your instrument ....your mind will command you to pick up the instrument at any given moment. As if you feel surprised and you lack controlling your inner desire. A calling. You begin to improvise in a single note style or naturally placing strange melodic chord voicings together. It feels channeled and I have no other words due to my lack of knowledge about the spiritual world.
I have met guitarists on the road who couldn't read a note of music. They played Jazz , Progressive Rock, and figured out Classical pieces without reading the transcription...practically perfect. So....there is something else to consider besides theory. Although theory is important to rely on as a source of music making sense to many, it is quite seperate from what is defined as the all and end result of the musicians creations. The creation can be written down for an orchestra to follow. Theory is vital in that case and being taught by a master will help you to expand musically diverse when the creations surface and you travel to the dark hole or unknown spiritual force. Other cases document that some musicians who do not read, hear everything and their hands fall naturally in place to play it. This can easily occur after learning the basics and everything feels second nature. Sometimes a musician is in touch with the forces of nature. I suppose I still question these observations, but as a musician since childhood, I must render that there is another place a musician travels to which feels powerful and unexplainable.
|
Posted By: cstack3
Date Posted: August 28 2013 at 17:32
|
^Nice post, Toddler! I once read a story (perhaps made-up?) where Andres Segovia met Django Reinhardt playing fluidly and emotionally, with tears running down his cheeks as he played. Segovia asked Reinhardt where the (transcribed) music was, and Reinhardt pointed to his temple. That really says a lot for me. I'm classically trained in voice & used to read vocal music with no problem, but I'm self-taught on guitar and bass and so am limited by lack of theory training. However, over nearly 40 years of playing, I've become comfortable with scales, modes etc. and have few limitations with improvisation. Not that all improv sounds great, mind you! There are times that I amaze myself, and other times when I know I stink! Technical skill and knowledge of theory surely enriches the ability to improvise. I'd love to be able to comp jazz like a Barney Kessel, Joe Pass etc.! Now, THIS is some improv by the Master! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6sxvext9c8" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6sxvext9c8
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 31 2013 at 15:26
Thx ... much appreciated and Toddler also put together a nice write up. We're actually very close about the points, with the exception that my experience comes from acting and directing ... and musicians don't like directors and think that they are telling them to change the music from rock'n'roll to rock'n'poop or something more insane and bizarre!
I have a parallel interest in the subject via acting ... and I posted it in another thread. And it goes like this ... and what is important here ... and the only thing that will teach you anything ... is the experience, and it does not have a lot of precedent ... and this is the kind of exercise that most musicians will never learn, and, and why there are so few Jon McLaughlin's around ... (Egberto Gismonti in his early days!).
You take about 5 or 6 actors, and you tie them up in a room for 3 hours, let's say ... the length is REALLY important ... why in a minute! You start and say ... this is this and that ... so for out exercise, let's say ... this is a nursery and you are all 5 or 6 years old!
Now you, the instructor or teacher, sit aside and watch and take notes.
Acting ... or ANY PROCESS will fall apart at about the one hour ... you run out of tricks, you run out of ideas, and you run out of processes, and you have no help, and can not talk enough to be able to discuss anything with anyone ... (thus the young age -- very important!) ... and when you start the 2nd hour, your "character" starts changing ... now you could say that it is growing up ... but sometimes the changes are drastic and not in tune with the way you started ... but you are "aimless" ... and are still struggling with what to do and what to say. You don't even REMEMBER what you did an hour ago ... and you have to continue ... and from here on, the "characters" tend to settle down and it appears that a more complete characterization starts showing up, and there is more consistency.
This is a massive exercise, that is unbelievably helpful for folks struggling with the work they do. I've done this in writing (comparatively speaking) and it works. I've had three artists do this, and it works, not to mention helping a lady draw the most fantastic line of angels you ever saw! She had the touch, though, so no issues there ... she just needed help in focusing it in a particular direction so it would not be wasted!
The main issue, is that musicians are LOUSY at getting off their duff and their "learning" in order to take it further. The world of dance has been fanatical about these exercises and extending the work ... a Misha, and many of the more famous experimental and modern dancers would not be listed anywhere if it were not for the ability to free form themselves with their craft!
