# Technique, Theory, Playing Tips and Tricks > Theory, Technique, Tips and Tricks >  Improvising

## Br1ck

I'm at the point where I can play most any fiddle tune off a site like mandolessons.com in a couple of days, and I have quite a few licks I can throw in here and there at the end of the vocal line of a bluegrass tune. If someone gives me some notice I can work out a basic solo break. What has been happening is my rehearsed solo break never seems to get played. I start it off but end up throwing in the intro licks , or something else that works. If not as well thought out as what I've practiced, it isn't generally a car wreck. Is this how improvising starts happening? I've played scales and arpeggios from day one, and sometimes play the right arpeggios over the changes. Is it just a matter of learning a bunch of licks you can string together cohesively?

I'm working my way up the neck too, with scales and arpeggios learning where to shift, ans also making up fiddle tune variations that take me there in order to shift in a musical context. Anything else to push my improv skills? I know, play with others a lot....

----------

Cindy, 

Simon DS

----------


## CBFrench

I'm at the same junction and of little help, I do work on playing the melody and as you hear in jazz circles alot, the call and response method, so question and answer. Lots and lots of ear training

----------


## UsuallyPickin

Wow …. You are on the right track. Ultimately improv is an effort to play what you hear in your head and to allow your brain and fingers to connect to the music without conscious thought. I often use a sports analogy at this point. In baseball when the ball comes your way you have to know what to do with it. If you stop to think about what to do with it you are too late. In music you have to know where you are and where you are going within a tight time frame and within the melodic statement. Licks , arpeggios, partial scales, modes and chords  are the conversational tools of the language of music. Like a spoken language there are statements you will make regularly … think or licks like that..... a paragraph would be like a chord conveying a general but specific context. Arpeggios and partial scales are exchanging ideas … possibilities within a conversation. Then you add emotion to your musical statement with technique, adding or dropping .. playing ahead or behind or syncopating the beat ……. Insofar as playing your prepared statements don't be to hard on yourself … we all get excited in the moment especially if things are going well .… as often as not when I crash and burn it is when I start thinking or listening to myself or the other players to closely  …..   Play On!   R/

----------

bigskygirl, 

Emily Weerheim, 

Kevin Winn

----------


## Pete Martin

There is no "right way" to learn improv.  While the goal is to be able to flow without thinking (subconcious), no player can ever do this without a whole lot of concious improv work in the practice room.  Otherwise it is just moving the fingers and hoping it works.  An old Jazz teachers saying is "good improvisation is 2% inspiration and 98% perspiration".  

For jazz playing, I found and really like the Barry Harris method.  Its the best improv teaching method I've run across (Ive seen and tried a lot).  Ive done a number of videos on Barry's ideas applied to mandolin, the first one here

https://youtu.be/1X0CefNUAl0

You have to stick with this for a while and it is very confusing at first, but if you stay with it, you see a cool world open up to you.  

I think so highly of Barry's method, I've adapted it to non jazz improv.  I've several videos in this series called Improv From Scratch.  The first of that series is here:

https://youtu.be/1_e9m-KqsBE

Just like Barry's series, you need to follow it along for a while.  It gives lots of tools you can use to construct logical lines, but leaves the specifics up to you.  Because of this, everyone will sound different.

----------

DavidKOS, 

DSDarr, 

greg_tsam, 

SOMorris

----------


## JeffD

A thought came to me the other day. I think how to improvise kind of depends on what you mean to accomplish with your break.

You would approach improvising differently for each of these:

-playing an alternative (and seemingly if not actually spontaneously composed) melody that fits the chords and general feel of the original tune
-showing your chops
-decorating the original tune
-dramatically enhancing the drama and story of the original tune

And other goals I am sure.

All of them are valid and can be fun to do and to hear. But I am thinking that what you do to come up with each kind of break is different.

I have a prejudice, but I will leave it to the experts to either verify it or to correct me. My prejudice is that the best breaks come from the tune itself, and the first step in all cases is to learn the tune. Be able to play the tune before you depart from the tune in a break.

I don't think a break should be "what you do when you don't know the tune".

----------


## Bill McCall

For me, if music is about communication, then your break should say something.  The original tune says something in its structure.  I think a break should utilize that structure to say something different, although in jams if folks simply restate the melody I'm fine with that.  That means its best to know the melody, but often tunes are called that I've never heard or never heard of (Webster as played by Django?), so I have to work with the structure.  That includes the phrases, the changes and the rhythm I can use as guides to developing a new melody that speaks the message I'm trying to communicate.  Sometimes that means I create a new motif along the structure of the tune but sometimes I'm just trying to capture the feel of the tune in a non rambling way.  At my level, my mileage varies greatly, especially on unfamiliar tunes in unfamiliar keys. 32 bars can be a very long time to feel naked.

But since we're trying to play music, its always about melody.

----------

UsuallyPickin

----------


## OldMandoMan

> I'm at the point where I can play most any fiddle tune off a site like mandolessons.com in a couple of days, and I have quite a few licks I can throw in here and there at the end of the vocal line of a bluegrass tune. If someone gives me some notice I can work out a basic solo break. What has been happening is my rehearsed solo break never seems to get played. I start it off but end up throwing in the intro licks , or something else that works. If not as well thought out as what I've practiced, it isn't generally a car wreck. Is this how improvising starts happening? I've played scales and arpeggios from day one, and sometimes play the right arpeggios over the changes. Is it just a matter of learning a bunch of licks you can string together cohesively?
> 
> I'm working my way up the neck too, with scales and arpeggios learning where to shift, ans also making up fiddle tune variations that take me there in order to shift in a musical context. Anything else to push my improv skills? I know, play with others a lot....


For years I have been teaching (preaching) what I call "Improv 101" and it applies to all genres of music & all stringed instruments (obviously having different looking patterns) The home key for mandolin, guitar, banjo, & bass is always G/Em, forget the CAGED method. My two cents is "Learn this & you'll never go wrong!"

----------


## OldMandoMan

One of my favorite sports analogies is: "Playing music with others is the ultimate team sport because everybody has the ball all the time!"

----------


## T.D.Nydn

Don't forget to use other "tools of expression" such as sliding in and out of notes,hammer on's and pull offs,glissandos,choking,vibrato,altered tremolo beats etc...once you start to utilize these on your scales,pentatonics,double stops you can add more expression to your playing...

----------

Mike Floorstand

----------


## Doug Brock

Sounds like you're doing the right things and headed in the right direction. It can be difficult to let go of your rehearsed intro licks and try something new during the heat of a song, but I think that's where the most fun is had, when you take a risk and it works. And when it doesn't work, well then you took a chance and didn't die, so that might make you more comfortable improvising the next time. And don't pause or grimace or apologize when you make what sounds to you like a mistake, but just keep on keeping on, like it was meant to be, and most folks will never even know that you "messed up."  :Smile:

----------


## j. condino

Start  listening to and practicing with horn players, like Miles Davis'  Kind Of Blue....

----------

jshane

----------


## RobP

At least some of the melody notes are in the chord tones.  I typically follow the chord progression around, and try to find the melody notes in the chord patterns around the neck.  I cant improvise if I don’t know the chord progression.  Im no expert, but i am getting better at doing this on the fly.  It also help to stay relaxed, but that is easier said than done.

----------

DavidKOS

----------


## JonZ

The key to rapidly learning to improvise is to spend a lot of time improvising. (Shocking!) I say this because many players will look for non-improvisational things to "master" before they feel like they are "ready" for improvising. It can be a form of procrastination to avoid the scary part of sounding like a child again. Learning scale and arpeggio studies isn't improvising. Learning someone else's break, from the page or by ear, isn't improvising. They can provide you with tools and techniques, but they are not creative. Learning to create is hard and you will initially be bad at it.

Learn a few improvisational concepts and improvise the heck out them. Just one pentatonic scale offers infinite melodic options. When you can use one tool fluently, integrate a new tool into your playing. It might be a scale, or it might be a technique like sliding into a double stop. Have a goal: "Today I will craft an interesting solo that incorporates X." Start slow. Build little sections. 

The hard part for you will be learning to create compelling lines; devote the majority of your time to that. You will need to adjust to sounding crappy, at first, but that is what will free you.

----------

DavidKOS, 

mandos&turtles, 

Pete Martin

----------


## Br1ck

Lot's of good things said here. I fully agree that scales and arpeggios don't music make. But they can sure get you out of hopeless situations. I have no fear of crash and burn. The closer I come to the cliff without going off, the better. But it is wise to have a parachute. But I think when trying to pick out a melody, having played scales has taught my brain a lot about intervals. As I've progressed those patterns have helped me pick up fiddle tunes, and as a friend has hammered into my consciousness, start and end a phrase on the first, third or fifth of the chord you are playing over, an it's bound to sound good.

I also think starting with a melody and gradually wandering away from it is a solid path.

----------


## Paul Cowham

This doesn't necessarily answer your question Br1ck, but I thought it worth sharing this clip where guru Grisman talks about improv and offers (to my mind at least) some profound insights about the subject. Hope you find this as interesting as I do 





 sorry, I can't get the video to embed, here is the link https://vimeo.com/244123483

----------

Bob Visentin, 

chasray, 

Jim Bevan, 

Nbayrfr

----------


## mandrian

Paul,

That was interesting. Thanks for posting.

Regards,

----------


## Steve 2E

I’m new to the Cafe. Been playing mandolin seriously for less than a year, but I’ve been playing guitar for 30+years. I would say my improvising  skills on mandolin aren’t quite up to par, but on guitar I’m fairly competent, confident and comfortable. All of the other posts have touched on some great points and I will reiterate some of those and hopefully shed some more light too.

