There is nothing in Richard's post that I disagree with. He is correct that
the emphasis from teachers is placed more on improvising over
pre-determined chord progressions than on improvising around a melodic
theme and that technique is stressed over feeling.
My problem as a teacher is that I really can't teach someone how to feel. I
personally have never felt comfortable as someone else's spiritual mentor.
I try to stay away from philosophical approaches as a teacher but some
philosophy is always unavoidable because music really is a branch of
philosophy. Technique can be taught (at least by me) feeling can't (at
least by me). I try to concentrate on what can be taught (at least by me).
I've read some interviews with people who have studied with Lenny Tristano
and they always say more about what they didn't talk about which is hip but
these same students must have learned the technical material somewhere
also. This type of teaching is only appropriate for a student who is real
serious about being a jazz artist of the first order. A lot of my students
have an interest in using jazz techniques to become better improvisors
without necessarily becoming jazz musicians.
Regarding using melody as the starting point for thematic variation: I
think that most good jazz players would agree that this is what *should* be
going on. Ideally, the changes just serve as a backdrop for melodic
exposition and create the setting whereby two or more instruments can
automatically harmonize with each other.
Wouldn't it be interesting if a group of musicians devised a way to
improvise using melodic development as the starting point and the harmony
and form or lack of it arising out of the melodic interplay and
developmental techniques being used? This might be part of what Ornette
Coleman was/is trying to do but I don't know his music well.
Regards
Joey Goldstein
Guitarist/Composer/Bandleader/Teacher
joegold@idirect.com
Check out:
http://www.icom.ca/~freeflt/