Would it, ever, make music better? I don't know.
But what happened in the late 60's that brought so much of this music out, was a serious artistic revolution that helped a lot of folks create new things in many arts ... and music has become the most important of them ... since no one gives a damn about a ballerina and Ian Anderson killed her anyway, and classical music is next to 78RPM albums these days, when it comes to the amount of sales!
I sincerely, believe that the ability to learn from improvised methods was very important, and when you read Peter Brook's books about the stage directing (The Empty Space ... and the other one -- sorry title fails me), you can see why and HOW so much theater took a serious turn in London and the whole world, but the same similar process was also happening in America with The Actor's Studio ... which gave us writers AND actors and directors! And later, even NY had Fosse and Papp ... major names in the shaping of a culture definition through its work!
Music, was not immune to all this! No art, or person, ever was ... unless they had their head in the sand, and come around and go ... who's Ionesco? Who's Misha? ... who's Lawrence Olivier? Rock music, pretty much followed and copied almost verbatim ... England had "the angry young men" and America had "James Dean" ... same thing, except the leather jacket looks a lot better and cooller than the other guys!
There are, some other things here ... and I would like to go more in depth about Gurdjieff and his own studies (fabulous film called "Meeting with Remarkable Men"), that will also show some synchronicity with all this ... in a different area that I am not exactly experienced, or capable of discussing ... but the end result? ... total inner/outer synchronicity ... and this is the part of the arts ... that make them indominable and so potent ... and part that ... you can say this is the soul at its most open part ... volatile and deadly ... and sometimes violent. The extremes of these for me, would be Janis Joplin and Jim Morrison ... and you can see the utter destruction and unbelievable cry for love, when you hear the bit that was cut out of the Woodstcok film because Janis Joplin went totally nuts ... and in the end ... you listen to all these songs about love, and here she is ... still crying for it ... and it doesn't mean anything ... sorry buddy ... this is not a song! This is a life ... and it makes you wonder, where the process ends, and your life starts ... and this is the part that is hard to discuss and help artists bring foreward, and in the stage, you have to go home tonight and come back tomorrow and then back home and take care of your children ... and you are playing a murderer!
Most musicians are too tied up to their craft, to be able to improvise. Plain and simple! Most of them can only work off a note or chord because it is easy ... and simple, and takes no effort! And of course, it is not scary, because you are not getting out of the comfort zone ... and the idea of "improvisation" is to demolish that comfort zone so you know the difference!
If you are a musician, next time you want to improvise, ask yourself ... why am I doing this based on this note? Or this chord? ... when you have a good answer ... you will probably know how tied up you are to form and process! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 31 2013 at 16:34
| ^tl;dr |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: August 31 2013 at 18:28
All that needs to be said here is that you need to gain an understanding of something, and then work towards ingraining that knowledge into your brain to a point where it comes as natural as speaking, almost as a reflex. Of course there is a natural course, but the natural course is no more than your own interests. If you go against the tide of your own interests it becomes a chore.
Sometimes I feel inclined to think that it is a spiritual thing when a musician improvises because i does seem like you are tapping into a part of your brain that is seldom used, however in hindsight I actually believe that when the brain is demanded of (not forced) then it extends its capabilities to suit that. It really boils down to a science and not spirituality.
This is really a determinist argument. I don't know how much weighting you can put on the notion of "talent" therefore in this context. I don't really believe the notion has weight, moreso that an unwavering interest is ingrained in a person by his/her surrounding phenomena. Whatever we are interested in we work towards, and therefore due to the amount of work we put in it becomes natural to us, and can't be explained by folk who haven't worked at that particular skill because of that boundary set up by the workload. It is no mystery, as like I said above: the human brain accommodates the enormity of the task. There is nothing really mysterious about it I think.
