How to Study patterns?
dirk
som very good patterns wich i plan to study.
I know i should practice these in all keys to get them in my vocabulary.
Now may i write them all out in every key or should i study it 1 key
thoroughly and then transpose it without writing it down?
The last method seems to me the most difficult the first one means a lot of
writing.
All help appreciated
Dirk
Greg clayton
material you are referring to.
Jazz is syncopation and all pattern studies I've seen are devoid
of the rhythm which make jazz what it is.
Once you have practiced things and ingrained them it's doubly difficult
to break out and devise fingerings on the spot to get the phrase to swing
with jazz rhythmic conception
I'd suggest learning jazz lines[heads,melodies] from the
record so correct phrasing and inflection are ingrained from the start. You
can use your fake book as an aide but I've heard many young players playing
lines and one just knows they have not paid attention to the recordings.
Patterns etc can be instructive regarding seeing and hearing
"what's there" in a given material,scale,pitch group etc but once you
know your alphabet throw the book away and start speaking!
You can learn so much from just the heads and then if you feel
you want to go to the solo's the music is all there.
My 2 cents
keep swinging
Greg Clayton
"dirk" <dd-...@hot-mail.com> wrote in message
news:BcNI8.100233$Ze.1...@afrodite.telenet-ops.be...
Mark Kleinhaut
"Greg clayton" <gregc...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>IMO Patterns are a waste of time once you know the fingerings of whatever
>material you are referring to.
> Jazz is syncopation and all pattern studies I've seen are devoid
>of the rhythm which make jazz what it is.
> Once you have practiced things and ingrained them it's doubly difficult
>to break out and devise fingerings on the spot to get the phrase to swing
>with jazz rhythmic conception
> I'd suggest learning jazz lines[heads,melodies] from
the
>record so correct phrasing and inflection are ingrained from the start.
You
>can use your fake book as an aide but I've heard many young players playing
>lines and one just knows they have not paid attention to the recordings.
> Patterns etc can be instructive regarding seeing and hearing
>"what's there" in a given material,scale,pitch group etc but once you
>know your alphabet throw the book away and start speaking!
> You can learn so much from just the heads and then if you feel
>you want to go to the solo's the music is all there.
> My 2 cents
> keep swinging
> Greg Clayton
In other words, if one spends lots of time practicing patterns they will
just program themselves to regurgitate patterns when they step up to solo?
This is true of scales too? Isn't it true of transcribed solos as well?
And heads?
I agree that whatever we input during practice time is ultimately what will
come out on the bandstand. If we practice playing what jazz sounds like,
we will will in turn sound like we're playing jazz. It's so simple really.
--------------------Mark Kleinhaut
markkl...@hotmail.com
Info and soundclips about:
"Chasing Tales":
http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/Chasing%20Tales.html
"Amphora":
http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/Amphora.html
"Secrets of Three": http://www.invisiblemusicrecords.com/Resources/SO3.html
Max Leggett
burned into my memory better. If a thing's in Bb, once you've
transposed it to F everything else will be easy because you'll be
recognising intervals.
Bob Russell
gregc...@videotron.ca wrote on 5/28/02 1:39 PM:
> Patterns etc can be instructive regarding seeing and hearing
> "what's there" in a given material,scale,pitch group etc but once you
> know your alphabet throw the book away and start speaking!
> You can learn so much from just the heads and then if you feel
> you want to go to the solo's the music is all there.
> My 2 cents
That's worth a lot more than two cents! Learn (and make up) lines/phrases,
not "patterns". If you want to learn to play music better, practice playing
music.
-- Bob Russell
http://www.bobrussellguitar.com
Thom_j.
lines/phrases by just picking any spot on the fretboard & see
what I come up with, but for the 'sake of playing better' with
the "make up) lines/phrases" isnt it best to do both?
tia.. thom_j.
dirk
directly from records of gifted jazz musicians.
So i think i can assume i can get as much mileage
out of it as if i transcribed the myself.
btw this pattern study i'm planning to do is only a part
of my study , i also transcribe , play over aebersold cd's etc..
