The mindset of an improviser

A

ABlueJazzBassist

"Always play beautifully."
Dec 26, 2012
120
2
4,726
#1
Hello, Mr. Seaton, my question is about what sort of state of mind you are (ideally) in when improvising. I realize there isn't a universal answer that will work for everyone, I'm just curious. I've been reading a lot of interviews by the greats such as Lee Konitz and Red Mitchell, and also the thought processes of some like Bill Evans and Sonny Rollins, and I've come to realize there are a lot of approaches to creation. Especially on the bass. Bass playing can become almost a craft instead of an art where you're constantly solving the "puzzle" of playing the changes, and honestly, some people can make that sound great, and there playing isn't devoid of emotion, and they stay creative. And being able to do this well I think is a necessity since we aren't always going to be feeling on, and won't be inspired/sometimes will be in playing situations (for me sight-reading some complex chord changes) where we don't because of lack of musicianship high enough feel what's coming, and so have to rely on what we know theoretically.

However, some people advocate a polar opposite approach where they literally try to completely lose awareness of themselves, and honestly a lot of the musicians I know at my age (and some older) who advocate this approach just sound like they are wiggling their fingers through patterns familiar to their muscle memory.

I've found the most successful mindset to take in creating in the moment is a compromise between the two views. Its not really locked into manically figuring out each note in succession. But its not completely unaware either. Instead, I feel like I'm more focusing on developing the arc of my lines dynamically, and composing the bigger structure of the solo. Instead of thinking note to note, or even phrase to phrase, its has an idea of where to go, where to come from, and how to get there without being too specific or strict.

While obviously I have much technique to develop, most of the time in performance I feel much more held back by my mindset then by technical limitations.

Anyways, that's all way to much information for a simple question: what do you think about (or not) when you're improvising? And also, what do you do that helps you to reach the the ideal mindset as often as possible? I'd really appreciate all help, and I can say for myself that I will not be offended if the answer includes some spiritual/religious/philosophical whatever elements. I realize the question is one that applies to how we live our lives in general. Thanks Mr. Seaton!
 
#2
Hi,
What an interesting question. I hope there are many comments from across the spectrum from people that read this forum.
The similarities between language and music are many and certainly apply to my mindset when improvising. I spent a lot of time transcribing and LISTENING to the master players. The time spent learning the craft of music is so that I don't have to think of the minute details when playing. Just as when talking I don't consciously think of the rules of grammar, I don't have to think about the fundamentals of music or technique on my instrument. That is only possible because of extensive work on those things off the bandstand. Remember to not be hindered by a limited technique or experience. A delightful conversation can be had with a child who has much less language skills and has not read as much of the classics. In jazz, sometimes people get so hung up about what that can't do that they can't do anything with what they have. That is sad. Continue to strive to be more musically eloquent, but great music can be made with all skill levels when it is sincere and comes from the heart.

My ideal mindset when playing music is this:
When truly in the zone, I am a puppeteer watching the entire bandstand who controls the actions of the bass player in the ensemble. I am aware of the other players and can see and hear how what I am doing fits in with the them. I change my improvisations, basslines, dynamics, tone, etc. as if I were a third party observer controlling my music from the inside and outside. "Be your own sound engineer" is one of my favorite conceptual catch phrases.
 
#3
What a quick response. Thank you! I also hope we get a lot of replies we have a lot of very experienced and interesting players on this forum who could contribute a whole lot. I see what you're saying about technique and I can relate very much to your ideal mindset. That is the perfect place to be. Anyways, hoping this gets a lot of comments.
 
#4
Connie Crothers had an interesting thing to say at a workshop I was at last year - the difference between listening and hearing is that the former is an activity and the latter is awareness. Not thinking in a conscious, intellectual way is NOT the same thing as not being aware. I've quoted this before too, it's probably the best piece of musical advice I've gotten over the years - Don't let what you want to happen interfere with what is actually happening. Lynn makes a great point about using what you have RIGHT NOW to make music. You don't need to grab a dictionary and look up a bunch of new words to have a conversation, right? You just use the language you have the most nuanced control of to say what you mean with as much specificity as you can muster (and to be an artist, you do so in a way that not only speaks to the immediate moment, but also the universal infinite. And does so in a way that highlights the beauty of the language).
The question I would ask is, how you are "focusing on developing the arc of my lines"? Because what I would say is that your ear is what should be guiding that and any decision made "consciously" as an intellectual construct will lack relation to the moment at hand because of that.

A few years back I was doing pretty regular duo sessions with a pretty wonderful pianist, Jon Easton, and we were talking about playing together and how to keep that open and interactive but not reactive. My question was how to approach playing with him, since my ear was nowhere as deep as his and his response was that neither of us really had to hear and define exactly and precisely what the other was playing if we were both improvising with the same melody in our ear and an awareness of what the other was playing, what we were doing would be musical.

Jon's solo starts at about 6:40
 
#5
Hey Ed I really agree, and I'll sort of posture the things going through my head on a good day so you can see what's going on a little bit. Also, I try to really sing an idea and then play it but my ability to instantly transcribe my own lines is still not so great so that often becomes a challenging route at times.

Anyways, when I say develop the arc of my lines these are usually my thoughts:

"quieter, softer... increased intensity... raise it up into the upper register... repeat the opening phrase up an octave "

Its a structural approach. The notes fill themselves in somewhat, and its aware of the song and focused on the big picture of the solo.

I'm torn between this and the singing approach. The structural approach for lack of a better word often leads to a satisfying and beautiful musical creation that I enjoy.

But I thing the most inventive lines and the truest improvisations come from the singing. I just don't have the chops to play what I scat yet often. Also, I have a few breathing problems (can't breathe through my nose) that make singing very exhausting and I need to breathe a lot, which can add space when needed to a line I know, but honestly it just seems to get in the way a lot of times.
 