You obviously have the desire to improvise and that’s a great first step. Just remember that improvising takes constant improvement also. You need to use all of your musical knowledge and keep expanding on it. Everything plays a part. Melody, scales, modes, circle of 5ths, relative minors/majors, note intervals, chord inversions, chord substitutions, rhythm, tempo, hammer-ons, pull-offs, slides, double stops, tremolo. I’ll stop because I’m overwhelmingly myself! I’m not saying you have to master everything at once or even ever, but all of this stuff is foundational and can be helpful with improving your playing skills and confidence.

Referring back to your original post, I would agree with another that having a solo worked out in advanced is not really improvising. I’m not saying it to fault you, just trying to clarify. I used to work out parts in advance when I was learning how to play a solo and I think it can be a great tool. I think your timing may get a little tripped up when it’s time to play that break when you’re in a jam context. Think of your break as a little fiddle tune. You know the notes and what you want to play, you just have to get the timing right. 

Hope this helps a little. Just remember we’ve all felt hand cuffed, been lost in a tune and survived many train wrecks.

----------


## Gunnar

Well, I've never felt like I can improvise very well, and I'm always trying to get better at it. But the other day while I was practicing with a metronome, I set it at about 60 bpm (for tremolo practice) and when I got bored tremolo-ing, I played clinch mountain backstep, which is one piece that my solo is always improv, and at that speed (or lack thereof) I had much more time to experiment with different lines, as well as having the metronome to easily pick up the melody where I left off if I train wreck. It was really fun. 
Another thing I've done (especially with ukulele players) when I have another musician, is I get them to play a simple chord progression (usually Dm C, or Em D) and I just improvise something Irish sounding over it

----------

Simon DS

----------


## gfury

> At least some of the melody notes are in the chord tones.  I typically follow the chord progression around, and try to find the melody notes in the chord patterns around the neck.  I cant improvise if I don’t know the chord progression.  Im no expert, but i am getting better at doing this on the fly.  It also help to stay relaxed, but that is easier said than done.


This is what I often end up doing, and I'm trying to expand beyond it.  I find myself fingering intervals of the chord and basing my break off that.

I feel that's it's a crutch, and that I should be able to pick up the melody by ear and embellish it.

----------


## Don Julin

https://www.mandolinshealtheworld.co...ories/20170317

----------

greg_tsam, 

John Mondick, 

Kevin Winn

----------


## Don Julin

https://www.mandolinshealtheworld.co...ories/20190520

----------

DavidKOS, 

greg_tsam, 

John Mondick, 

Kevin Winn

----------


## Kevin Winn

Thanks, Don!

----------


## RobP

Yes, THIS!! It ain't cheating to use the chord tones/positions as anchors for a break.   Often the melody notes are in the chord tones, if not they are only a fret or 2 away from one.  It really helps to know the chord progression for improvising.

Thanks!

Rob





> https://www.mandolinshealtheworld.co...ories/20190520

----------

DavidKOS

----------


## UsuallyPickin

I believe it is Tiny Moore that is quoted as saying " You're only one fret away from a note that will work". Arpeggios to pentatonic scales to playing the melody to playing the melody and adding or subtracting tones and syncopating...… I will always be on the journey of trying to play the music I hear in my head and practicing the tools to access it... and enjoying the journey.  R/

----------

DavidKOS

----------


## DavidKOS

Arpeggios and chord tones are your friends when improvising!

----------


## dhergert

> ... I also think starting with a melody and gradually wandering away from it is a solid path.


I'm going from the opposite direction, I build the chords first for backup support, than find the melody or close-melody within the chords which my left hand is already forming.  Coming from deep chord-melodic banjo playing for improv, this seems to be the natural direction for me, and of course my non-standard mandolin tuning helps me with that, although I would think that any tuning that is well known would do the same...  So for me the key is knowing the neck, no matter what tuning is involved.

I suspect though that there is no single way to get into improv, but once you have it you'll never want to stop.  It's totally fun and really gets those neural synapses humming.  From what I read, once a person is "in the groove" with improv, the brain releases more than normal levels of dopamine, the satisfaction hormone.

----------


## RobP

I also find that the ease with which one can follow the chords for a break and still approximate the melody depends a lot on the song.   For instance, one of the songs we perform is a cover of The Weight (by The Band).   Every time we perform that song (we play it in key of G), I 100% improvise my break, and for the most part it comes out pretty well.   On other songs I have to do a more up-front planning and parts of my break have to be more rehearsed.

----------


## Relio

> I'm at the point where I can play most any fiddle tune off a site like mandolessons.com in a couple of days, and I have quite a few licks I can throw in here and there at the end of the vocal line of a bluegrass tune. If someone gives me some notice I can work out a basic solo break. What has been happening is my rehearsed solo break never seems to get played. I start it off but end up throwing in the intro licks , or something else that works. If not as well thought out as what I've practiced, it isn't generally a car wreck. Is this how improvising starts happening? I've played scales and arpeggios from day one, and sometimes play the right arpeggios over the changes. Is it just a matter of learning a bunch of licks you can string together cohesively?
> 
> I'm working my way up the neck too, with scales and arpeggios learning where to shift, ans also making up fiddle tune variations that take me there in order to shift in a musical context. Anything else to push my improv skills? I know, play with others a lot....


Learn the core melody notes, then play other scales, patters, arpeggios, etc. and hit a core melody note at key times so people know what song you're playing.

----------


## JonZ

Something to think about as you get more advanced is creating a structure to your solo. 

Does it have a beginning, middle and end? Is there tension and release? Are you developing any motifs? Is there variation in dynamics and tone? Are you using a tasteful variety of techniques?

These are the types of compositional elements that separate a well-crafted solo from stringing together licks and patterns. Do a search for "best guitar solos" and listen to what is going on. Take the solo on "Hotel California", for example. What is going on there that makes it so compelling?

----------

DavidKOS

----------


## dhergert

To me, the reason it's so great is that it was improvised, on the fly, at least at first.  The artist didn't sit down and consider all the compositional elements to include before he played it.  It came from inside.

To me, that's the beauty of improv.  It's the artist's inner soul making the music.  You never know exactly what to expect.

To do this, a musician has to know their instrument well enough to play without thinking about technical details.  Having a rich toolset to pull from is also important.  And knowing the basic melody of the song helps.  Mostly, the instrument has to become an extension of the mind.

----------

Rick Jones

----------


## Phil Goodson

> To me, the reason it's so great is that it was improvised, on the fly, at least at first.  ... It came from inside.
> 
> ... Having a rich toolset to pull from is also important.  And knowing the basic melody of the song helps.  Mostly, the instrument has to become an extension of the mind.


1.  I don't care whether the player thought about his solo yesterday or he made it up as he played.  To me, it sounds the same.   (I recognize that it's not really 'improv' if it was previously considered.)

2.  "A rich toolset" is often talked about and the usual advice to to "listen to lots of music from your genre..."  Unfortunately, many of us are not good at listening and recognizing the bits and pieces of solos that can be taken and used later in our own solo.  I know that it takes repetition and time, but I'd love to hear if anyone has any personal approach to absorbing, recognizing, and piecing together those 'tools'.  
Specific advice appreciated.

----------


## dhergert

> ...  Mostly, the instrument has to become an extension of the mind.





> ... I'd love to hear if anyone has any personal approach to absorbing, recognizing, and piecing together those 'tools'.  
> Specific advice appreciated.


This is probably going to be a little controversial, but it is my experience...

I remember as a very young kid, before I played any instruments, hearing songs and repeating them by whistling or humming or singing or even just breathing a tune if I was in that situation.  And with complicated songs, I'd come close, and then embellish the song to make it more similar to the original.  These are the most simple and natural, "extension of the mind" instruments that people have.  Short of having an instrument in my hands, this is naturally still how I improvise today.  

From years of teaching music, I've observed that if a person can hear a tune and do this kind of simple repeating and improvising using these natural instruments that are part of their bodies, they can pretty easily transfer that to the instruments that they play.  I've had a lot of students who can do this naturally.  I've had some students who with time and effort have been able to learn and practice it.  And I've had a lot of students who despite lots of time and effort, just can't come close to it -- I've worked closely with some of this last kind of students for years trying to gently teach improv, unsuccessfully, and eventually improv can become a source of frustration.  But happily there are other ways...

My personal conclusion is that if a student cannot do this kind of simple natural improvising after three to six months of serious effort, it probably isn't one of the natural talents and abilities that they've been provided, and a different track for their music learning is going to be more successful.  That doesn't mean they cannot enjoy music and in fact they can still become excellent and even great musicians, but improv is probably not going to be one of those things that they excel at.

Part of this mix is also ear-pitch training, which is also a natural ability related to music, and which can also be taught to some extent for many people.

The long and the short of it is that music can be successfully learned by ear, and/or it can be successfully learned by using a form of written music such as sheet music or tablature.  Learning which, or what combination of these tracks works the best for each of us as individuals is probably the first and most important task that a person who wants to learn music, and eventually improv, can accomplish.

----------

Gina Willis, 

Jim Bevan

----------


## Bill McCall

> ....2.  "A rich toolset" is often talked about and the usual advice to to "listen to lots of music from your genre..."  Unfortunately, many of us are not good at listening and recognizing the bits and pieces of solos that can be taken and used later in our own solo.  I know that it takes repetition and time, but I'd love to hear if anyone has any personal approach to absorbing, recognizing, and piecing together those 'tools'.  
> Specific advice appreciated.