The main reason for doing these patterns in my case is
hopefully for improving my ear/finger relationship and
my vocabulary and to break out of too much scalar
improvisation.
Feel free to correct me if im wrong.
Dirk
"Bob Russell" <bobrus...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:B91940BF.3B1A%bobrus...@hotmail.com...
Greg clayton
I think you missed my point, I was not talking about what way to practice
I was talking about learning the language with the accents etc, nuances
really.
In my experience phrasing jazz is very difficult on guitar as it's really
a trumpet and then sax language historically.
[Of course there are exceptions] I do not advocate memorizing ANYTHING to
then regurgitate the licks of others no matter how great.
After 35 plus years of playing I 'm trying to play only what I hear for
better or worse.
I just suggest [in particular to those just starting out]
that one is best off learning to play this language by emulating the
masters and doing lots of listening to the music you are trying to play.
Much like painters, writers and other artists do, and in the same way we all
learn to speak English. We all know very articulate people who have long
forgotten the theory of their native language[if they ever knew it at all in
theory] but are fluent expressing their own ideas in the vernacular.
In my experience,[and I learned a lot in my early days playing
with and watching older jazz musicians] when I did spend time[later]
studying the guitar in an abstract way it was of great benefit to me but
there were things that I had to later "unlearn" from this guitar centric
period as, In my opinion, they were hampering my ability to really play by
ear and phrase ideas in the way I needed to.
I think we must be carefull not to practice so much stuff at home
that when we get on the stand with others we have all this stuff coming out
by habit. Most rhythm section players if they are being honest can talk at
great length about the problem of guys not relating to them and what they
bring to the mix. They hate being live abersold playalongs.
I am not trying to deny anyone else's methods but to
just drop in a few things I've experienced in many years of performing jazz
.[and teaching at McGill .]
Mark, being experienced players I think we sometimes forget that
things we take for granted are not so obvious to young musicians who are
just feeling their way.
cheers
greg c
"Mark Kleinhaut" <markkl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3cf3...@spamkiller.newsgroups.com...
SteGre
most productive time I've spent is sitting and learning solo lines to standard
from various people. I've been using a Marantz PSD 230. It is very slick... you
can slow down items without changing pitch, and vice versa. Regards, Steve
Bob Russell
thom_...@yahoo.com wrote on 5/28/02 2:41 PM:
> Bob, I agree and I love just fiddlin' around trying to make up
> lines/phrases by just picking any spot on the fretboard & see
> what I come up with, but for the 'sake of playing better' with
> the "make up) lines/phrases" isnt it best to do both?
> tia.. thom_j.
There's enough "technical material" just in Charlie Parker heads to keep
most people busy for a long, long time. And when you get done with Bird,
there's Herbie Hancock and Wayne Shorter and - well, you get the picture.
This stuff all makes heavy technical demands on a player, plus it has actual
musical value. Just by learning to play the music (assuming you're thinking
about what you're playing), you're getting a course in how to make lines,
how to deal with harmony. And when you're done, you know a bunch of tunes!
You can actually play gigs!
Don't get me wrong; exercises have their place as long as they don't become
the whole focus of practice. Personally, I've always preferred to make
"exercises" out of tunes. For example, if I find myself stumbling a lot on
string-crossing, I'll make it a point to play the head to "Freedom Jazz
Dance" more often. String-crosses galore, plus it's music! You should get
creative with this, too. Say a figure from "Joy Spring" is giving you
trouble: Take that sucker, play it in all 12 keys, play it on all possible
string groups, start it with an upstroke, start it with a downstroke, play
it fingerstyle. Before too long, you'll OWN the sumbitch. You'll also have
made some "mistakes" which'll give you some ideas for lines of your own.
Thom_j.
end, I started my Quest of playing 'real jazz' seriously about 13-14
months ago and I thought well this cant be that bad as my dad did
it most of his life. Then I also had my classical training with all my
years of rock/blues, blues/fusion, fusion, blues playing, so I'll just
step right up "play away" like I did with my other genres of music.