#6
Ed Fuqua said:
Connie Crothers had an interesting thing to say at a workshop I was at last year - the difference between listening and hearing is that the former is an activity and the latter is awareness. Not thinking in a conscious, intellectual way is NOT the same thing as not being aware.
Click to expand...

Agree. I like to talk to students about having "cat ears". When you walk past a sleeping cat, the ears follow your movement even when the cat isn't "awake" or certainly is not moving. In a playing situation, you can be immersed in the totality of the music, but have cat ears for interesting things that other people are playing - things that may or may not affect what you are doing depending on what's going in total. Cats are aware in the sense mentioned above. Of course, they sometimes seem remarkably stupid in other ways, but that's another story.

I've quoted this before too, it's probably the best piece of musical advice I've gotten over the years - Don't let what you want to happen interfere with what is actually happening. Lynn makes a great point about using what you have RIGHT NOW to make music. You don't need to grab a dictionary and look up a bunch of new words to have a conversation, right? You just use the language you have the most nuanced control of to say what you mean with as much specificity as you can muster (and to be an artist, you do so in a way that not only speaks to the immediate moment, but also the universal infinite. And does so in a way that highlights the beauty of the language).
Click to expand...

Totally agree. A great melody is like a great poem. But what makes either great? Is it the extensive use of complicated polysyllabic vocabulary? It can be, but it doesn't have to be. In my experience most great melodies and poems are more about how elements are put together in a way that gives them motion and meaning. And most of the ones I actually recall again and again have precious few complex words, but are none the less still beautiful.
 
#7
:) very nice guys!
I ponder this a lot. Being so structured in theory and fundamentals that you naturally play without thinking about it, it's hard. But when you can freely play with your subconscious structuring yourself you can play with emotion!
 
#8
Craig Green said:
Anyways, when I say develop the arc of my lines these are usually my thoughts:

"quieter, softer... increased intensity... raise it up into the upper register... repeat the opening phrase up an octave "

Its a structural approach. The notes fill themselves in somewhat, and its aware of the song and focused on the big picture of the solo.
Click to expand...
Have you ever heard anyone say of someone, when discussing their conversational style "They're not really listening to you, they're just waiting for you to stop talking so that they can tell you what they wanted to say all along."? To me, that's exactly what you're describing above. It's WAY too conscious to be "in the moment".


Craig said:
But I thing the most inventive lines and the truest improvisations come from the singing. I just don't have the chops to play what I scat yet often. Also, I have a few breathing problems (can't breathe through my nose) that make singing very exhausting and I need to breathe a lot, which can add space when needed to a line I know, but honestly it just seems to get in the way a lot of times.
Click to expand...
I know I've typed this before too, but...
I felt much the same way and I was talking to my teacher Joe about it and he was dubious. So he suggested a little 'speriment - he'd comp (piano) and I'd play 8 bars and then sing 8 bars, back and forth over and over. We'd stop and move the play/sing so that I wasn't doing the same 8 bars the same way every time ( and I'm pretty sure this was on JUST FRIENDS) and what he was able to prove to me was that, if I was really HEARING a section of the tune it didn't matter if I was playing or singing, what came out was clear, creative and swinging. And if I didn't really HEAR a section, it again didn't matter if I was playing or singing, the line had the same sort of vague lack of direction, lack of melodicism etc.

You certainly are free to do what you want. But what has made the most difference in my playing is the polar opposite of either direction you outline above.
 
#9
Ed I'm listening to you. I generally agree with your opinion on the first method, though I would say sometimes its hard to tell whether I'm thinking to say, bring it up a design, or as an awareness of where my ear was taking me, as in: my ear is leading me up to the big climax and its in thumb position, as opposed to: time for the climax, take it to thumb position. Either way, I agree that the first is still fairly aware, though I think it has some parallels as a newbie version of the sound engineer example Lynn gave.

I really agree with what you're saying about singing. It is truly irrelevant what technical procedure I'm using if I'm not really hearing the passage. Singing my lines does, for me in this moment right now, seem to force me to hear the passage clearer (or maybe I just hate hearing myself sing garbage even more then I hate hearing myself play it) but I can see how in the big picture its a gimmick.

I'm really appreciating how you described awareness. I'd read about how cats like Miles could hear everything going on and my brain was freaking out: "how on earth do I hear and recognize every single not and rhythm being played at once? I'm a terrible musician." but it makes a lot more sense to describe it as an awareness, especially since I'm not a mind reader.

I will try not to decide for the music what it needs ahead of time. I'm just searching for the notes I guess. Too often do I feel like I try to empty mind and hear something and just end up scrambling to find whatever notes I can.

I can think of two guys who were are interesting to mention for this. Brad Mehldau is known for having solos that really have a great internal logic and development. Yet he says his mind is blank when he plays, he could just as well be driving a car. And Lee Konitz said that he doesn't understand people who try to hear the phrase ahead of time, that he can only think about the one note he's playing right then. Or something like that, its a bad paraphrase.
 
#10
Don't miss the point, being aware MEANS being able to hear what's going on in your aural environment and respond. That's why you do ear training, but it's got to be deeper than an intellectual "I can figure it out" stage, it has to be available to you at a visceral level. "Try to decide what the music needs ahead of time" is, again, the polar opposite of what I'm talking about here. I'm not sure if I'm not communicating clearly or if you're just hearing what you want to hear. I think I'm done.
 
#11
Oh hey Ed, the quote was a typo. I meant to say not. Thank you for pointing it out. I'll fix it. I understand what you are saying about being aware on a deeper level than intellectual. Perhaps I'm not communicating it well. Sorry you're done. I appreciated all your input.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back