Simple specific exercise given to me by my teacher:
a.  Create a simple 4 bar progression on a backing track.  Progression could be I-IV-V-I or I-iim-V-I.
b.  Choose 4 notes from the home key using 2 chord tones and any two other scale tones.
c.  Loop the progression multiple times and play against that using only the 4 tones to create melodies.
d.  Choose 4 different notes, again using 2 chord tones and 2 other scale notes and repeat steps b and c.
e.  Repeat from a using a minor key progression.
f.   Try new found insight on a simple tune.
g.  Repeat until competent :Smile: 

This is just a start to create motifs on which to create breaks.  You can always use more sophisticated progressions or any number or variety of notes including no chord tones.  Some choices will sound better than others, that would be part of the learning.  There is a Berklee DVD on creating motifs using only 3,4 and 5 notes which may prove useful as well.

For me specifically, I find its overwhelming at my level to have to choose from all of the available notes on the instrument and all the possible rhythmic variations.  By limiting my universe I am strangely given more freedom to experiment without feeling lost.  While having only 4 notes seems limiting, the use of repetition and rhythmic variety makes it possible to confidently develop lines that provide insight into useful items for soloing on more complex pieces.

"Any damn fool can make it complicated"-Norman Blake talking to David McLaughlin about a simple blues tune.

Ymmv.

----------

cunparis, 

gfury, 

mando_dan, 

Phil Goodson

----------


## JonZ

> 1.  I don't care whether the player thought about his solo yesterday or he made it up as he played.  To me, it sounds the same.   (I recognize that it's not really 'improv' if it was previously considered.)
> 
> 2.  "A rich toolset" is often talked about and the usual advice to to "listen to lots of music from your genre..."  Unfortunately, many of us are not good at listening and recognizing the bits and pieces of solos that can be taken and used later in our own solo.  I know that it takes repetition and time, but I'd love to hear if anyone has any personal approach to absorbing, recognizing, and piecing together those 'tools'.  
> Specific advice appreciated.


I think the most efficient approach is to use an outside resource to explain the tools that are commonly used in your genre, be it a teacher, a book or a video. Then spend a lot of time experimenting with the tools, creating interesting music. Many people find outside feedback, from a knowledgeable person, on their attempts helpful. With only very rudimentary music theory, you will be able to more easily figure out what is going on in most of the popular music genres.

Learning to improvise is just like anything else. You start slowly, work on narrow objectives, and produce poor workmanship at first. We set too high of a bar for ourselves, because most of the examples we are exposed to are at a professional level. This can lead people to incorrectly believe that they just don't have the talent for it.

----------

Gelsenbury, 

Phil Goodson

----------


## Phil Goodson

> Simple specific exercise given to me by my teacher:
> a.  Create a simple 4 bar progression on a backing track.  Progression could be I-IV-V-I or I-iim-V-I.
> b.  Choose 4 notes from the home key using 2 chord tones and any two other scale tones.
> c.  Loop the progression multiple times and play against that using only the 4 tones to create melodies.
> d.  Choose 4 different notes, again using 2 chord tones and 2 other scale notes and repeat steps b and c.
> e.  Repeat from a using a minor key progression.
> f.   Try new found insight on a simple tune.
> g.  Repeat until competent
> 
> ...


Thanks Bill.  This looks useful to me.
And is that Berklee DVD available anywhere?

----------


## Jim Bevan

I'm with dhergert  can you sing what you want to play? Can you imagine what you want to play in your head, and play what you're imagining?

Ya, learn all your scales and chords and arpeggios so that your fingers will know where to go, but like Grisman says, it's all composition  mastering the "tools" is a necessary step, but it won't give you the ability to compose.

----------

dhergert, 

jshane

----------


## Phil Goodson

> I'm with dhergert  can you sing what you want to play? Can you imagine what you want to play in your head, and play what you're imagining?
> 
> Ya, learn all your scales and chords and arpeggios so that your fingers will know where to go, but like Grisman says, it's all composition  mastering the "tools" is a necessary step, but it won't give you the ability to compose.


Yes, I can sing what I plan to play.  I can imagine some things in my head and then play them.  I've got scales and arpeggios.
The problem is that the *ideas* that are in my head are very limited.  Someone else might play a break and I'll wonder why I didn't think of that.  

I look down into my bag of tricks and ideas and just don't seem to see nearly enough.  Most of my breaks sound very similar in overall sound and approach, even if the melodies are different.   
I'm not very creative. :Frown:    Help!!!

----------

Rick Jones

----------


## ralph johansson

> 1.  I don't care whether the player thought about his solo yesterday or he made it up as he played.  To me, it sounds the same.   (I recognize that it's not really 'improv' if it was previously considered.)



It does? When I first encountered jazz, after about half a year of playing the guitar, more than 60 years ago, I was immediately struck by two things. 1) Most of the time the repeats and sequencing in the composition were not reflected in the improvisation. 2) Rests and long notes often did not appear in the "expected places". In the beginning that was very confusing, but in time it became the first step towards  understanding the true nature of improvisation. There is, of course, much more to it, but I'll save that for a later post.

----------


## Mudchutney

That's super helpful Pete, thank you!

----------


## Phil Goodson

> *It does?* When I first encountered jazz, after about half a year of playing the guitar, more than 60 years ago, I was immediately struck by two things. 1) Most of the time the repeats and sequencing in the composition were not reflected in the improvisation. 2) Rests and long notes often did not appear in the "expected places". In the beginning that was very confusing, but in time it became the first step towards  understanding the true nature of improvisation. There is, of course, much more to it, but I'll save that for a later post.


Ralph,
You have to know that I'm not really a jazz guy.  Although I enjoy some jazz, my ignorance is overwhelming.   So I'm not noticing all those things that are obvious to you, but not noticeable at all to me.  Would that it were different.

So I'm listening to pretty rough country stuff and never know how much time the guy spent preparing his break.  Either way, I'd sure like to sound a lot better and since I'm too lazy and forgetful to create, store away in memory, and recall a section of music for everything I play, I prefer to depend on hearing SOMETHING in my head and playing it in real time.  It's just that it usually turns out to be very trite.  Sort of like my attempts at writing the American Novel. :Smile:

----------


## Tom Wright

> Ralph,
> You have to know that I'm not really a jazz guy.  Although I enjoy some jazz, my ignorance is overwhelming.   So I'm not noticing all those things that are obvious to you, but not noticeable at all to me.  Would that it were different.
> 
> So I'm listening to pretty rough country stuff and never know how much time the guy spent preparing his break.  Either way, I'd sure like to sound a lot better and since I'm too lazy and forgetful to create, store away in memory, and recall a section of music for everything I play, I prefer to depend on hearing SOMETHING in my head and playing it in real time.  It's just that it usually turns out to be very trite.  Sort of like my attempts at writing the American Novel.


I would venture that you need to learn/store a lot more than a solo break for every tune. 

I find a riff or solo appealing, and then try to learn the interesting bits for myself. In order to have something interesting to say (play) you need an interesting subject and an effective delivery. Extemporaneous speakers, and improvisational artists, practice their craft by learning the elements, and by trying to perform them in practice sessions.

So when listening to that rough country music latch onto one figure. Learn to play that little riff in a few places, and always practice it when you play at home. Then add another one you hear and like. Repeat forever.

As time goes by you will find opportunities to use those words in your conversation. The larger your vocabulary and stock of useful phrases, the more likely it is you can add something more than cliche to the jam. It keeps getting easier to contribute, and you find you can comment on what others play, by echoing their last few notes and making it the beginning of your solo. (BTW, that is something you can practice at home, taking the end of some good recorded solo as your starting point.)

Everything good is practiced  all great players are using riffs from their personal stock. What is new is the conversation, not the words.

----------

Gelsenbury, 

Phil Goodson

----------


## bradlaird

Grisman nails it in that video. It's something I have muttered many times. I might have even said it clearly a time or two to my students or on the podcast. "Improvisation is just high pressure, high speed composition." Learn to write a tune or compose a good solo, regardless of the time it takes, and you are on the path to doing it quicker which we all call improv. Thanks for that video in Post #15.

----------

James Vwaal, 

Mark Gunter, 

Phil Goodson

----------


## Jim Bevan

When I studied jazz improvisation (with Adolph Sandole), there was a lot of emphasis on composition and on ear training. My takeaway from that is that improvisation is the art of combining the ability to compose (in your head) with the ability to instantly recognize what the notes of what you just composed are.

----------

DavidKOS

----------


## Tate Ferguson

Overthinking is the downfall of successful improvising, in my view.  What works for me is to start with a rhythmic pattern that I can play easily.  Then "populate it with notes".  This advice, which I'm sure I read somewhere, works for me.  Even a few basic notes - the tonic, the third, the fifth - can sound good if they're played with a confident rhythm.

----------

dhergert

----------


## dhergert

> Overthinking is the downfall of successful improvising, in my view. ...


I totally agree with this.  95% of the time when I'm improvising, whether it's going to be a break or a short backup riff, I have no idea exactly what I'm going to do a minute before.  Within 10 seconds before, yes, I'm starting to think about how to support the melody enough that it can be recognized, and the harmony enough that it sounds tasteful.  While playing I'm usually thinking a least a few measures ahead of where the song is currently.  When it's time for the break, or for the riff, I just go into the mode and do it, feeling like it is happening somewhat seamlessly and naturally.

