Free Jazz "Instruction Manual"?

[ep1str0phy]

(saw this over at Jazzcorner...) The end of days? I'm at least interested in cracking it open, if for no other reason than to see what was deemed "important" for a theory book of this sort.

Now, I don't think that "free jazz" or "free improv" (which have become pretty idiomatic themselves) are completely irreconcilable with an academic context--I've just never seen what seems to be a catch-all theory book (which doesn't, contrary to the practice of many free musicians, appear to cater to an individual musical ethos--e.g., Harmolodics or Ankhrasmation--but rather a general "style"--which seems problematic as hell).

Beyond Time and Changes

[Rooster_Ties]

Does it come with a "play-along" record/cd??

[JSngry]

Hal Crook used to play with Phil Woods.

[BeBop]

Does it come with a "play-along" record/cd??

There is a free-jazz play-a-long CD out there, not associated with this particular book.

[Free For All]

Hal Crook has written several excellent books on improvisation. I use one called "How To Improvise" for my own practice as well as my students. Despite the bold title of the free jazz book, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt until evidence to the contrary presents itself. I'm curious to check this book out, it might be good!

And as far as academia goes, I would love to see more attention paid to free jazz/avant garde styles. I think the study of bop is an important part of the jazz curriculum, but too often the road stops there. Students often don't understand the structure, form, rhythm and melody that exist in free jazz styles- I'd like to see them deal with the challenge of thinking about such things more abstractly instead of just running the changes and thinking that's all there is to it.

[ep1str0phy]

I've studied with Myra Melford during my time in Berkeley, who has registered a significant amount of effort in the way of studying the sylistic and "formal" elements of numerous "avant" musicians. On the whole, the heuristic approach has leaned toward developing a broader conception of improvising philosophy/understanding of free group dynamics as much as some sort of theoretical discourse, which is of course present. I'd think that a book of this nature might be helpful (again, I'd like to see it) in conjunction with an actual lecture/class, but I question its merits in the way of teaching any music that is largely contingent upon dealing with group sympathy (and therefore a real-time communicative context) and, of course, sonic elements that extend far beyond the traditional heuristic Western idiom. (like, if there's anything touching upon the AACM in here, I'd like to see mention of picking up bicycle horns and honking them, if you catch my drift.) I mean, can you teach spiritual?

Edited December 5, 2006 by ep1str0phy

[ep1str0phy]

And on that level--the Bailey book is instructive in this sense--really, how much can you teach? Those I've met who purport to teach this music are at least dubious of the prospect of really transmitting stylistic information to the student, as opposed to "awakening" the individuality within learner (which is straight-up AACM in rhetoric, and a noble sentiment in and of itself). If this music must be taught theoretically or historically in an academic context, codifying things into discreet, generalized theoretical lessons seems a questionable way to go (especially in light of the progenitors, who just as well might teach you an approach--ala Cecil--but not tell you what to say in that approach, which is what has happened with bebop, arguably).

[Rooster_Ties]

I mean, can you teach spiritual?

And along those lines, can you teach ears???

Without exception, THE best "free" or "free-leaning" jazz musicians I have known were and are EXCELLENT listeners -- always reacting to what else was going on around them.

What they may lack in pure chops, or traditional skills -- their ability to listen, and interact organically with other similarly skilled musicians around them -- THAT'S what needs to be taught more.

You can analyze the music to death, and/or play your ass off at the drop of a hat -- but if you can't make it work in a group context, it ain't shit. That takes EARS.

...or so I've heard.

Edited December 5, 2006 by Rooster_Ties

[ep1str0phy]

Totally agree with you--and that's part of my concern with, if not this book in particular, than rather the idea that any sort of music that purports to be "free" (and, really, not just free jazz) can be successfully taught outside of the practical context. Not that the authors are making such claims (and it might be a helpful tool), but the usefulness seems particularly questionable with a music that--yes, is strongly communicative and contingent upon strong and flexible listening. I mean, once we dissolve all the other formalisms, all we've got is communication of sorts--and where's the academics in that?

[Lazaro Vega]

The AACM school in Chicago taught jazz for ages. The educational component is part of their charter as a non-profit. From what I remember (as an outsider) they teach musical fundementals, the history of the music, and encourage bands to form in unique instrumental combinations. The "allow" the musicians to find their own voices, or encourage that. There was no mandate to play free or die.