I have a loaded question regarding the first portion of this paragraph: can maths exist without numbers? Sure, musicians who play by ear (I know a few too) can't recite the theory or read it off a piece of paper, but that doesn't mean that they are still not enlightened with its principles. You could still recognise a major 3rd interval without knowing what its name was or knowing what it looked like on paper, but how it works within the music can still be called theory. You can know that 2 sheep plus 2 sheep equals 4 sheep without knowing your numbers. Same applies to the latter part of this paragraph. There are no forces of nature involved or deep unexplainable spirituality, just muscle memory based on the theory. ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: September 01 2013 at 11:59
There is a great example of this with Bruce Springsteen a few years back in some of those relief bs things ... Shankar is with him warming up, and Bruce goes ... "what key you in, man?" ... and Shankar said ... you no worry about the key Mr. Springsteen, you just play and I join you!"
If that does not tell you something about "listening" and "playing" ... you're just a kid playing chords and notes! You're a beginner musician. It also, unffortunately, does not say much about Bruce's individual ability, though ... which is par for the course with the majority of popular folks, anyway! Not to mention a few "progressive" ones! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Stool Man
Date Posted: September 01 2013 at 12:15
Hello to you. I consider (having pondered the issue for a little while, and come to the following conclusion) that your post is rather too short, in my own personal opinion. Because of this conclusion which I came to, which I reached after the afore-mentioned consideration of your brief post (which I have quoted here for reference, lest I forget the context and lose my thread while I'm typing this) I have chosen to read your post on numerous occasions. The brevity of your post makes this possible, nay easy-peasy. In case I have confused you, I am willing and able to explain this more thoroughly at some length. ------------- rotten hound of the burnie crew |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: September 02 2013 at 10:40
I agree with both you and TODDLER, really. One can have reflective knowledge of music theory and implicit knowledge of it. Lack of reflective knowledge does not imply a lack of implicit knowledge. How people attain implicit knowledge is what any learning theory needs to account for. We deal with these issues all the time in linguistics. I'm a linguist by trade. In my case, for my guitar playing (not by trade), I recall reading about tension and resolution, intervals that lead toward the root note, those that lead away from it, and others that create dissonance. This made sense to me, and I have always thought since then in terms of creating tension and resolution both when I work something out with deliberation and when I improvise. Others perhaps simply hit upon it without reading about it, but I presume that everyone who improvises does this implicitly, even if somewhat mysteriously. |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: September 02 2013 at 11:49
|
^^ the condition you guys are talking about sounds like Rare Latent Inhabition.
It's a condition or ability that an individual has whereby for example, could look at say a lamp and know how to take it a part and put it back together without really knowing how the whole thing works. Not many have this ability, but in music I'd say it definitely exits. Anyway. Great posts and interesting forum.  ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: September 03 2013 at 11:53
|
Agreed.
Which is, for all intents and purposes, what my write up is about! It is the part that I am more experienced with having had the opportunity to work it with actors, up to and including "psychic" exercises. Attaining "implicit" knowledge, is not easy, and requires a lot of self, internal work, that many folks are not willing to do, and learn from. This is very hard in "acting", where your "character is VISIBLE ... whereas in music, this tends to be a completely invisible demon -- well, we like to call it that ... and say played like the devil! Haha! There is no "implicit knowledge" in the design and work of a "raga", for example, WHEN IT HITS, though more than likely the player will start with a theme, and the idea is to lose it and become so tied to the music itself that the "notes" become invisible, and you just sit there and appreciate the music coming, and this is NOT the classical music appreciation society counting every note and every this and that and telling you that you don't know what the iambic pentameter is all about (no kidding! btw!). On a different vein, there would also not BE ... such a thing as "implicit knowledge" as it would be impossible to do 2 things at the same time, and you can not make notes or take notes while you are doing this ... and if you record this and then have Sibelius give you a sheet of paper with all the notes, THEN, and only THEN can you sometimes formulate what it is you did ... and go about trashing the parts you don't like! The best example I can give you ... is the exercise above ... and you have to make it long ... or you will not even come close to start breaking barriers ... once you get past 2 hours, you will notice the difference, and how you feel about what you are doing and playing, and all of a sudden, it is different ... totally different ... than just a few notes here and there, which most ACADEMICS think that the students and masters HAVE TO DO to show their VIRTUOSITY! Or they are just rock'n'rollers! The biggest issue is that rock musicians are afraid to learn these things, and this was what "krautrock" was about in Germany ... and the reason why I find it as good as it is ... it's not self-conscious ... it is the ultimate western raga ... but we think we invented the western world, and God and all that, and no one else out there can have any credit or idea that is ... right on and with it, and a great teaching tool ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 03 2013 at 12:35
|
wtf does iambic pentameter have to do with classical music appreciation? ------------- What? |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: September 04 2013 at 12:19
Some of the English Professors at UCSB went to the plays and complained that we did not know how to do the Iambic Pentameter, and that our diction was all wrong. Considering one was a musical farce and such, his comments were so academic and full of ... custard ... that we chose to let it slide ... but the same thing happens here, and in music departments, when improvisation for them is SOMETHING THEY KNOW ... not something they don't know or understand!
