A Question For You Musicians

[Dan Gould]

I hope this questions makes sense or is remotely interesting to the musicians here. Otherwise, if its a silly question coming from a non-musician, I'll be deleting this faster than CBS disavowed those now infamous memos! OK, that didn't happen all that fast, but trust me, I'll make this go away.

OK, here we go. This question came to me when I was thinking about what I think someone told Lee Morgan (was it Blakey?) about soloing: grab the audience at the start and at the end and it doesn't matter what you do in between. I may be mistaking who said it to whom, but I think that was the message, anyway:

Does your approach to your solo vary depending on where you are in the solo order?

(And I mean that other than the obvious way of taking something the previous soloist did and commenting on it)

If you solo first, do you specifically try to really grab the audience from the git-go?

If you are soloing later, and someone is really killing, is there a chance of it taking you out of your game, as in, what the hell do I do following that mofo?

Hoping this makes for interesting discussion ...

[Free For All]

I think it's a good question, Dan!

I think the soloist's approach should always be based on the direction of the music at the moment. Many times have I stepped up to the mic with a general idea for where I want to start a solo only to have the music do a 180 at the last moment- for example, maybe the drums drop out, or the volume level drastically increases or decreases,etc.- in general, something unexpected happens that makes a former plan suddenly seem inappropriate. IMHO, this is most always a good thing- it shows some incentive by the rhythm section to be creative and not just play static accompaniment. It requires the soloist to be flexible and reactive to the moment (I always compare being a soloist to being a shortstop- you never know what you may be called upon to do, but you better be ready for anything!). This kind of playing by a group is what keeps me consistently engaged as both a participant and listener.

That being said, I do notice that the first soloist on a tune usually plays to an accompaniment similar to that played during the head. Sometimes they will come "charging out of the gate" or not, but it's usually the subsequent soloists that will start out with a more dramatic change in accompaniment, like dynamic increase/decrease or textural increase/decrease (various players in the rhythm section dropping out temporarily, etc.) or rhythmic variation (double time, half time, etc.).

One of the most important things to remember as a player is to ALWAYS be true to yourself. Don't try to be someone you're not. This "rule" comes into play when following another soloist, particularly one who might haved just played a spectacular solo. If you appoach your solo with an attitude of "I'm going to outplay that guy" you more often than not will fail, IMHO. I think being comfortable and confident with who you are musically is something that comes with experience, preparation and maturity. My feeling is that contrast is what makes a series of solos interesting on a tune, so maybe it's sometimes a better choice musically to not have each and every solo reach the same orgasmic conclusion in the same way. That approach gets too predictable, AFAIC, and predictability is what creates boredom. I know that if the soloist preceeding me plays a marathon, high-energy solo, it's not necessary, or even desirable, that I do the same. I know I'll get a chance to do that later.

The rhythm section and soloists should function as if having a verbal conversation- it can be a heated debate, or a casual monologue. If everyone "talks" at once all the time, nothing gets said. Sometimes the best role to take in a conversation is that of listener- in musical terms this would be akin to players "laying out" from time to time.

I think the most important thing is that there shouldn't be a formulaic approach- variety, unpredictablity and flexibilty are what make things interesting.

The needs of the music should always supercede the needs of the ego.

Live long and prosper.

Just wanted to "solo first" on this one before Sangrey steps in and writes the definitive response.

Edited for spelling clams

Edited September 20, 2004 by Free For All

[Joe G]

I think you said plenty with that chorus, so I'm going to lay out for a bit.

[Dan Gould]

And I'm glad I left this up long enough for you to get a chance to solo on it, cuz I was coming back to pull the plug on this for lack of audience response!

Thanks, FFA.

[Free For All]

And I'm glad I left this up long enough for you to get a chance to solo on it, cuz I was coming back to pull the plug on this for lack of audience response!

Thanks, FFA.

I think you'll get some responses............... B-)

[sal]

I think Free for All said it best. And I'd like to re-emphasize that its all about that moment in time. You may have an idea about what you want to do, but jazz is so organic and instantaneous that its really about the exact moment. You play what you feel, and that's really it.

[neveronfriday]

Hm.

I only glanced at the other responses (this is about soloing, after all), but next to staying true to yourself and having the music rule a solo - and not the other way 'round - there are other considerations, I think.