And perhaps as an example, my experience with improv is this: I arrange everything I play, there are no note-for-note copied arrangements from any written material or from any recordings.  If I listen to an arrangement or read an arrangement, it is solely for the purpose of re-arranging it in my own playing styles.  These re-arrangements are all at least originally improvised and then when playing in public, the songs are possibly re-played in those same re-arrangements, or possibly re-improvised on the fly.  And to be clear, when playing in public, I'm always improvising and I never play a song exactly the same.

----------


## James Vwaal

> Grisman nails it in that video. It's something I have muttered many times. I might have even said it clearly a time or two to my students or on the podcast. "Improvisation is just high pressure, high speed composition." Learn to write a tune or compose a good solo, regardless of the time it takes, and you are on the path to doing it quicker which we all call improv. Thanks for that video in Post #15.


Exactly. I would be willing to bet that the best "solos" were ones constructed slowly, over time, in the practice room or in a series of jams whereby the composer figured out that which sounded best. This idea that one can improvise an amazing solo on-the-fly each time is bunk, IMHO. There might be a few out there who can do that; however, I can point to video evidence that some outstanding soloists play their solos pretty much nearly the same each time they were recorded. Thus, they were reusing phrases from their lexicon and I see no problem with that.

At the end of the concert, what matters is how cool the solos were, not whether or not it was on-the-fly improv (highly unlikely) or something worked out in the practice room.

----------


## Jim Bevan

Chick Corea says that when he goes on tour, playing the same tunes every night, eventually he ends up playing the same solos.

Jackson Pollock's paintings were slowly working towards a consistent level of "busyness". 

Sometimes it's not about improvisation vs composition, spontaneity vs contemplation   it's about using the freedom to explore, to find out what truths lie within.

----------


## JonZ

One way to expand your creativity is to pose yourself the problem of "How can I incorporate X into an interesting phrase".

X could beThe rhythm "sweet potato pan cakes."A major 7th note.String skipping.The shape of a line you have drawn on paper.An emotion you want to convey.Elements of a lick you like in a different context.Movement up one position and then back down.Etc....

Basically, the Xs that you choose to explore are what will define your aesthetic.

Again, outside resources can be one place to find these Xs. If you go on Amazon and "look inside" at the table of contents of a method in your genre, you will find a list of common Xs in that genre to explore.

Purposefully exploring new concepts is how you break out of saying the same old thing.

----------


## stevojack665

I think Dawg is spot on. To me, improvisation is actually spontaneous composition. Using the tools that one has practiced for a long time to compose, real time, a melody over the running changes. Everyone is going to improvise differently because of what they have studied or practiced, and how their brain incorporates and uses that language. 
I heard an interview with the great Sonny Rollins, though, where he says "You can't think and play at the same time".
https://www.npr.org/2014/05/03/30904...-the-same-time
At first I thought that was in direct opposition to the idea of spontaneous composition. The more I ponder this idea, the less I think think so. In fact I think it is actually the same. As one converses, in language or in music, most of the time we are not consciously thinking of what we are saying or crafting what comes next. If one is fluent in a language, be it a spoken or a musical one, the words or notes just flow out. 
The key to me is then practicing a specific musical genre in order to gain fluency in it.

----------

James Vwaal

----------


## James Vwaal

> I think Dawg is spot on. To me, improvisation is actually spontaneous composition.
> 
> The key to me is then practicing a specific musical genre in order to gain fluency in it.


But Dawg was saying that it is all composition, and that the speed is maybe irrelevant. I agree that one who is fluent in a specific genre will be able to compose more quickly; however, how interesting a solo sounds is more important to me than the speed of composition. So if a solo is not as interesting as the melody, then why produce something less interesting via "spontaneous improv"? Working on an "alternate melody" in the practice room sets one up with a better chance at producing something as interesting, or more so, than the melody line.

BTW, I am sending you a PM for a different question. Thanks.

----------


## Bill McCall

> ........So if a solo is not as interesting as the melody, then why produce something less interesting via "spontaneous improv"?.......
> ..


1.  Because you have to start somewhere.
2.  Interesting or boring is a matter of taste.
3.  Many situations (jams) have unbounded repetoire choice so rehearsal for specific tunes is not possible.
4.  The goal may be to practice ‘spontaneous composition’ with others.

I’m sure there are more reasons.

----------

dhergert

----------


## stevojack665

> But Dawg was saying that it is all composition, and that the speed is maybe irrelevant. I agree that one who is fluent in a specific genre will be able to compose more quickly; however, how interesting a solo sounds is more important to me than the speed of composition. So if a solo is not as interesting as the melody, then why produce something less interesting via "spontaneous improv"? Working on an "alternate melody" in the practice room sets one up with a better chance at producing something as interesting, or more so, than the melody line.
> 
> BTW, I am sending you a PM for a different question. Thanks.


There are many great performers who build solos long before the performance and many who build them on the spot, and many more who do some of both. The key to any of these is developing fluency in the music and the instrument, regardless of the speed that one uses to build the composition.

----------

dhergert, 

Rick Jones

----------


## Don Stiernberg

a few rambling responses to this interesting and challenging discourse on improvising, aesthetics, and life itself...
  Let's start with the OP's question. Dear OP, you may want to use your fretboard familiarity and scale/arpeggio knowledge to cultivate phrases, melodies, or melodic segments, as opposed to "licks". One thing I hear often is "I learned all my scales and arpeggios, now all my solos sound like scales and arpeggios!" So, a couple of things to try...Play a major scale with the cord it corresponds to plays. Listen to each interval, stopping at each one. Inventory what feeling, vibe or effect each note yields. A 6th, for example may sound happy or swingy, a 2nd or 9th consonant but also "going somewhere". What we're looking for here is new starting points for your solo..starting your break on a color tone can help break out of repititious diatonic(scalewise) movement. There's a lifetime of fun stuff right in that major scale. After getting a feel for those intervals, try the same examination on the chromatic scale to get vibes off of the "alterations"or "tensions". For example, a b5 sounds kind of angry doesn't it? Imagine starting your solo on that! You are immediately playing a feeling or expression rather than a mathematical pattern or route.
          Another thing to try is to sing something, then find it on the mandolin. You don't have to be a "singer" or "have a good voice", it's just an attempt to create lines that have a vocal quality. The average listener(sorry)relates more, more readily receives, soloing that approximates singing or tunes or songs, and we are less likely to present "a bunch of notes" when using this approach. We are certainly less inclined to sing scales or arpeggios or "sheets of sound" when we're singing around the house or in the shower, etc. If you combine this with the above step and notice what intervals and note to note movement you gravitate toward, you're cultivating your own idea of how you like your own solos and melodies to sound.

          now back to general ramblings:
    Was it Charlie Parker (case can be made that he is one of the greatest improvisers in history..other case made that he relied on a deep collection of beautiful melodic phrases, combined and re-combined..)who said regarding scales and arpeggios  "you've got to learn all that stuff, then forget it and just play.." ? Was it Charlie who said that?

      Vassar Clements said " I just paint myself in a corner, then I try to get to get out.."

     I asked a jazz hero/friend here in Chicago if there were particular scales, chord substitutions, devices that he recommended. He said "You've got to know everything." He went on to say "after a while it seems to be all one thing--there's only one tune. One chord. One note."

     I have often quoted Dawg's ideas about improvisation and composition being possibly the same thing. Of course he's right. In classes and workshops sometimes I'll play a phrase off the top of my head, then have everyone play it back. When they do I say if you can do that you can improvise, because you've just engaged that improvisation/composition process--you heard something, then found it on your mandolin. When we improvise we hear something in our head, then find it on the mandolin..

        consider also the discussions of Bach being the original jazz musician..he was finding the cool notes which expressed harmonic movements("cadences", "changes")in the 1600's, apparently at a high rate of speed, often "in the moment"...

      the same hero who recommended "know everything" also suggested trying to get out of the way of the music..."If you hit a note then stand back and admire it or say 'dig that note, dig me'....you're done! It's over!"

           John Carlini wrote a wonderful tune called "Mugavero" named after a revered percussionist who offered advice that can be applied to improvisational pursuits: "Wait for the right note."

          In an article somewhere I read a good distillation of two distinct and useful approaches to improvisation. Auther boiled it down to two camps/terms/ styles :Paraphrase and Free Invention. Paraphrase of course being a reshaping or personalizing of an existing melody...shifting a rhythm, adding notes in an open space, leaving a note out, changing a note, etc while retaining the melody's essential form and vibe. Free Invention being where you generate your own rows of notes, playing "off the changes(chords)" relating scales or modes or arpeggios to the chord progression of the vehicle tune, or also ignoring them for "outside" sounds. Paraphrase or Free Invention. Both are improvisation, both are valid, all good. (Choro and fiddle tune improv usually leans toward Paraphrase. Bluegrass and Jazz employ elements of either/both. Nether approach is better or worse than the other.

         One more blast from my sax playing friend: "Nobody wants to hear you up there running someone else's stuff. They want to hear about the road to your city."

----------

Bruce Clausen, 

chasray, 

DavidKOS, 

dhergert, 

Gina Willis, 

Josh Levine, 

Nbayrfr, 

Phil Goodson, 

Rick Jones, 

V70416, 

WaxwellHaus, 

wildpikr

----------


## CarlM

Two things that have not come up, except very peripherally, are rhythm and dynamics.  Some of the posters said explicitly that it is all about melody.  That is not true. Expression comes through rhythm, timing, dynamics and articulation also.  These are tools for improvisation.

The best illustration of this is the first line of the Christmas song Joy to the World.  "Joy to the world the Lord is come."  Play the notes (the melody) of that line through with each note given the same timing and dynamics.  What do you have? (spoiler below)

It is just a scale.   A one octave scale starting and ending on the root note.  Do-ti-la-so-fa-mi-re-do  Yet it is one of the most recognized "melodies" in the world.  It only becomes recognizable as the song when proper timing and dynamics are applied.

Likewise hamboners play recognizable songs and tunes despite having little to no melody as such.  They rely on rhythm and dynamics to make the tune recognizable. They will freely improvise over a known tune.

One tool toward improvisation is to take a melody line you know and change the timing and dynamics.  Sometimes this can be to create a particular "feel".   One great exercise Keith Yoder taught me  was to play a tune then he would say: "Now play it as a blues", then as a fiddle tune, then as kind of a slow ballad, as a swing tune, etc. as we would play through a fiddle tune eight or a dozen times.  Each time we would try to capture the feel of that genre, sometimes through adding a subtracting notes but mostly through timing, dynamics and articulation. 

Another was to play the lines emphasizing particular notes for a different dynamic feel, the first or third or last note , etc. 

 Finally to go to extremes you can completely change the time signature (in practice obviously, not on stage without warning) playing 4/4 songs as two steps, waltzes and so forth.

Rhythm, dynamic and articulation changes have generated as many ideas for me as melodic changes.

----------

Rick Jones

----------


## mmuussiiccaall

As Don says in #53 Listen to each interval, stopping at each one. Inventory what feeling, vibe or effect each note yields. A 6th, for example may sound happy or swingy, a 2nd or 9th consonant but also "going somewhere".

here's my personal chart regarding emotions and the fingerboard

----------


## gtani7

T here's a few guitar books i can recommend, they're NOT scary theory books, they have enough theory, starting w/pentatonics, working thru different minor scales, mixolydian, 

Guitar Theory by Serna

https://www.amazon.com/Guitarists-Gu.../dp/1423483219

Soloing strategies by Tom Kolb

For mandolin, the jazz oriented books by Stiernberg, Todd Collins and Ted Eschliman are good

----------

Rick Jones

----------


## mandocrucian

Music Interviews - *Sonny Rollins: 'You Can't Think And Play At The Same Time'*

https://www.npr.org/2014/05/03/30904...oHg70z6NaZnKp8

Niles H

----------

DavidKOS, 

Josh Levine, 

Rick Jones, 

wildpikr

----------


## Rick Jones

> One tool toward improvisation is to take a melody line you know and change the timing and dynamics.  Sometimes this can be to create a particular "feel".   One great exercise Keith Yoder taught me  was to play a tune then he would say: "Now play it as a blues", then as a fiddle tune, then as kind of a slow ballad, as a swing tune, etc. as we would play through a fiddle tune eight or a dozen times.  Each time we would try to capture the feel of that genre, sometimes through adding a subtracting notes but mostly through timing, dynamics and articulation.


What a fantastic idea! I have done this while mindlessly noodling around with various tunes, but never thought to do it in any organized manner. This could be a great ear-opener.

----------


## mandocrucian

> Another thing to try is to sing something, then find it on the mandolin. You don't have to be a "singer" or "have a good voice", it's just an attempt to create lines that have a vocal quality. The average listener(sorry)relates more, more readily receives, soloing that approximates singing or tunes or songs, and we are less likely to present "a bunch of notes" when using this approach. We are certainly less inclined to sing scales or arpeggios or "sheets of sound" when we're singing around the house or in the shower, etc. If you combine this with the above step and notice what intervals and note to note movement you gravitate toward, you're cultivating your own idea of how you like your own solos and melodies to sound.


*REAL PLAYING,* imo, is *SINGING ON THE INSTRUMENT*, especially in improvised music. 

Learning your scales, arpeggios, etc. is fine, but FAR TOO OFTEN, it is done in such way that minimizes or ignores the ear. i.e. Read the notes off the paper and send it to the fingers. Practice scale patterns (as finger exercises) watching HBO as muscle memory drills. Yeah, you can drive on _automatic pilot_ to work, or the grocery store without thinking about it.

On various flute forums, largely populated by classically oriented players, it is really aggravating to see their ingrained mindset. _ "I need some Celtic flavored music for a recital/wedding/etc. --- recommendations?"_  And then people chime in with names of books, or composed/arranged sheet music of tunes, everything for the eye-trained player.  I'm sure I annoy these folks (except for the minority of jazz or world music flutists) by saying, _"Why don't you just go to your local library and check out some CDs (or go to YouTube) and find some tunes that catch you ear, and then either learn them BY EAR, or go to one of the abc tune sites, like theession.org if you just have to have some standard notation? It's what almost ANY rock/folk/countryblues player would do!"_ I suppose they need pre-arranged piano accompaniment music for whatever eye-trained player they'll have backing them who is too lazy or just can't spontaneously play something chordally appropriate by ear. People asking for _"harder"_ or_ "more complicated"_ versions/arrangement of Christmas carols 'cause they are so dependent on sheet music; they can play technically more complex stuff, but *unable* to think up something adequate on their own!  *PATHETIC!* 

*The bottom line,* as I see (or hear) it, is that a lot of the responses here are putting the cart before the horse. The *EAR* (to hand) is *PARAMOUNT.* . And the way to do that is to *vocalize* . You MUST "hear it" to be able to "sing it".  When you practice tunes, or scales or whatever, vocalize simultaneously what you are playing on the instrument. Again....*You MUST "hear it" to be able to "sing it".*  Make the fingers respond to what you are singing.

Start with stuff you can already play.... You know, it's amazing, but a LOT of people can not hum the melody of tunes that they can rip out on the mandolin. That means, they really do not hear it; it's primarily by-rote muscle memory.  Vocalizing _"Twinkle Twinkle"_  and _"Three Blind Mice"_ is remedial ear-training, but it's a start for fusing the ear and hands together.

Yeah, you can learn various licks to fit numerous chords and start dropping them into tunes, or stringing them together, but if it is muscle memory, it isn't really "improvising".  The audience may buy it, but it's is still BS-ing.  Don't get me wrong....this is a necessary step/stage_ on the road_ to improv, but it isn't the real thing.

Someone on FB posted some YouTube video of the Austin City Limits mandolin episode, with Johnny Gimble, Tiny Moore and Jethro all on stage together. For my taste, Gimble played they best solos of the three (though Tiny wasn't too far behind). Why, Gimble *"sang"* on the instrument (regardless whether he's playing mandolin or fiddle).  But if you've read interviews, he (JG) talked about how he learned tunes as a kid... he'd spend the hour walking home after some show he saw, singing the tune(s) he wanted to remember, and then he'd put it onto fiddle when he got home. EAR EAR EAR.

I played mandos for over 30 years (at a pro level) before ever picking up a flute.  I had a rough time at the beginning with the instrument, never having played any winds before. Reading notation and playing at the same was too complicated, so I started with tunes I already had in my head, and HAD TO THINK THEM to be able to play them.  I put the same methods of teaching beginner mando (ear>hand) into how I learned flute. Now, when I pick up the instrument, "Radio-Ozone" comes in loud and clear from the stratosphere. The ideas and new tunes pour in like they never did on stringed instruments. I've probably got 800-900 originals (PDFs and midi files) on the computer, and at least 85% of them were made doodling/improvising on flute.  It's like looking up at clouds and just seeing images/animals in them. 

As far as specific steps to incrementally learn to improvise I've listed these in the past here on the Cafe forum, though I have no way of finding particular (long) explanations. You might want to look for _"transposing game", "memory jukebox"_ as key phrases in a search.

Putting the *ear in charge* will boost your playing even if you don't improvise. You should be able to pick along with new tunes much faster and easier.  But for improvising, real improvising, *it is a NECESSITY!*

Niles H


Max, the guard cat with 3-ring notebooks of original Mandocrucian tunes

PS: I noticed that nobody seems to appreciate the Sonny Rollins interview on the subject I posted.

----------

DavidKOS, 

dhergert, 

Phil Goodson, 

Rick Jones, 

Tom Ronan

----------


## dadsaster

> *REAL PLAYING,* imo, is *SINGING ON THE INSTRUMENT*, especially in improvised music.


Thanks Niles!  I must have read something like this from you before but I've started to add a lot more singing to my practicing and it is rapidly improving my ear/instrument relationship.  I definitely feel a lot less lost when I'm not familiar with a tune.  Intervals don't mean a thing if you can't hear them.

----------


## dhergert

Worth mentioning though, there's definately a place for "eye trained" people in music.  I have a brother who plays violin with symphonies, and while there may be people present there who can coincidentally also play by ear, you won't find anyone in a symphony doing so.  Charts and written music are all that is played in that environment, with no improv, perhaps with the very subtle exception of the conductor and/or the concert master.  This is an environment that requires exact reproduction of the written page.

My brother and I sit down together sometimes to try to play music together.  I can follow along and provide harmonic backup for the music he plays, but because he doesn't play by ear or do improv at all, he can't play along with songs I play.  And similarly, because I can't site-read written music and because I'm all by ear and improv, I can't play my brother's pieces exactly, and for that matter, I can't play a song of my own exactly the same way that I played it a few minutes ago.

These are completely different musical cultures.  And, there's a place for each of them.  Some people can only do music "by eye" and some people can only do music "by ear"...  

And some people can do both well...  For example, our band's fiddler is one of these people, she's an accomplished classically trained violinist, but her instructors always also stressed ear training.  She loves bluegrass and plays it wonderfully and tastefully by ear, but she also can site read and plays classical music beautifully; and she also plays piano as well as fiddle and she sings, and can get along on rhythm guitar very nicely.  I'm humbled and honored to be able to play with her.  Clearly, the only reason we can play together is that she is equally talented with playing by ear and improv.