Not true, not true at all!
I forgot that all the years I played on stage, and in the studio' was
mostly linear and my chordal abilities had become poor putting it
lightly. So I started trying Pass pieces and thought what is wrong
here? It was, & is me! I was really ticked that so much of my old
playing abilities had gone down the tubes. I had no one to blame
but myself and I'm just now starting to re'group & re'coop some
of my internal playing style from my old'n days. What a shocker
for me.
I have tons of music here and I have even looked at some of my
dad's old 30s-40s-50s stuff but for now I am taking it like a new
toddler.. Doing what you stated, and right now I am using "The
Ellington Collection for Solo Guitar" so I will be better with my
melody & harmony together. I feel like I am starting again but I
am also trying to incorporate my other style in between too, so
I still have the 'thom_j' playing style still in there. I can blues til
the sun don't shine, but do I ever need more time with learning
some good jazz standard melody & chording. A lot more time
folks!! Ok, I 'fessed' up kids.. :) a humbled thom_j.
phew this was a long post for me.. ouch ...
"Bob Russell" <bobrus...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:B919675A.3B39%bobrus...@hotmail.com...
Rick Ross
If we practice playing what jazz sounds like,
> we will will in turn sound like we're playing jazz. It's so simple
really.
>
this speaks directly to the book by Bunky Greene.I think it was originally
called "Jazz in a Nutshell"..essentially a compilation of jazz II-V-I
patterns in all keys..ingest the jazzy phrases to the point where they flow
from the fingertips and learn where to plug them in and miraculously you
find yourself tweaking the rhythms and pitches towards a personal sound...
Dan Cooper
"Rick Ross" <rick...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:7lUI8.7775$fg3.3...@news1.news.adelphia.net...
Herb Ellis' course is also based on the same precept. It seems like the
right way to go for me right now. Of course, different people learn
differently.
Dan
Kev
> The patterns i was talking about were mostly lifted
> directly from records of gifted jazz musicians.
> So i think i can assume i can get as much mileage
> out of it as if i transcribed the myself.
> btw this pattern study i'm planning to do is only a part
> of my study , i also transcribe , play over aebersold cd's etc..
> The main reason for doing these patterns in my case is
> hopefully for improving my ear/finger relationship and
> my vocabulary and to break out of too much scalar
> improvisation.
>
> Feel free to correct me if im wrong.
> Dirk
>
>
No correction necessary. I think that stuff's useful. I think the only danger is
in doing too much "importing" of information, and not enough application of it.
But, that's pretty much what the Aebersold's are good for, they offer a kind of
laboratory for applying pretty much whatever you want to a tune. I'm totally
into checking out patterns from time to time. Sometimes it's useful to take an
idea that's pretty alien, like some of the 4-note groupings in the Slonimsky
thesaurus, and work with it until it becomes a part of you, technically and
musically. Recently I've been doing some sight-singing of really chromatic stuff
as a regular part of the shedding process, and I'm thinking I should be doing
that with any bop-oriented material as well, including any transcribed ideas.
I've found vocalizing to be very helpful in learning tunes, in that once I'm
away from my apartment, perhaps in the car or whatever, i can review the root
progression be singing it, or the melody, or guide-tones.
Sorry! Another tangent! Anyway, I think you're on the right track, and that
we all pretty much recognize the pitfalls of getting too caught up in pattern-
oriented practice.
I'd say that picking a couple distant keys (from the original), and writing
the stuff out in them would be beneficial. I guess it depends on how strong
your theoretical training is, as to how necessary it is to write it in all keys.
But, it's definitely essential to *hear* it in all keys, like taking it through
the cycle of fourths for instance, or some other non-stepwise sequence.
cl...@claymoore.com
>The patterns i was talking about were mostly lifted
>directly from records of gifted jazz musicians.
>So i think i can assume i can get as much mileage
>out of it as if i transcribed the myself.
>btw this pattern study i'm planning to do is only a part
>of my study , i also transcribe , play over aebersold cd's etc..
>The main reason for doing these patterns in my case is
>hopefully for improving my ear/finger relationship and
>my vocabulary and to break out of too much scalar
>improvisation.
Hi Dirk,
The points by others are well taken. I've worked out of the Baker
Bebop books myself, as well as solos in Joe Pass's and Sam Most's
books, and I think they were useful for getting some of the jazz
vocabulary down. I don't think you need to write them out in all keys,
just play them. One thing I think was useful for me from doing these
lines is I was able then to vary them according to what I knew and
heard. IOW, if a particular line has a G7 arpeggio in the middle I
could substitute a G7b9, or any of the other "G7" sounds I knew. The
more often you do that, the easier it gets, and you'll soon find
yourself "inventing" your own bop type lines on the spot. At least, it
seemed to work this way for me.
In answer to some who have mentioned that pattern practice is
unhelpful, I think a number of great jazz players have had periods in
their development when they practiced patterns and were able to
incorporate those into their playing without it becoming a boring
exercise. Joe Diorio and Pat Martino are two guitarists who have gone
on public record to say they've done this, and they don't suck. Mike
Brecker described how he practiced patterns at a clinic I was at, so
did Wayne Krantz. Coltrane, McCoy Tyner, Herbie Hancock supposedly
practiced from Slonimsky's Scales and Melodic Patterns, and especially
in Hancock I think you can hear it, but again it doesn't sound like it
hurt them, particularly. I think if you've got the background and
understanding of playing jazz with others it's just another pallette.
Clay Moore
Jordan Katz
> IMO Patterns are a waste of time once you know the fingerings of whatever
> material you are referring to.
> Jazz is syncopation and all pattern studies I've seen are devoid
> of the rhythm which make jazz what it is.
> Once you have practiced things and ingrained them it's doubly difficult
> to break out and devise fingerings on the spot to get the phrase to swing
> with jazz rhythmic conception
[snip]
I think your advice is wonderful and I'm definitely
going to apply it. However, I have a question which I think is
similar to what was being asked. This one is about patterns of scales
on the fretboard rather than patterns as in exercises (like the ones
in Oliver Nelson's "Patterns"). I think the OP was referring to the
latter, I'm asking about the former.
Learning heads and rhythms is great because as you phrased (no pun
intended) much more eloquently than I can, it teaches you how to
play jazz. However, in my mind patterns are necessary for
improvisation which is so critical to jazz. In order words, if I know
how to really swing a melody, but I need to solo on a tune and I don't
know where I can play all the relevant scales, there ain't much to
swing :). This rather monotonous task of learning all the scales
seems so crucial yet unmanagably overwhelming. I'm thinking that I'm
either wrong about how crucial this technical knowledge is or about
how overwhelming it is in reality to study, and I am wondering what
you guys think.
For example, it boggles my mind that if I ask my guitar teacher to
play Db Mixolydian, he can in his sleep play it in 10 different shapes
across the neck. It seems infinite to me to study and correctly
differentiate between the shapes of all the 21 (I think?) modes, the
major scales, pentatonics, etc. Thinking about the amount of scales
there are to find on the fretboard is overwhelming enough, and adding
the fact that to really move around you need to know at least 5
patterns on the neck of each scale doesn't help.
This knowledge that based on my understanding seems so overwhelming
also seems necessary. If I see Db7 on a tune and I really want to be
able to know where all the notes I can hit are, I have to know all the
shapes of Db mixolydian well enough to then begin thinking about
phrasing and rhythm and all the stuff that really matters.
To conclude this blabber; is this really necessary? Am I exaggerating
it? If it is necessary, what are managable ways of approaching it and
what are some good books for that if any?
Thanks a lot!
--
Jordan Katz <ka...@underlevel.net> | Mind the gap
Dan Adler
> called "Jazz in a Nutshell"..essentially a compilation of jazz II-V-I
> patterns in all keys..ingest the jazzy phrases to the point where they flow
> from the fingertips and learn where to plug them in and miraculously you
> find yourself tweaking the rhythms and pitches towards a personal sound...
The book is now called "Inside/Outside" and it's available from
Aebersold.
There is no point in getting this book unless you plan to actually
play all the exercises because there is no information in it other
than the exercises.
http://www.jazzbooks.com/scripts/search.asp?detail=1&item=111
There is also a book that I find interesting by Eric: Comprehensive
Jazz Studies And Exercises
http://www.jazzbooks.com/scripts/search.asp?detail=1&item=718
It's a bunch of patterns, but the idea of how to practice then is kind
of interesting. Basically, you play a pattern, then move it up/down in
m2, m3, p4, etc. - you don't really need the book for that..
Jack A. Zucker
> IMO Patterns are a waste of time once you know the fingerings of whatever
> material you are referring to.
> Jazz is syncopation and all pattern studies I've seen are devoid
> of the rhythm which make jazz what it is.
I couldn't disagree more. Jazz is a language and patterns are part of
every language.
Some of the best improvisers in history make excellent use of
patterns:
John Coltrane, Mike Brecker, Herbie Hancock, Chick Corea, etc...
And some very prominant guitarists utilize patterns in very exciting
ways:
Joe Diorio, Pat Martino, George Benson, Wes Montgomery, Paul
Bollenback, etc.
Creativity is in the mind of the artist. Patterns are what you make of
them.
Jaz
Jack A. Zucker
P.S.
Ever hear of Slonimsky's "Thesaurus of scales and melodic patterns"?
Is that book a waste of time?
Coltrane, Brecker, Hancock and almost every other modern improviser
has spent hundreds of hours practicing material from that book.
Jaz
cl...@claymoore.com
wrote:
>I couldn't disagree more. Jazz is a language and patterns are part of
>every language.
>
>Some of the best improvisers in history make excellent use of
>patterns:
>
>John Coltrane, Mike Brecker, Herbie Hancock, Chick Corea, etc...
Not to mention that any tune or sequence of chords that you might use
to blow over is a pattern. That is the supposed reason for the 12 bar
blues form. In early recording days the self-taught "country" blues
players who came to the studios didn't play according to conventions
concerning repeated forms, measures, etc. (check out Lightnin'
Hopkins, for example) and in order to get everyone on the same page
some producer decided it should be 12 measures. Most "standards" are
32 measures, without which we'd all be playing free jazz, I suppose.
Many melodies are patterns (Autumn Leaves, All the Things You Are),
which makes them easy to learn and analyze.
Clay Moore
John Pin
I reckon....get a bunch of solos that you love.
Find cliches, licks that are played in various harmonic situations.
Put them in your practice routine. Play them over and over so that you
internalise the phrase.
Them apply it ..mechanically at first..into your improvs.
Do this enough and your will build a vocab.
In time you will morph the licks into your own.
99.9% of Jazz players..do this.
including Parker.
Whilst its not hte only way to learn..its a part of your routine that you
should not neglect.
go for it.
JP
"Jordan Katz" <ka...@underlevel.net> wrote in message
news:m3d6ve9...@underlevel.underlevel.net...
Nazodesu
<jp...@optushome.com.au> wrote:
> Well i differ. I reckon....get a bunch of solos that you love.
>
> Find cliches, licks that are played in various harmonic situations.
> Put them in your practice routine. Play them over and over so that
> you internalise the phrase. Them apply it ..mechanically at
> first..into your improvs. Do this enough and your will build a vocab.
> In time you will morph the licks into your own.
I guess it's important to add that you need to *stop* playing them when
they become your cliches, not building blocks of other stuff. At some
level you won't be ABLE to, just like it's tough to stop using a word.
But you should avoid hard-coding them too much. I found licks very
useful, but wouldn't counsel using them as a part of regular
repetitious practice. Patterns, yes. Licks, no.
One of the important thing about learning licks is the learning.
Hearing another player do it, figuring it out, finding a way/place to
play it, playing it till you can do it smoothly. All of this is very
important in and of itself.