From a drummer's point of view, speaking of course for those who have a point of view, there are a whole bunch of things that are thrown in the mix to generate what I would call a "good" solo:

a) You gotta have chops. There are faaaaaaaar too many drummers around who simply don't have any and build a solo around the same three things they know and have tried out a million times. Also in jazz. Ever heard a Simpon Philips solo? Not jazz, but that should show you what I mean.

b) Don't forget the audience. The audience is a major factor when it comes around to soloing. A solo that started off mediocre (from the musician's point of view) can develop into something quite different depending on audience response. You've got to be careful not to be swept away by an audience that wants too much of the simple boom-bang stuff, but an appreciative audience certainly helps.

c) There's got to be tension in a solo. I'm so tired of people showing off nothing but chops, boring the audience and the other musicians to death. Let me give you an example that most people would laugh about. Harry Connick Jr., who's quite an able panist (if he allows himself to really let things rip), has some totally unexpected twists and turns in his solos, from disjointed Monk chords that might sound like he isn't concentrating on getting things right to simply adding percussive parts to his solos using the piano as a percussion instrument. No matter what, there's always enough in there to make the audience notice that the guy knows exactly what he's doing, and that creates lots of tension (and fun).

d) Re the question if one needs to grab the audience from the get go: I would say yes and no. It really depends on how you grab them. I think making things interesting and maybe challenging can grab an audience right from the start. I'm not a fan of listening to people who come out guns blazing and all, but sometimes that's what's necessary. Most of the time, I think picking up on the current mood of a tune and then toying with it and expanding on it is a pretty safe bet.

e) My last 2 cents worth: for me, especially a drum solo must be melodic. Especially in jazz you can find countless drummers who are excellent at using the drums as a melodic instrument, thereby continuing what others in the band have played before and not bashing it to death. But, there are also representatives of the latter group.

Cheers!

[trizno]

Dan, I second that this is a excellent question...

I find that the audience does mainly remember how you start and finish a song/solo. Being the first out of the gate adds a little pressure to the soloist (which in turn can be translated into creative energy), because he/she sets the tone for that section of music. The first thing you have to do is grab them (make a musical connection, take yo' time baby), keep them (by developing that first statement you played to make the connection), then you grab them again/own them when concluding your solo (I feel this is the most challenging part of the solo, because it usually determines how much applause the audience gives you) As far as that bad mofo is concerned, celebrate what he is playin at that time. Keep your heart and mind open to the energy that soloist is creating. I also think that it shouldn't be over looked that starting your solo with the last 2 bars of his solo keeps your ears open for some great improv. One great thing a 2nd or 3rd soloist can do is to cue every 1 to drop out except for the drummer and take a chorus or two with the drummer keeping time and accenting your ideas.

[JSngry]

I try to respond and lead at the same time. Try to get inside everybody else's head and try to let them get into mine. That way you can more often than not let something happen instead of trying to make something happen. I'm not at all into the "this is my solo, y'all follow me" thing. Unless you're playing with less experienced players who want/need that guidance. Then you do your best to step up and deliver.

Having said that, though, sometimes there will be something, either from me or somebody else, happening, that is so strong that you just gots to go with it, previous intentions be damned. That's the beauty of this music - it's very "lifelike" (at least at its best), and you gotta be able to react/respond to damn near anything at anytime. Can't always get what you want, as the song says, but if you want to, you can usually get what you need, whether you knew that was it or not!

I've for years had to follow Hurricane Gallio about 50% of the night, and when you follow somebody like that, it does no good to try to beat, or even compete with, him at his own game. Can't win. CAN NOT win. So you find a way to transition from where he was to where you're going to be. Of course, it helps to have a rhythm section who knows this, and to have a band that is built around this concept of complimentary opposites. Pete will tell you the same thing about following me, too. What we each do is so different from what the other one does that each piece becomes a suite of sorts, as the different voices emerge and establish. That's a groovy thing, I think. It's kinda gotten me soured on the whole "assembly line" approach of so many jam sessions and such, where what you can bring is defined within set parameters that don't move all that much. Of course, when you're playing with REALLY good players in that bag, it's a different matter. There, there WILL be different things going on throughout, and even if the overall "style" remains the same, the little things will make the difference. But that's the type of thing that you have to learn over time.

Speaking of which, one thing I definitely learned from the old cats is that "after you" is seldom an act of courtesy...

[Hoyt Clagwell]

Don't put the bass solo first.

[Upright Bill]

Don't put the bass solo first.

WHAT!?!

[Uncle Skid]

Don't put the bass solo first.

WHAT!?!

I knew it wouldn't be long before Upright Bill weighed in on that comment!

[Free For All]

Don't put the bass solo first.

Actually I like to have the rhythm section players solo first every now and then- I think it's important to vary the solo order for musical reasons (avoidance of "format stagnation") and also 'cause it's a drag for them to always

"bring up the rear" and wait 'til all the horns have played. 'Cause if there's one thing I've learned, it's that if the rhythm section ain't happy, ain't NOBODY happy!!

So I say let the bass player play first!

.....of course not on every tune.....

[Upright Bill]

Just keep in mind, if you make the bassist unhappy he'll do bad things to you. Look here.

[Hoyt Clagwell]

WHAT!?!

Well.. I'm a bass player too so I figure I can get away with that comment.

I've never popped any lungs, though.

[Sundog]

if there's one thing I've learned, it's that if the rhythm section ain't happy, ain't NOBODY happy!!

A lot of truth in that. I always arrive to gigs very early to help the drummer carry in his equipment and help him set up. Also, stay late and help with the breakdown and carry out. A pissed off drummer will drive the bass player crazy, and we can't be having that!

Hell, I say let the drummer and bass player perform a duet!

[Upright Bill]

WHAT!?!

Well.. I'm a bass player too so I figure I can get away with that comment.

I've never popped any lungs, though.

I haven't popped any yet either but it makes me feel better knowing that I have the power!

I think I need more solos!

[mikeweil]

I find it impossible to seprate the position in the solo order from the person etc. It's all closely intertwined.

Changing solo order in a creative way can change the whole piece drastically. I remember playing Monk's "Straight No Chaser" in a quartet with vocals, piano, bass and percussion, and with the usual solo order: vocals, piano, bass, and fours with the percussion, nothing happened. I then suggested to change the order as follows: theme - fours of vocals and piano with percussion - bass - vocals - piano - theme, and we always played the hell out of that tune, and the bassist delivered some of his most exciting solos!

[mikeweil]

Hell, I say let the drummer and bass player perform a duet!

I hear Ya!

Or let one soloist play a number with only bass, or drums, or bass and drums. Not everybody has to play every tune!

[Michael Fitzgerald]

I am a fan of NOT having everyone solo on everything. As a pianist, I play enough already behind everyone else (and enjoy making them sound better). If there's three horns in a sextet, I don't need to get a solo every tune. I feel the same for bass and drums. Now, to make up for that, it's nice to have the occasional feature - maybe a trio tune, or a feature tune that is based around the drummer or bassist. Seems like that was much more common 40 or 50 years ago. The string of solos (with no interludes, backgrounds, etc.) is OK in a jam session but if it's a working band, come on - do some rehearsing and think about variety.

Mike

[neveronfriday]

I am a fan of NOT having everyone solo on everything. [...] do some rehearsing and think about variety.

Exactly!

Cheers!

[neveronfriday]

I always arrive to gigs very early to help the drummer carry in his equipment and help him set up. Also, stay late and help with the breakdown and carry out.

And why aren't you in MY band?

Cheers!

[Michael Fitzgerald]

Because his membership in the Teamsters union won't allow that.

Mike

[Noj]

In rehearsing, would the order change according to who had the best solo? Perhaps have the best solo go last? Or were the transitions between key to the statement each soloist makes?

[Free For All]

In rehearsing, would the order change according to who had the best solo?  Perhaps have the best solo go last?  Or were the transitions between key to the statement each soloist makes?

A couple things here-

The criteria for what constitutes a "best" solo is at best quite a subjective issue.

Sometimes the "best" solo isn't necessarily the fastest or most emphatic one. It's frequently an issue of who best exploits their placement in the solo order, IMHO. A good contrasting second solo can often outshine a frenetic first solo. And why does there have to always be a "winner"? Each player should get a chance to shine.

Also, the "best" solo in a rehearsal may or may not be the of the same quality with the different variables of the actual perfomance. That being said, I also think it's good to choose who plays first to create the desired effect relevant to the tune- Freddie will most often create a different vibe than Wayne or Curtis, for example.

But listen to how Wayne sets the tone for the subsequent soloists on the tune Free For All (although Blakey takes top honors for creating the initial intensity level!).

I also think it's important to let each soloist in a group experience playing first AND second AND last- I feel that there is a different approach inherent to where one's solo happens in the order.

Edited September 22, 2004 by Free For All