----------

DavidKOS

----------


## CarlM

Here is a great example of the same song played side by side on fiddle in two different musical styles to get two different flavors.  Mariachi and western swing. 
 That is another way to think about improvisation and express the tune differently.

----------


## ralph johansson

> Sounds like you're doing the right things and headed in the right direction. It can be difficult to let go of your rehearsed intro licks and try something new during the heat of a song, but I think that's where the most fun is had, when you take a risk and it works. And when it doesn't work, well then you took a chance and didn't die, so that might make you more comfortable improvising the next time. And don't pause or grimace or apologize when you make what sounds to you like a mistake, but just keep on keeping on, like it was meant to be, and most folks will never even know that you "messed up."



Of ocurse, over the years I've stored a lot of ideas on both my instruments, but I don't think of them as licks, but as devices, eg., various approaches to chords (playing through them or around them, bypassing them (e.g. using dim or wholetone scales) spicing them, etc.), ways of connecting them, rhythmical ideas.

 I have composed and kept about 70 tunes in various styles, and often I take my time, exploring the implications of my original inspiration, until I strike a pleasing balance or structure. That also means that I discard a lot of ideas, but they do add to my repertoire of devices, so I rarely feel I've examined these ideas in vain. They will help in future improvisation. ANd, of course, having gone through this process I'm all the more aware of the possibilities of the finished tune and much more aware of why all the notes are there and what I can do with them.

----------


## ralph johansson

> This doesn't necessarily answer your question Br1ck, but I thought it worth sharing this clip where guru Grisman talks about improv and offers (to my mind at least) some profound insights about the subject. Hope you find this as interesting as I do 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  sorry, I can't get the video to embed, here is the link https://vimeo.com/244123483


I don't think he offers any insights at all. Saying "it's all composition" is not helpful in explaining the possiblities and deeper motives of improvisation. The analogy with the age of a painting is completely irrelevant, as painting is not a performance art (in general).  Improvisation is creation in performance, and its possibilities lie there. Among them, the most obvious is spontaneous interaction. Listen to, e.g., Miles Davis' two choruses on the 1964 recording of Funny Valentine. It's not really a very complete and coherent statement; I think of it as a dialogue with the drums, moderated by the bass and piano. By contrast, some of the stuff that Stan Getz recorded in the 50's is so complete and fluid it makes me think he doesn't really need the rhythm cats (we do, of course). And then contrast this with some of his later recordings, e.g., those with Joanne Brackeen on piano, or with Bill Evans' trio. Etc.

----------


## ralph johansson

> Ralph,
> You have to know that I'm not really a jazz guy.  Although I enjoy some jazz, my ignorance is overwhelming.   So I'm not noticing all those things that are obvious to you, but not noticeable at all to me.  Would that it were different.


Byt my point is that I made these observations *because of* my lack of experience --  I was lost.

----------

Phil Goodson

----------


## T.D.Nydn

[QUOTE=CarlM;1744698]
Likewise hamboners play recognizable songs and tunes despite having little to no melody as such.  They rely on rhythm and dynamics to make the tune recognizable. They will freely improvise over a known tune.



Ok..this is me,,I didn't know there was a name for it,,so I'm basically a "hamboner"..

----------


## Phil Goodson

> Byt my point is that I made these observations *because of* my lack of experience --  I was lost.


Thanks Ralph.  I've reread the responses on the previous page and a dim bulb is beginning to light up  a little.

My musical history has been one of strictly rhythm/simple backup player for decades of my life.  When I discovered the mandolin in my 50s, I still approached it for a long time, telling myself how much I hated 'fiddle tunes' (because they were melody).  Only for less than a decade have I really tried to apply myself to hearing and working on motifs/riffs/devices.  It's been hard in part because I've ignored that part of the music for so long.

I think it's just going to be a thing of specifically looking for those things and spending lots of time with them.  I haven't given it enough attention obviously.
Thanks for the guidance that you and Tom and Bill have given.  I'll keep working on it.  Thank goodness that it's at least interesting and fun. :Smile:

----------


## CarlM

> Ok..this is me,,I didn't know there was a name for it,,so I'm basically a "hamboner"..


Actually this is hamboning, demonstrated in the videos below.

----------

T.D.Nydn

----------


## JonZ

> *The bottom line,* as I see (or hear) it, is that a lot of the responses here are putting the cart before the horse. The *EAR* (to hand) is *PARAMOUNT.* . And the way to do that is to *vocalize* . You MUST "hear it" to be able to "sing it".  When you practice tunes, or scales or whatever, vocalize simultaneously what you are playing on the instrument. Again....*You MUST "hear it" to be able to "sing it".*  Make the fingers respond to what you are singing.


My son is playing jazz with top pros in the LA area, and has never learned a tune by ear or sung a line. His teacher would give him some changes, show him various note collections that would work well in that context, and then say "What do you hear inside?" Then he would find those sounds on the bass. I think that turning on that inner voice is what allowed him to advance rapidly.

People who are great at copying by ear are not necessarily good improvisors. They are good copiers. You get good at improvising by putting in hours improvising, purposefully adding new tools to your playing, and incorporating feedback from more advanced players.

----------

DavidKOS

----------


## T.D.Nydn

> Actually this is hamboning, demonstrated in the videos below.


Ok,thanks man,,that definitely ain't me...

----------


## Rick Jones

> PS: I noticed that nobody seems to appreciate the Sonny Rollins interview on the subject I posted.


I read and appreciated very much - just didn't think to comment on it. Thanks for posting - not sure how I missed this when it originally aired.

----------


## JeffD

> But Dawg was saying that it is all composition, and that the speed is maybe irrelevant. I agree that one who is fluent in a specific genre will be able to compose more quickly; however, how interesting a solo sounds is more important to me than the speed of composition. So if a solo is not as interesting as the melody, then why produce something less interesting via "spontaneous improv"? Working on an "alternate melody" in the practice room sets one up with a better chance at producing something as interesting, or more so, than the melody line.


This is a good question, but it assumes that improvisation is _nothing more than_ composition, which is not the case. Improvisation is certainly spontaneous real time composition in front of an audience. But as opposed to other types of composition, there is no attempt at permanence or future performance. Improvisation is not meant to last, not meant to be performed by other people. It is meant to be a personal response to the energy of the moment, and its heartbreaking beauty is that it does not last, it is and should be gone in the following moment. 

I really think that a recording of an improvisation is not the improvisation, just like a picture of a sunset is not the sunset.

----------

dhergert, 

Steve 2E

----------


## DavidKOS

> My son is playing jazz with top pros in the LA area, and has never learned a tune by ear or sung a line. His teacher would give him some changes, show him various note collections that would work well in that context, and then say "What do you hear inside?" Then he would find those sounds on the bass. I think that turning on that inner voice is what allowed him to advance rapidly.
> 
> People who are great at copying by ear are not necessarily good improvisors. They are good copiers. You get good at improvising by putting in hours improvising, purposefully adding new tools to your playing, and incorporating feedback from more advanced players.


That sounds good - but wouldn't it help if the teachers also taught some jazz tunes by ear?

----------

dhergert

----------


## ralph johansson

> Worth mentioning though, there's definately a place for "eye trained" people in music.  I have a brother who plays violin with symphonies, and while there may be people present there who can coincidentally also play by ear, you won't find anyone in a symphony doing so.  Charts and written music are all that is played in that environment, with no improv, perhaps with the very subtle exception of the conductor and/or the concert master.  This is an environment that requires exact reproduction of the written page.
> 
> My brother and I sit down together sometimes to try to play music together.  I can follow along and provide harmonic backup for the music he plays, but because he doesn't play by ear or do improv at all, he can't play along with songs I play.  And similarly, because I can't site-read written music and because I'm all by ear and improv, I can't play my brother's pieces exactly, and for that matter, I can't play a song of my own exactly the same way that I played it a few minutes ago.
> 
> These are completely different musical cultures.  And, there's a place for each of them.  Some people can only do music "by eye" and some people can only do music "by ear"...  
> 
> And some people can do both well...  For example, our band's fiddler is one of these people, she's an accomplished classically trained violinist, but her instructors always also stressed ear training.  She loves bluegrass and plays it wonderfully and tastefully by ear, but she also can site read and plays classical music beautifully; and she also plays piano as well as fiddle and she sings, and can get along on rhythm guitar very nicely.  I'm humbled and honored to be able to play with her.  Clearly, the only reason we can play together is that she is equally talented with playing by ear and improv.



"Eyetrained"?  I've never heard of classical training that doesn't involve theory and ear training (I'd like to hear from August Watters on this). How can you possibly become a good reader if you don't understand how individual notes fit togehter or relate to the form of the piece, and if (some of) the notes you play come as a surprise? 

The daughter of a friend of mine took voice and piano in secondary school. My friend, who is a fair amateur guitarist, was very impressed with her training which involved. e.g., identifying the voicings  
of chords, whether they had the tonic, third or fifth in the bass, etc. But, of course, ear training alone does not make anyone a good improviser, and she enver even tried. You got to have that urge, and, of course, understand the idiom. Another friend, one of the best blues and jazz guitarists in my country, with an excellent ear, has tried at times to play BG on violin, without success. He doesn't feel the  idiom. That's a pity, because otherwise he could really take it somewhere.

----------


## JeffD

The total musician has to be able to do it all. There are classical musicians who cannot learn by ear. And it has nothing to do with they're being paper trained. It is because they haven't worked on learning by ear. Those musicians who cannot read, it has nothing to do with their ear training, and entirely due to not learning how to read.

Those who can memorize but have trouble sight reading, it is because they don't spend time working on sight reading.

And so on. One gets good at improvising by working on improvising  :Disbelief:  regardless whether one can read music or learn by ear or operate a helicopter.   :Smile:

----------


## JonZ

> That sounds good - but wouldn't it help if the teachers also taught some jazz tunes by ear?


Sure. It's great to be well rounded. But to get good at something, practice that thing. To get good at improvising, practice improvising. I think it is challenging for teachers to teach creativity, so they substitute noncreative methods.

Playing professionally, my son hasn't really had to learn anything by ear. If he is playing someone's original composition, they give him a chart. Giving a chart to someone who can sight read is the most efficient way to communicate a tune. It may be different in other genres.  

Of course, using your ears is how you learn taste, timing and tone. But I think that how much you need of that varies by the individual. My son picked all of that up just by listening--not imitating. Other people have to work on it more explicitly by duplicating what someone else does. It's like with "swing feel". Some people feel it instantly, while others struggle with it. It might be one of those things--like learning a foreign language--where it helps a lot if you start young.

The odd thing is that he developed perfect pitch without doing any ear training or learning by ear. He just eventually memorized the way all the notes sound.

----------

DavidKOS

----------


## JonZ

> As Don says in #53 Listen to each interval, stopping at each one. Inventory what feeling, vibe or effect each note yields. A 6th, for example may sound happy or swingy, a 2nd or 9th consonant but also "going somewhere".
> 
> here's my personal chart regarding emotions and the fingerboard


Don't these feelings vary depending on the harmonic context?

----------


## ralph johansson

> But Dawg was saying that it is all composition, and that the speed is maybe irrelevant. I agree that one who is fluent in a specific genre will be able to compose more quickly; however, how interesting a solo sounds is more important to me than the speed of composition. So if a solo is not as interesting as the melody, then why produce something less interesting via "spontaneous improv"? Working on an "alternate melody" in the practice room sets one up with a better chance at producing something as interesting, or more so, than the melody line.
> 
> BTW, I am sending you a PM for a different question. Thanks.



I simply do not agree with this idea of “composition speed”. 

Improvisation is an urge, a desire, you discover in yourself. Then the hard work begins, training your ear, expanding your vocabulary of devices, including harmony. And the more you know, the more you will find in actual performance. 

 No improviser tries to “compete” with composing, he’s driven by  desire and curiosity, his feeling for the possibilities of this very mode of expression and his openness to challenges from the other bandmembers.

The goals and values are different. To better appreciate this I suggest listening to two extreme examples, available on YouTube and Spotify. The first is “Those Nights With Candlelight and Wine” with the Nashville Guitars, an extremely wellbalanced and thematically economic composition (the outside   is almost entirely based on one idea, down a second, up a third). The second is Paul Desmond’s solo on Perdido (from the Oberlin concert). To attempt the first in improvisation would be silly. The second combines familiar devices to be sure, as blues scales and sequencing (far removed from the rigid and mechanic approach of, e.g., Ornette Coleman) but with a freshness and immediacy that cannot really be calculated.  A breathtaking performance, one of Desmond’s very best. ,


Ah, that’s the word I’ve been searching for, “immediacy”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ0eKp8PNEc

https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...light+and+wine

----------

dhergert, 

MontanaMatt

----------


## Mark Gunter

> Don't these feelings vary depending on the harmonic context?


Of course they do ...




> *Play a major scale with the cord it corresponds to plays*. Listen to each  interval, stopping at each one. Inventory what feeling, vibe or effect  each note yields. A 6th, for example may sound happy or swingy, a 2nd or  9th consonant but also "going somewhere". What we're looking for here  is new starting points for your solo..starting your break on a color  tone can help break out of repititious diatonic(scalewise) movement.  There's a lifetime of fun stuff right in that major scale. After getting  a feel for those intervals, try the same examination on the chromatic  scale to get vibes off of the "alterations"or "tensions". For example, a  b5 sounds kind of angry doesn't it? Imagine starting your solo on that!  You are immediately playing a feeling or expression rather than a  mathematical pattern or route.


IOW, the advice was to play the scales in a harmonic context, "Play a major scale while the chord it corresponds to is playing."

Some great advice there, thanks!

----------


## Mark Gunter

> No improviser tries to “compete” with composing, ...


I haven't gotten that impression from anyone's remarks here; "compete with composing"? It is plain and simply composition, on the fly and in the moment. Immediate composition.

----------


## JonZ

> Of course they do ...
> 
> 
> 
> IOW, the advice was to play the scales in a harmonic context, "Play a major scale while the chord it corresponds to is playing."
> 
> Some great advice there, thanks!


But the notion of a chart is static.

----------


## Mark Gunter

> But the notion of a chart is static.


Ah, yes, I agree. Chart wasn’t useful for me personally. YMMV. But Don’s advice was helpful, as usual. Much appreciated.

----------


## mmuussiiccaall

Here's a lick in A Major that uses 6 of the possible 12, what does anyone think, hear, feel.....when you play it?

----------


## catmandu2

Oops I totally lost my post about leroy jenkins - I have no idea what just happened.

Oh well - it's nice to have a holiday jazz thread.  Here's a good one I've been listening to - some of my favorite artists..https://youtu.be/FqMoarPDohE

https://youtu.be/49ZPD-cAKz8

----------


## ralph johansson

> I haven't gotten that impression from anyone's remarks here; "compete with composing"? It is plain and simply composition, on the fly and in the moment. Immediate composition.


What Im getting at is this bovine manure about speed of composition.

#50: Working on an "alternate melody" in the practice room sets one up with a better chance at producing something as interesting, or more so, than the melody line.

Such a remark reveals  lack of understanding of improvisation, its possibilitiess and motives. Its not about safety. For a better understanding I could refer to Barry Kernfelds article in the Grove Dictionary of Jazz, e.g. from the Introduction: Improvisation is generally regarded as the principal element of jazz since it offers the possibilities  of spontaneity, surprise, experiment, and discovery, without which most jazz would be devoid of interest  

Not to mention communication. Decades ago I often sat down with some friend for a session of free improvising on two guitars. On one occasion the other guy dove into a long chordal sequence that had every sign of being completely precomposed. I stopped playing, he simply didnt leave any room for me. 

Its hard to imagine that Grisman is ignorant of these values. Maybe he hopes to provoke reflection: why do you improvise or want to improvise? Because youre supposed to? I repeat: Improvisation happens. Its simply an urge you discover in yourself, leading you to develop certain skills, such as a good ear for harmony and rhythm. If you dont have that desire, forget it. It cant be taught.

----------

dhergert

----------


## mandocrucian

> What Im getting at is this bovine manure about speed of composition.
> 
> #50: Working on an "alternate melody" in the practice room sets one up with a better chance at producing something as interesting, or more so, than the melody line.
> 
> Such a remark reveals  lack of understanding of improvisation, its possibilitiess and motives. Its not about safety. For a better understanding I could refer to Barry Kernfelds article in the Grove Dictionary of Jazz, e.g. from the Introduction: Improvisation is generally regarded as the principal element of jazz since it offers the possibilities  of spontaneity, surprise, experiment, and discovery, without which most jazz would be devoid of interest  
> 
> Its hard to imagine that Grisman is ignorant of these values. Maybe he hopes to provoke reflection: why do you improvise or want to improvise? Because youre supposed to? I repeat: Improvisation happens. Its simply an urge you discover in yourself, leading you to develop certain skills, such as a good ear for harmony and rhythm. If you dont have that desire, forget it. It cant be taught.


Spread that _equine fertilizer_ Ralph....

For a better understanding I could refer to the first couple of paragraphs in the introduction of *Jerry Coker's  "Patterns For Jazz"*  (a book I've used over the years since buying it in the mid 1970's)



A lot of "improvisations" are learned ii-V7-I patterns/licks or circle of 5ths licks. or treading water with scale patterns etc.  Spontaneous?.... maybe _digital diarrhea_ When an improvisation is really happening at peak level, it is *composition*.  "Composition" of tunes/breaks etc. polishes one's skills at manipulating phrases into something more cohesive than random noodling.  It's something that carries over into your "spontaneous improv."  Let me put it this way; if you've written 50 limericks, doing another one on the fly is going to be much easier.

And for those that couldn't seem to grasp the underlying rationale for vocalizing tunes you know, scales you are learning etc....  Yes, it make it easier for one to pick up tunes on the fly in a jam.  But it also carries over into making it easier to play those new ideas which pop into your skull. It's a big mistake to think everything progresses linearly....there's a LOT of lateral thinking that starts running on those new neural pathways you have been installing.

For those who keep quoting Malcom Gladwell's "10,000 Hours" theory. I'd suggest you read David Epstein's *"Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World"* which touts the benefits of "cross-training" and the lateral thought insights applied from other fields.  

https://www.amazon.com/Range-General...s=books&sr=1-1

Niles H

----------

Christine Robins, 

cunparis, 

Jairo Ramos Parra, 

James Vwaal, 

Mark Gunter, 

Rick Jones

----------


## SincereCorgi

> I haven't gotten that impression from anyone's remarks here; "compete with composing"? It is plain and simply composition, on the fly and in the moment. Immediate composition.


Improvisation is different from composing. If it's not, we need a different word for 'composing'. You can revise when you compose, and you can't revise when you improvise, which leads to a reliance on formula phrases and pre-existing frameworks. (It also creates excitement when people improvise since something might happen that nobody expects, and it might be something good.)

This might be a hazy distinction when it comes to small-group genre music, where you can use formulas to improvise a convincing piece of music, but you're not going to get 60 people to improvise a piano concerto unless you want something pretty vague and messy.

I personally think Jon's right that the only way to learn to truly improvise (as opposed to creating something in advance and playing it by memory) is to pointedly work on it. If you want to create music in the hotseat, you've got to accustom yourself to the hotseat.

----------

dhergert

----------


## Bill McCall

I don't agree with the first statement.




> Improvisation is different from composing. If it's not, we need a different word for 'composing'............... 
> 
> I personally think Jon's right that the only way to learn to truly improvise (as opposed to creating something in advance and playing it by memory) is to pointedly work on it. If you want to create music in the hotseat, you've got to accustom yourself to the hotseat.


Merriam-Webster defines composing as 'formulate and *write* music'.  Improvisation doesn't involve any attempt at permanence, although someone may record and transcribe an improvised work.  

I do agree that improvising requires practicing and folks will use phrases and frameworks as tools, but like with spoken language, I don't think folks are concerned with the grammar when they are playing, only there sound (meaning).

----------

dhergert

----------


## Rickker

Time for a little levity....
When asked the question on how he improvises, John Duffey famously said, "the more I think about it, the worse it gets".

----------

dhergert, 

John Soper, 

Kevin Winn, 

Rick Jones

----------


## ralph johansson

> Spread that _equine fertilizer_ Ralph....
> 
> 
> For those who keep quoting Malcom Gladwell's "10,000 Hours" theory. I'd suggest you read David Epstein's *"Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World"* which touts the benefits of "cross-training" and the lateral thought insights applied from other fields.  
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Range-General...s=books&sr=1-1
> 
> Niles H


Seems youre commenting on things ive never said. 

Lets try again. An improvised performance is a composition  to be sure it is composed of everything that goes into it. Thats trivially true and trivialities dont explain or prove anything. What I ve been trying to explain is that speed of composition doesnt explain anything because speed is a quantitative  concept, hence ignores the qualitative difference in possibilities and demands between working out your solos in advance, and improvising them. 

 To become a good improviser you need to improvise, and play with people. The idea that precomposed solos  give a better chance of creating something of value excludes the perhaps most important aspect of improvisation, group interaction. In  a serious jazz group the fellow players would (musically) challenge the soloist to take a less safe route.

Bluegrass may be different. One extreme example is Mountain Dew with the Stanley Brothers where Bill Napier plays the same QUERTYstyle solo four times. In many cases solos are closed within the overall form, instead of bridging the verse before and after them. I like to hear a soloist emerge from the background and fade into it at the end. But it is really futile to prescribe or describe what improvised solos are or should be. What drives or structures a performance can be many things, dynamics, variations or contrasts in  rhythm, phrasing and phrase lengths, alternate changes, conflicts and their resolution. Or something else, yet to be discovered.

I dont believe that composing solos is a good preparation for improvisation. Ive recorded with two top musicians (one of them today an ECM recording artist) and the material I brought was really tricky. They didnt precompose their solos. Instead they hade me playing the changes over and over again on my guitar, very straight, no substitutions, fills or runs, until they had the changes in their ears. Over my accompaniment they played very basic stuff; e.g, almost all of the bass players phrases started on the root. There was no attempt at creativity or originality; that was saved for the recording.

----------

dhergert, 

SincereCorgi

----------


## Tom Wright

What we dont know is if the two accomplished improvisers ever tried composing solos at home while developing their improv chops. Given that many of us have tried learning transcribed improvs, it seems pretty normal to practice a solo chorus at home. 

But you are quite correct that wont fly in a real setting, or wont be very satisfying. As I noted before, with others improv is a conversation, and even an *a cappella* performance is a monologue which needs to be coherent to be understood. Learning phrases and anecdotes others created gives you a stock of words and phrases that have meaning to others. Similarly, if you have under your fingers a large stock of ready and familiar phrases, you can participate in the musical conversation. No one makes up every note out of the blue. Every riff you hear Grisman, or Charlie Parker play, has been played before. What is new is the whole story, not the words or phrases.

Most of the elements of improvised music are taken from composed songs, which take some of their figures from previous improvisations, which built on previous elements from tunes and songs. For amateurs in a jam, a ready-composed chorus is no terrible crime, but may not fit as you hope. Just keep adding new riffs heard in jams, in songs, and tunes, and especially listen to other instruments for variety.

----------


## CarlM

Music is a form of communication as is speaking and language.

Jamming and improvising is analogous to an impromptu conversation.   Conversation is usually not planned out.  It may contain some stock phrases (hi, how ya doin', long time no see, workin' hard or hardly workin', its been a coons age, etc.) even cliches but the order, sentences and even topics are unplanned and come spontaneously as do the awkward pauses and silences.  But it would be generally weird to have a written script for a conversation.  Improvising is a conversation between friends or adversaries or acquaintances or coworkers.

Composition is like a formally written speech or stage play.  Everything is planned.  There is little room for impromptu bits.  The expression comes in the form of nuance and how emotion is communicated within the planned form.  Just as it would be weird to script a conversation, it can really mess things up to deviate from the script of a play or speech.

These analogies can be helpful to understand the similarities and differences between improvisation and composition, where one leaves off and the other begins and where the boundaries are.

----------


## Phil Goodson

> ....
>   Just as it would be weird to script a conversation, it can really mess things up to deviate from the script of a play or speech.
> 
> These analogies can be helpful to understand the similarities and differences between improvisation and composition, where one leaves off and the other begins and where the boundaries are.


Yeah.  But to write a speech or to have a really good conversation both require that you have a *good command of the language, including common and uncommon phrasing*. (and maybe something interesting to say)   This is often a major hurdle for speakers of 2nd language and musicians. :Smile:

----------


## catmandu2

While that's no doubt true, Phil, this begets matters of context, style and taste - whole nother bag of fish..

----------


## dhergert

I wanted to post a simple example of how I arrange a tune, involving improv and tools that I know how to use...

We're in a season that uses a lot of tunes for celebration that we don't usually play during the rest of the year.  Because I haven't ever previously arranged The First Noel for mandolin before, I decided to use that song for this demo.  

The video is 8:52 long, it's very informal, unedited, warts and all, and possibly boring to watch, but it does show some of the type of things that I'll do to arrange a song.  

And, note that the end of the video doesn't mean the final arrangement has been found, but now there is foundation for performing the song has been figured out, and from there any further improv will have a structure to work within.  I'll probably repeat a session or two like this one, continuing to polish the arrangement foundation, before I practice it with my band.

This is what's happening in the video:

0:00 whistle tune to remember how it goes (in G)
0:52 begin working out on mandolin, single picking
1:50 begin working on integrating in tremolo and double-triple stops -- chords
3:25 free-playing around with the tune in a variety of ways
5:15 begin trying different keys: C and D
7:30 concentrate on the key of D for voices

Arranging the First Noel:

----------

Christine Robins, 

gfury, 

Kevin Winn

----------


## catmandu2

Here's some perspective - albeit from a lyrical/taksim POV; there are many approaches to improvisation not included here, but this can be generally applied.  The point given toward the end about having music _in your head_ is salient. https://youtu.be/uBxt7FujMbw .  Point being, we are so full of music, that it is natural to improvise - to _create_ using resources readily accessible to you.

----------

dhergert

----------


## catmandu2

Ah, I'll do a longer one tomorrow or when I can

----------


## ralph johansson

> Seems youre commenting on things ive never said. 
> 
> 
> Bluegrass may be different. One extreme example is Mountain Dew with the Stanley Brothers where Bill Napier plays the same QUERTYstyle solo four times. In many cases solos are closed within the overall form, instead of bridging the verse before and after them. I like to hear a soloist emerge from the background and fade into it at the end. But it is really futile to prescribe or describe what improvised solos are or should be. What drives or structures a performance can be many things, dynamics, variations or contrasts in  rhythm, phrasing and phrase lengths, alternate changes, conflicts and their resolution. Or something else, yet to be discovered.


QWERTY, of course, and hade -> had

----------


## JeffD

I think there is a distinction to be made about improvisation. I think Bluegrass breaks, and Jazz breaks are different animals, that perhaps need to be approached differently. There are likely many different kinds of improvisation. I think of the sections of classical pieces that are meant to be improvised, or indeed entire variations on a theme meant to be "composed" spontaneously. And so there, I just thought of a third kind of improvisation. 

Are we trying to highlight and extend the drama and energy of the original piece with our improv, or trying to show a departure from the melody that expresses something different, maybe humorous, or to create a new drama with how far we can depart from a melody without getting lost or losing the way back. Or taking something iconic and making it our own. Lots of other purposes I am sure.

----------


## Pete Martin

To build on what Jeff said, improvising in a certain style and improvising in general are two different animals.  If you want to speak a language fluidly, you need to do it as others speak that language.  Same for music.  Transcribing and learning great players solos teach you to speak their language, meaning play that style.  

For example, if you want to play authentic traditional Bluegrass mandolin, you need to know some Bill Monroe.

----------

Mark Gunter

----------


## CarlM

Paco de Lucia discusses learning to improvise while performing with with John Mclaughlin and Al diMeola.

----------

Barry Canada, 

Bill McCall

----------


## catmandu2

Paco inspired everyone in flamenco.  I got to see him a few times, and still my favorite, and JM.

----------