It's the veritable STAFF banging on the ground in "Amadeus" ... or nowadays ... even worse ... the DAW! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 04 2013 at 12:33
You said:
So I asked:
I did not ask you what iambic pentameter has to do with Shakespeare (in which case if you put the emphasis on the wrong syllable then your diction would therefore be all wrong) or musical farce (which is unlikely to be in iambic pentameter and is very unlikely to be called "classical music"), but what it has to do with classical music appreciation.
------------- What? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 04 2013 at 12:42
What does this even mean? I mean literally and semantically btw, not philosophiocally or ideologically or metahysically or any of that make-it-up-as-you-go-along drivel. ------------- What? |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: September 05 2013 at 08:43
I read an interesting book on the relationship between music and poetry once having said that... So I kind of get moshkito's meaning ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 05 2013 at 09:02
So in Pedro's absence, would you care to elucidate? I mean on the particular sentence I quoted... STAFFs and DAWs. I don't mean on the relationship of iambic pentameter to music (the meter in pentameter gives the game away there), because I know that is about rhythm and tempo and how that relates to the natural rhythm and tempo of life, the dynamics of speech and the drama of ... well, drama, so it is then music in words (as opposed to the words in music that are found in musical farce and opera). Understanding music allows us to understand, interpret and enjoy the plays of Shakespeare as they were written, rather than a cold reading of the words off the page - understanding iambic pentameter will gain you no insight into the appreciation of music, classical or otherwise. Which is why I pushed this question in the first place. ------------- What? |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: September 05 2013 at 09:26
I'm not going to elucidate on Pedro's point because in all honesty I don't REALLY know what he's talking about, but I get the gist. All I was really commenting on is a human being's natural aesthetic attraction to rhythm and pattern, and thus it dominates almost everything in our lives, including our speech. Even if you look at prose, it has a rhythm to it (regular syllable lengths) if we're talking of the literary greats like Dickens, Fitzgerald and Tolstoy. If we go into poetry there is a distinct relationship to music. It's renowned that Emily Dickenson wrote bar lines and rhythmical marks on her manuscripts, similarly with Blake. ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 05 2013 at 09:42
Sure, as I said - I don't need that explaining, I got that. I even got (and fully understand) how and why the English Professors at UCSB would say that a group of actors did not know how to do the Iambic Pentameter, and that their diction was all wrong - that's pretty basic Drama-101 Chapter 1, Lesson 1: Shakespeare. I would have thought my last post would have been enough to show that I got that. That does not explain what iambic pentameter has to do with classical music appreciation - because it has nothing to do with it, even after the amusing UCSB annecdote. You could, I suppose, argue that (instrumental) music has a language, but that would also be "wrong" in this particular instance, because that language is not written in iambic pentameter. ------------- What? |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: September 05 2013 at 09:50
As I said, I don't really know what he was talking about with the iambic pentameter thing. Regarding whether instrumental music has its own "language"... At music college we have this debate all the time. I can only conclude that it's categorically not because it in no way communicates anything specific. ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 05 2013 at 10:05
Presactly. It can convey an impression of emotion or feeling, and even a narrative to some extent, but there is no vocabulary within leitmotifs and phrases of music to be interpreted or translated. ------------- What? |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: September 05 2013 at 10:44
I like that word... I'm going to start using it if you don't mind? But yeah, I think we agree on that one. I think when music is called a language (often is the case in Jazz) I think the word used in that sense as an abstract, not literally. ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |