Melody versus scale-based soloing.

Buco

Jazzaferri wrote: »

Without naming names, I hVe been lee visiting Selmer 607 invite over the past week. Good examples of both in that CD.

Ha, maybe a week ago I listened to that album again and there was a song where a solo sounded exactly like playing a scale up and down and nothing else. It was fast and clean and groovy but just a scale. I didn't look up who it was playing on the song, I was driving at the time but remember thinking this guy is playing a scale.

In my view, though I'm unbaked in theory, melody soloing is scale based. Some melodies change the key of the song, then eventually come home.
I would maybe contrast that with arpeggios and chord tones based soloing. Both can be robotic and unimaginative. That's where the performer's artistry comes to play.
I have to admit that most of my soloing is in the key of the song with adjusting by ear to outline chord changes that coy be outside the key.

Nice to see you back @Chiefbigeasy

Jazzaferri

Lots of songs, while usually just written in one key signature, change key once or even two or three times in the form.

Jazzaferri

Jazz schools train players that way. Not sure why they think it a good thing.

Flash runs build up a huge amount of tension/excitement that when used artistically and released frequently can create a wonderful intensity of feeling IMO.

Playing high speed "sheets of sound" notes through a whole form without a break just comes across to me as angst at best. Most of the time I end up thinking that the person has nothing to communicate.

Bones

I think part of it, especially in jazz and in this genre, is to demonstrate that one CAN play thru tricky changes, actually nail the changes, without stopping. An example would be playing thru Christophe changes with continuous eighth notes at fast tempos.

Similarly with the flashy fast triplet or sixteenth note runs. Obviously, these are previously worked out 'licks' that can be thrown in to add excitement and demonstrate technical expertise.

Buco

Jazzaferri wrote: »

Jazz schools train players that way. Not sure why they think it a good thing.

Interesting.
Can you expand so I'm sure it is like I'm guessing it?

Chiefbigeasy

Ok guys, don't fall down the rabbit hole here.

My original observation was that I remember reading someone on this forum saying he could kind of tell, while listening to a solo, whether the player was trained primarily formally--drawing from the scales and arpeggios for solos--vs someone who seemed to be drawn to finding melody or trying to play more lyrically when soloing.

Obviously, in any beautiful, lyrical, melodic solo, one can identify the scales, arpeggios, structure, etc. And, I'm not saying that there's not something to say when stating the simple arpeggio. I'm not going to about it with Philip Glass.

I guess I'm also saying that it's a choice that I'm fortunate enough to have, to attempt to pursue solos in this manner, because I, like many guitarists, am not formally trained. Studying gypsy jazz is the closest I've ever come to formal musical training since my brief stint on the French Horn in high school band.

So, forgive my for trying to keep my approach simple. I am identifying my inclination toward melody in my soloing, reserving the right to throw in the occasional scale/arpeggio/chromatic run, flashy statements, etc.

The easiest place to practice this is in ballads. I've had good success with "Nuages" and "Clare de "Lune." Next, blues based tunes like "Minor Swing" and "Blues Mineur" offer good opportunities because of small number of changes. In the case of the ballads, speed is my friend because I have enough time to compose on the fly. In the blues tunes, the simple changes offer the advantage of large open spaces over the chords to experiment; also, the energy of the tempo can support experimentation and reward.

I'm hoping I'm making myself a little more clear, and I'm also hoping for some examples for some others. As I mentioned earlier, obvious melodic solos come to mind like Django's "I'll See You In My Dreams" and "Honeysuckle Rose." I find some of Stochelo's tunes such as his version of "Coquette" very lyrically interesting.

Any favorites come to mind?

Chiefbigeasy

That line should have read "I'm not going to argue about it with Philip Glass."

Charles Meadows

I had made a comment similar to that. As someone for whom improvising does not come naturally I am interested in how others tend to approach it. Is it stringing licks together - or following a melody you hear? Probably a mix of both. I'm learning more licks - but I'm always in awe of the guys who pull beautiful "non-lick" lines out of the air. I've also found, in transcribing a lot of licks, that most of the newer players seems to play licks that are more friendly to scale or arp patterns we are familiar with. Others (like Angelo in particular) seem to have "default" patterns that don't conform to these patterns that "trained" players are likely to be familiar with. I'm anxious to see what Denis Chang does with his Angelo Debarre lessons on DC music school.

Chiefbigeasy

I thought it was you, Charles. See what you started! (I'm glad you did.)

Jazzaferri

@Buco ....In the top jazz schools in the US a few grads have to,d me that in order to pass the juries (at least in sax) one has to demonstrate proficiency in two Octave scales at 300 bpm eighth notes. In sax that is wiggle fingers and blow territory. Like drumming ones fingers

For guitar I do not know what the requirement is but I would bet it's not far off that. Having to spend the time to get to that level, no wonder it's hard to break out of a scalar approach.

Kenny Werner comments about the thousands of new technically brilliant players jazz schools pump out every year, yet he says there are still only a few artists among them.